My group is gonna be starting a clone wars campaign and while creating the clone PCs and looking at the weapons in Rise of the Separatists. We want to use the DC-15 rifle however after comparing it to the carbine it seems like a disadvantage to take the rifle over the carbine, sure the rifle has longer range and 1 more damage but It also is an encumbrance of 6 with cumbersome 3 while the

Carbine has half the encumbrance and the autofire quality and to top it off that they both have the same number of hardpoints, we’ve read the long text and there’s no other special properties so unless we’re missing something it seems pointless to use the rifle except for flavor reasons.

The official stats as reference

DC-15 blaster rifle - (Ranged [Heavy]); Damage 10; Crit 3; Range [Long]; (Cumbersome 3, Pierce 1, Stun Setting) Encumbrance 6; Hard Points 4

DC-15A blaster carbine - (Ranged [Heavy]); Damage 9; Crit 3; Range [Medium]; (Autofire, Pierce 1, Stun Setting) Encumbrance 3; Hard Points 4

We had talks about balancing the weapons a bit better to give more of a choice, our proposed changes would be;

DC-15 - increasing pierce to 2

DC-15A - Replacing the autofire quality with accurate 1

Our thinking is that it needs up the rifle a little bit and makes the carbine competitive and not just an easy pick also in the long text it says the rifle can penetrate up to a 1000 meters and in the description for the carbine it mentions that it’s highly accurate

If we were to change it does this seem balanced

DC-15 blaster rifle - (Ranged [Heavy]); Damage 10; Crit 3; Range [Long]; (Cumbersome 3, Pierce 2, Stun Setting) Encumbrance 6; Hard Points 4

DC-15A blaster carbine - (Ranged [Heavy]); Damage 9; Crit 3; Range [Medium]; (Accurate 1, Pierce 1, Stun Setting) Encumbrance 3; Hard Points 4

Light grey on white is very hard to read.

I'd say keep the stats as is:

Range is a notable difference, and you basically get 2 extra damage with the DC-15 (1 damage, pierce 1). The more Soak a target has, (think droidekas) the more important this is, as the proportionate damage is increased dramatically (with 8 soak, the DC-15a does a minimum of 2 damage, whereas the DC-15 does a minimum of 4; twice as much as the DC-15a).
As far as HP, there are a variety of attachments that only work on rifles (not the DC-15a, which is a carbine) and HBRs, notably the Augmented Spin Barrel, Marksmen Barrel, and most Under-Barrel Attachments.

Man, both these weapons are OP. Hard to understand why the Empire would ever retire the DC-15 series in favor of the E-11.

Just now, DaverWattra said:

Man, both these weapons are OP. Hard to understand why the Empire would ever retire the DC-15 series in favor of the E-11.

About half the cost, and longer ranged (DC-15a), lighter and less of a maintenance hog (DC-15). The T-21/DLT-19 were more specialized and therefore probably better suited to the role often taken by the DC-15 (that role being a light machine gun, of sorts).

There's also something to be said for having a weapon that splits the difference between the two, as you are able to then produce it more cheaply.

On 11/16/2019 at 11:49 AM, DaverWattra said:

Man, both these weapons are OP. Hard to understand why the Empire would ever retire the DC-15 series in favor of the E-11.

The E11 is cheap to mass produce, easy to field, is somewhat modular (e.g., E11-D), and falls in line with the Empires pedantic drive for uniformity. The same is true of TIE Fighters. There were better fighters fielded by the Republic and later the Alliance, but the Tie hits the cheap to mass produce and easy to field check boxes. Its a lot like the US military's love of the AR platform. We have discarded and designed far superior infantry weapons, but outside of limited specialized roles we don't adopt them.

You want a better infantry rifle? Stick with the Garand or M-14, or grab an FN-FAL. You want a better sub-machine-gun? Stick with a Thompson or grab an HK. You want a better sniper rifle? Take your pick. So why stick with the AR? Some alternatives are too expensive, some are too hard to maintain in the field, and some are both. The AR fills all the roles above less impressively while being cheap and easy to maintain. Fielding millions of grunts? Or legions of faceless interchangeable Stormtroopers? The E11 is your go to gun. Small irregular or specialist units? Mercenaries? Assassins? Pirates? Bounty Hunters? Those guys will pay for top-end specialist weapons and spend the time keeping them operational.

TIE Fighter Note: remember that Lucas' generation grew up in the shadow of "The Greatest Generation" watching WWII movies and he put a lot of that into SW. TIE fighters are essentially Zeroes (fast, maneuverable, lightly armed and armored and limited in range) while Alliance fighters are (mostly slower, less maneuverable, more heavily armed and armored, and have longer deployment ranges). I liken the A-Wing to the Spitfire, the X-Wing to the Corsair, and the B-Wing to the P-38. Some of the scenes with the Falcon dealing with TIE fighters feel like they flowed straight out of the old "War Week" movies about B-17 pilots in WWII.

On 11/16/2019 at 8:52 PM, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

About half the cost, and longer ranged (DC-15a), lighter and less of a maintenance hog (DC-15). The T-21/DLT-19 were more specialized and therefore probably better suited to the role often taken by the DC-15 (that role being a light machine gun, of sorts).

While it's called a rifle, and storm troopers are statted with rifles, you'd have to make a pretty convincing argument for me to accept that rules-wise, the E-11 shouldn't be a medium range carbine. The E-10 looks like a better fit for the generic rifle template.

So at least in my head canon, the empire did split the difference with the E-10, and then went back to a carbine and heavy rifle setup with the E-11 and DLT-19.

Of course, just because we dont see the E-10 much in the OT doesn't mean it's fallen out of use. After all, most appearances by stormtroopers are in fairly close quarter circumstances where carbines might be more handy. Also, it might be something like the E11 being newer, shinier and more "elite" responsible for it being fielded when the E-10 would've made more sense. Compare the M4 and the M16 in US military service.

3 hours ago, penpenpen said:

While it's called a rifle, and storm troopers are statted with rifles, you'd have to make a pretty convincing argument for me to accept that rules-wise, the E-11 shouldn't be a medium range carbine. The E-10 looks like a better fit for the generic rifle template.

So at least in my head canon, the empire did split the difference with the E-10, and then went back to a carbine and heavy rifle setup with the E-11 and DLT-19.

You're not alone in that, as even since the D6 days a substantial number of GMs have treated the E-11 as being a blaster carbine with an extending stock, given that just makes more sense.

One D6 GM I knew who had prior military experience had chalked up WEG using "rifle" instead of "carbine" as WEG being beholden to what Lucas wrote for his films, and that Lucas had no real concept of what constitutes a "proper" rifle given he was more interested in crafting a story than getting what were (for the film) fairly inconsequential details 'correct.' It still grated on him a bit, but he didn't let it sour his general enjoyment of Star Wars.

1 hour ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

You're not alone in that, as even since the D6 days a substantial number of GMs have treated the E-11 as being a blaster carbine with an extending stock, given that just makes more sense.

One D6 GM I knew who had prior military experience had chalked up WEG using "rifle" instead of "carbine" as WEG being beholden to what Lucas wrote for his films, and that Lucas had no real concept of what constitutes a "proper" rifle given he was more interested in crafting a story than getting what were (for the film) fairly inconsequential details 'correct.' It still grated on him a bit, but he didn't let it sour his general enjoyment of Star Wars.

Heh, I'll take it one step further.

The E-11 has no stock.

Sure, the folded stock of the Streling SMG is there, and despite calling it a stock and showing it unfolded in some secondary material (which is now legends, I think?), we never see it unfolded in other visual media. Also, if we look at derivatives like the E-10 and E-11D, they retain the folded stock despite having a fixed stock. It leads me to conclude, that rather than a folding stock, the thing under the barrel is...

...something else. Heck if I know what. There's a picture somewhere from Solo of a mudtrooper (it might be Han) that has the "buttplate" of his E-10 folded out and uses it as a vertical grip. I guess the E-11's "buttplate" might work similarly. The DC-15A also has something looking like a folded buttstock, but since it semms to be hinged/attached hinged just in front of the trigger guard it barely clears the rear of the weapon if it was unfolded from there.

I might have given this issue way too much thought.

But yeah, the E-11 being a rifle while Boba's EE-3 is a carbine? That makes no sense.

Probably more about power level than size, because when you look at it, the EE-3 keeps the receiver of a revolver with a thicker and slightly longer barrel, whereas the E-11 is larger generally and has a much bigger receiver, and therefore more space to generate more power, while the DC-15a splits the difference, being much smaller and slimmer than the E-11, while still being larger than the EE-3. As for the A280, the rebel's main rifle, it has a longer barrel, but the receiver isn't much different in size, so its greatest advantage may be one of accuracy rather than power.

On 11/17/2019 at 7:11 PM, Vondy said:

You want a better infantry rifle? Stick with the Garand or M-14, or grab an FN-FAL. You want a better sub-machine-gun? Stick with a Thompson or grab an HK. You want a better sniper rifle? Take your pick. So why stick with the AR? Some alternatives are too expensive, some are too hard to maintain in the field, and some are both. The AR fills all the roles above less impressively while being cheap and easy to maintain. Fielding millions of grunts? Or legions of faceless interchangeable Stormtroopers? The E11 is your go to gun. Small irregular or specialist units? Mercenaries? Assassins? Pirates? Bounty Hunters? Those guys will pay for top-end specialist weapons and spend the time keeping them operational.

What? Have you ever touched a Thompson? That thing is heavy for no reason. The original was built to work on an "blish principle" that doesn't actually exist and wound up with an inefficent delayed blowback. It's literally a gen 1 SMG, as in MP18 era. It was outdated during WW2 (there's a reason we replaced it two times, technically three times if one counts the M3A1 separately from the original M3, before the end of the war). The M-14 was never a good rifle, much less for its era (The Italians did what it was trying to do, better, and this was with a fraction of the DoD's budget). It will literally lose zero if you hold it wrong.

There's a reason competitive shooters in every country, even in one like Finland where men are required by law to learn how to use an AK or go to prison or Canada where it's a huge extra pain in the butt to get compared to other rifles, and special forces, who have the choice of whatever they want, go with the AR platform. It's reliable when the DoD isn't intentionally sabotaging it (giving it the wrong ammo, removing features important to reliability), insanely accurate ( budget examples can be sub-MoA with factory ammo these days), and easy to stick accessories on.