Sniping fiber ropes (think Old West movies)
is possible but impractical and difficult. But this isn't fiber cordage. This would be braided steel cable with a safety factor of 5:1, and a diameter of about 26mm (see Assumption 3, later on). Assuming perfect shots and perfect clean-through holes, it's going to take multiple hits, likely 3-4+ at the same spot to weaken it enough that it finally snaps.
A closer look at the setup reveals a crane equipped with a multi-stranded steel cable (designed to be redundant), connected not to a simple shackle, but a claw hook, which then suspends four smaller-but-still beefy multi-strand wire ropes. And that entire setup is duplicated six times. Gut feeling says it's possible, but not practical.
Engineering time! Time for the SWAG*!
*Scientific Wild Ass Guess.
Assumption 0: The Desert Merrow's systems would not stop bullets fired at the cranes or rigging. (If it blocked shots, then sniping the cranes just can't be done.)
Assumption 1: Lycoris will make any shot she takes, and nervousness won't apply. Given she shoots
electrical cabling one-handed from about 50m away back in Chapter 44, and her other exploits since, this is reasonable. (I have put bullets from a revolver into roughly the same size of group at 50m...but only from a benchrest setup. Not standing, and not one-handed.)
Assumption 2: Since the system is automated, it would need an automatic or mechanical latching system to release the crane rigging once the arms are replaced (or else the Merrow would be stuck in the cranes).
Assumption 3: Given the size of the arms and comparing real-world setups, we'll assume each sling and crane is setup for 10 metric tons (tonnes), and DUO accurately models physical materials; i.e. non-creatures are handled via physics simulation instead of hp.
Assumption 4: Lycoris's sniper rifle has power roughly akin to a 7.62x51 NATO round.
View attachment 2720
Figure 1: Something like this. It can automatically release the hook once pressure is off the load (in this case, once the arms are attached and no longer being held up by the crane).
Option 1: Shooting the main body of the mechanism would be the largest target, but that's a hardened steel box. The weak points would be the battery core or the motor shaft, but disabling either one would just lock down the hook, since IRL equipment like this is "fail safe", i.e. when it fails, it does so to a "safe" position (hanging onto the load instead of dropping it unexpectedly). Shooting the case itself would warp the metal, likely also locking it in place.
Option 2: Shooting the sling hook at the bottom. Since this is usually a forged steel part, it would be the mechanically weakest for a bullet impact. On a 10 tonne hook, the narrowest part of the load-bearing arc of the hook (i.e. a bit smaller than "F" on the diagram) would be about 42 mm. Shooting above "J" on the narrow side would not cause the load to drop; shooting above "J" on the thick side would just be additional metal for a bullet to go through.
Forged low-carbon/ordinary alloy steels such as those used in hooks at tough, but not hard (Brinell of about 200 for grade 100 alloy steel such as commonly used in crane hooks); they will smush and deform instead of shattering or breaking when under too much mechanical stress. Cast steels are hard but brittle; they resist changing shape at all until they shatter. Armor plate is a special sauce of medium-hard (sometimes with layers) that will resist both deformation/penetration and shattering. The catch here is that military testing is done against military-grade armor, not load-bearing alloy steel.
[Cue three-hour rabbit hole looking at WWI-era ballistic formulas and installing DOSBox to get an ancient QBasic program to run.]
So it turns out that the math...is squishy. Literally, because metal has to move out of the way of a bullet. There's a formula, but it's basically an estimate and requires comparing to a known result. While WWII US Navy armor steel was comparable in hardness to our hook and the stats of our steel are known...the closest reference result I could find for that material is a 75mm shell...which ends up with clearly-wrong estimates when scaled down to something the size of a human-sized rifle.
But...
a crazy person on Youtube did shoot a 7.62 NATO rifle at carbon steel plate (grade 50) and got .457 inches using a sniper rifle-length gun barrel. That's 11.6mm in normal units, but in the wrong type of steel. Thankfully, if all else is held constant, penetration against steel of different hardness varies linearly with the hardness (per an article in the
Defence Technology scientific journal, Volume 12, Issue 2). I'm more comfortable scaling this up or down since it's already in rifle-scale, and not starting at tank/naval cannon scale. The paper goes to use calculus so that velocity, hardness, and angle can all vary at once, but that's overkill. Basic rise/run algebra slopes time.
Penetration depth(mm) = -.116 * Brinnell hardness + y
In our YouTuber experiment: 11.6mm = -.116 * Brinnell 135 + y. Solve for y, and that gets us an intercept of +27.3.
Plug in our beefier crane hook and
(-.116*200)+27.3 equals...4.1mm.
Lycoris's bullet will scoop out a finger-sized divot, but she'd need 10 or 11 shots to the exact same place to break through the hook...on a single crane.
Option 3: Shoot out the master link, that thing at the top of the hook assembly that connects to the main cable coming down from the crane hoist itself. It's a single loop, but as a critical component, such master links are made to a higher degree of safety and usually a higher hardness of steel to prevent catastrophic failure.
A bit of searching gives that a 11 tonne master link will have a material diameter of about 25mm, and a hardness value of 32-35 HRC...Rockwell system hardness. Since a softer metal would be easier to shoot through, let's give Lycoris the softer option...32 converts to a whopping 302 on the Brinell system. Plug that in to our existing formula:
(-.116*302)+27.3=-7.7?
Our formula breaks. Above Brinell hardness 230, a standard FMJ bullet isn't appreciably plow through steel with the rest of our setup.
Option 4:
Okay, but what about
armor-piercing sniper rifle rounds?
...actual tests of people shooting armor-piercing military rounds at softer steels is hard to come by. We do have some stated stats and can solve for the Y-intercept on our linear hardness equation:
"The M993 7.62mm AP Round is capable of penetrating a 7mm thick high hardness armor plate[...]". "The surface hardness of this material is a minimum of 477."
7.7=(-.166*477)+Y, and Y is 86.9
Against our harder crane master link, that tungsten inner slug has 36.8mm of penetration; against the softer sling hook it has 53.7mm.
In theory, a dead-on shot would go straight through either, but a non-deforming penetrator like a tungsten rod is much much more sensitive to angle and shot placement than a jacketed-lead bullet. I don't have the references needed to quantify how bounce-happy the armor-piercing core might be.
Lycoris mentions, however, that she can't use any of the "power shot" skills.
TL;DR/Summary: Against the wire cable, it would take multiple rifle shots to disable a crane. Against the hook or master links holding up the sling assembly, it would take an impractical amount of "same hole" shots to break either; armor-piercing rounds (if separate from the game skills Lycoris lacks) might work but would be subject to angling.
P.S.: Also, there's
six crane assemblies, and they're all moving.