Post by mg on Jan 25, 2016 21:30:15 GMT
The US had the old M14 rifle that was retired decades ago, so they had many in storage. Older rifles like the M14, FN FAL, and HK G3 have the effective range of a stationary machine gun, and they use common 7.62mm NATO. It would be easy for Minerva to make new versions because they are wealthy and they do not have a large military. They can afford excellent weapons and training. I advise rifles that use 6,5x51mm because it is often used by professional shooters during 1,000m competitions. The shape of this bullet is almost identical to the 7.62 NATO, but it has less recoil and flatter trajectory. It also has narrower 6.5mm diameter, so it penetrates armor better than 7.62mm
(left image is an American M14 in Afghanistan. Right image is size comparison. Middle bullet ins 6.5, far right side bullet is 7.62)
You are correct: training and discipline are more important than a good gun. Tenzin's squad was seen firing at the robot, but none of them destroyed it. There are two possibilities 1- they did not hit the target, or 2- they hit the target but it was protected by armor. If they used a better gun, they would have hit the target more often and damaged it more severely. More soldiers would have survived if the robot was wounded early in the battle.
(6.5mm = 260 Rem, 7.62 = 308 Win) (vertical = penetration of armor) (horizontal = range) (size of circle = recoil)
It is true that the soldiers used bad strategy, but I suggest that we should also blame weak weapons. They would not have won the battle, but they would have increased their chances of survival from "very low" to "low".
I agree that small details would not change the general outcome, but you misunderstand my goal. There was no way to win the battle with the robot, but I believe improved weapons could have made a small difference. I prefer any improvement, even an improvement so small that it would not be noticed by a large army in the real world. Minerva has an army so small that a small improvement is valuable.
(left image is an American M14 in Afghanistan. Right image is size comparison. Middle bullet ins 6.5, far right side bullet is 7.62)
You are correct: training and discipline are more important than a good gun. Tenzin's squad was seen firing at the robot, but none of them destroyed it. There are two possibilities 1- they did not hit the target, or 2- they hit the target but it was protected by armor. If they used a better gun, they would have hit the target more often and damaged it more severely. More soldiers would have survived if the robot was wounded early in the battle.
(6.5mm = 260 Rem, 7.62 = 308 Win) (vertical = penetration of armor) (horizontal = range) (size of circle = recoil)
It is true that the soldiers used bad strategy, but I suggest that we should also blame weak weapons. They would not have won the battle, but they would have increased their chances of survival from "very low" to "low".
I agree that small details would not change the general outcome, but you misunderstand my goal. There was no way to win the battle with the robot, but I believe improved weapons could have made a small difference. I prefer any improvement, even an improvement so small that it would not be noticed by a large army in the real world. Minerva has an army so small that a small improvement is valuable.
