# ballistics table *The Urth list — 1 messages, 1 voices, 02 Jun 1998* > Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright > in each message remains with the person who wrote it. > Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original > archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than > retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact. --- ### Peter Cash *02 Jun 1998, 16:46* > Mantis wrote: > However! We know that Marsch was a pretty good shot, we know V.R.T. > was a pretty lousy shot. So, what's with the balistics table? > Marsch doesn't seem to need it. V.R.T. just might be able to use it. > > Or is the ballistic table just one of the real red herrings? > Something that Marsch needed a long time ago, but quickly outgrew > (i.e., before getting out in the field), so in the field he can guess > the distance and adjust his aim accordingly without looking at the > table constructed specifically for a rifle of his caliber. The ballistics table also strikes me as odd. It is simply not something that the average hunter would bother with. You take your rifle to the range, and zero the scope at 100 yards. (I.e., the bullet impacts at the center of the scope's reticles at that distance.) If you run into a deer at 200 yards and want to take a shot, you hold a little high. It's not rocket science. Someone who takes the trouble to construct a ballistics table is someone who plans to take long shots, and want to be very, very sure of hitting his target. A long-range target shooter, perhaps. Or a sniper. ---