Now that everyone has had a few days to digest the FMA test draft stuff, I
want to start throwing out a few other ideas that we've had as alternatives to
some of the draft rules, to see what people think of them.
The first one is to do with ranges of weapons; the draft version posted to the
list last week has each weapon given fixed ranges for close, medium and long,
which is both "traditional" in game terms and is simple to use and remember.
However, this means that an untrained figure has the same maximum range with a
given weapon as an elite (albeit with a reduced chance of actually hitting).
Now, an alternative method, and one closer to what we used in Stargunt II,
is to relate range bands of weapons to the firer's quality rating - so
each
figure has a "basic range band" equal to his/her quality die type - eg:
6"
for a green, 10" for veteran etc. Different types of weapon then use
MULTIPLIERS on this basic range band to represent differing inherent
accuracies - eg: pistols and machine-pistols might use 0.5 (pretty
inaccurate at anything over point-blank), assault rifles 1, heavier or
more accurate weapons 2 or even 3.
So, the range band for a given weapon/user combination is the weapon's
modifier x the firer's basic band - so for a veteran with a pistol it
would be 0.5 x 10 = 5", for an elite with an assault rifle 1 x 12 = 12", etc.
CLOSE RANGE is then up to 1 x the effective range band, MEDIUM is 2 x, and
LONG would be 3 x (or maybe 4 x - it might be sensible to say that each
band is twice the previous one?)
Examples: 1) Regular trooper with typical assault rifle: Base RB =
8",
weapon multiplier 1, so actual range bands are close 8", medium 16", long 24"
(or maybe 32"?). 2) Elite trooper with machine pistol: Base RB = 12", weapon
multiplier
0.5,
so actual range bands are close 6", medium 12", long 18" (or maybe
24"?).
3) Veteran trooper with sniper rifle: Base RB = 10", weapon multiplier
2,
so actual range bands are close 20", medium 40", long 60" (or maybe
80"?).
On top of this, we could say that an AIMED shot (which would entail using 2
actions for the shot - the first action to aim, then the second to fire)
would DOUBLE the weapon multiplier - thus in example (1) above, the reg
could fire his rifle out to 48" (or 64" if using the 4x for long range) if he
spent both actions over the one shot, assuming he had a clear LOS over that
distance!
Pros of this concept: more realism due to better troops being able to hit at
greater ranges; it has a good "feel" to it, I think. Commonality of ideas with
SGII. Cons: a bit more complex than original method; may give some odd results
at the extremes of the variables range (eg: an untrained with a pistol gets
ranges of 2/4/6' if snapshooting, and still only 4/8/12" if he aims,
whereas an elite with same gun gets 6/12/18" for snap and 12/24/36" if
aimed - but is this REALLY unreasonable, in the light of real-life
examples quoted on the list?)
So, opinions anyone? This is the sort of rule where we are going to have to
go for an either/or decision, rather than allowing the option of both -
it is too fundamental to the core system. Does this feel better than the
fixed-range version, and is the extra complication worth it?
Over to you guys......
> So, opinions anyone? This is the sort of rule where we are going to
I much prefer the range bands. One of the things I liked most about SGII was
the fact that more experienced troops could perform more effective fire at a
further distance. I think the second way may SOUND more complex but I don't
think it is.
> Cons: a bit more complex than original method; may give some odd
Has anyone here SEEN "Pulp Fiction"? I rest my case....
> Ground Zero Games wrote:
I like it!
> Cons: a bit more complex than original method; may give some odd
Have you ever had the opportunity to fire a handgun? It's a ratehr interesting
experience, especially for one who's grown up on wargames and hollywood.
After a few of lessons at the range, I consider myself lucky to hit a dinner
plate size target at 25 feet with any regularity! And that's with a.22 target
pistol. With my '10mm' Sig I can't hit squat. So I'd support those numbers
wholeheartedly, being that untrained soldier
myself. :-)
Perhaps someday I'll have enough time to get back to the range and move
my way all the way up to green. :-)
> whereas an elite with same gun gets 6/12/18" for snap and 12/24/36" if
This end of the spectrum I can't really comment on, but it doesn't sound
unreasonable.
> So, opinions anyone? This is the sort of rule where we are going to
I'd go for this version myself.
Tom
> Now, an alternative method, and one closer to what we used in Stargunt
6"
> for a green, 10" for veteran etc. Different types of weapon then use
Go with this alternate method. Troop quality does have alot to do with
effective range of aimed and "unaimed" fire. It doesn't add much in the way of
complexity, but contributes significantly to the realism and feel of the game.
The SGII correlation is a happy bonus.
> On Wed, 14 Jul 1999, Sean Bayan Schoonmaker wrote:
> >Now, an alternative method, and one closer to what we used in
all agreed. plus, you get rifles in trained hands having slightly more
respectable ranges - an aimed long-range shot could hit out to 96 yards,
or 128 yards if you adopt doubling bands. not quite the 400 m that turns up on
the battlefield, but, i would say, fine for skirmish.
furthermore, if you put proper assault rifles at 2x (where MPs are at
0.5x, and intermediate things like SMGs, AK-47s and other budget kit are
at 1x), you get ranges of 192-256 yards, which is really close enough to
'reality' [1] for most people, i shoudl think.
tom
I hate to "me too," but I say go with multipliers, it "feels" better and seems
to make sense to me. I know that my wife has a longer "effective" range with a
pistol than I do...though it is exactly opposite with longarms...but even with
these minor differences in skill the effective range seems to change (neither
of us were combat military, but grew up with guns and hunting).
That or I have a high PSB skill...
Later,
I like it more than the artifical range bands; no tables to look up to check
what the range is.
Now if we can just import the SGII range bands/range die over, that
leaves no new rules to learn for firecombat...
Regular snap firing AR (x1.0): 8/16/24/32/40 = 80m at open targets
Elite snap firing pistol (x0.5): 6/12/18/24/30 = 60m at open targets
Then again, maybe this makes the ranges a bit far unless we use x0.25 for
pistols or only allow fire while there is a valid FP die (Which would drop the
last band or two off, depending on the weapon).
Regular snap firing AR (x1.0): 8[d10]/16[d8]/24[d6]/32[d4]/40[miss] =
64m
???
'Neath Southern Skies - http://users.mcmedia.com.au/~denian/
Commodore Alfred K Hole - RNS Indy's Folly [CB]
Captain Nicolette O'Teen - RNMS Golden Spear [CB]
EBD Medusa
> -----Original Message-----
On top of this, we could say that an AIMED shot (which would entail using 2
> actions for the shot - the first action to aim, then the second to
Howdy!
> On Wed, 14 Jul 1999, Thomas Pope wrote:
> After a few of lessons at the range, I consider myself lucky to hit a
Either a> change your ammo, b> play with the sights, ot c> chnage the
perscription on your glasses. That has always worked for me.
Ken
> Kenneth Winland wrote:
Actually I just need to d> practice!
:-)
Tom
Personally, I prefer just the 3 range bands (CLOSE, MEDIUM and LONG), but then
I'm a bit of a traditionalist myself....
This does mean that you can have some weapons that drop off on Firepower
quickly compared to others, which I like.
What about accuracy ratings for shotguns (those wretched shotguns!!)?
Also how about an accuracy of 0.75 for a Heavy Pistol compared to 0.5 for a
Light Pistol?
I think its Ok to have accuracy ratings of 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 etc for
"do it in your head" calculations. If you have the unusual ratings like 0.9
then its probably better to calculate the range bands before the game and
write them down on the squad data sheet.
Mike Elliott
________________________________________________________________________
___
_____
*****************************************************************
Privileged/Confidential Information and/or Copyright Material may
be contained in this e-mail. The information and Material is
intended for the use of the intended addressee. If you are not
the intended addressee, or the person responsible for delivering
it to the intended addressee, you may not copy or deliver it to
anyone else or use it in any unauthorised manner. To do so is
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you receive this e-mail by
mistake, advise the sender immediately by using the reply
facility in your e-mail software.
Thank you.
*****************************************************************
ct "Fil.?
We're trying to avoid exceptions, but sometimes they're warranted.
What about making a shotgun have a special rule that it drops 2 firepower per
band (reducing it to three bands in the open) and ignores soft cover.
Another optional rule (if you think it's warranted) is birdshot load takes a 1
die shift downward in impact and firepower, but rolls 2 firepower dice. Lots
of hits and suppression at close range, few casualties.
> Personally , I prefer just the 3 range bands (CLOSE, MEDIUM and LONG),
Well, this is the big question..... I'm fairly ambivalent about it myself,
I like the quality/range relationship version for realism's sake, but I
still have a few reservations about simplicity and playability. Most of the
comments so far seem to point to this as the system of choice for the list
members, however, so it looks like we're drifting that way....
> This does mean that you can have some weapons that drop off on
You'll note from the draft that some weapons (machine pistols, for
instance) drop D12/D8/D4 rather than (say) D10/D8/D6. I think this
covers that sort of weapon to a reasonable degree.
> What about accuracy ratings for shotguns (those wretched shotguns !!)?
I've got to disagree here, Mike - I think that halving and doubling are
generally OK for on-the-fly calculations for even the
arithmetically-challenged, but I don't want to expect players to start
doing x 0.75 and x 1.5 calculations just for stuff like ranges.
Jon (GZG)
> Mike Elliott
> Thomas Pope wrote:
> After a few of lessons at the range, I consider myself lucky to hit a
I've been shooting pistols since I was 13 (GASP! The HORROR!). Right
now I currently own a Taurus PT-92 (A Brazilian clone of the the Berreta
92F) and a Springfield Armory 1911A1. My father likes to boast that I
probablly can shoot better than most cops he has seen, but I haven't meet very
many police officers out on the range to be able to judge. With the 9 mm, I
can hold a 1 inch group at 15 yards. The.45 is giving me a little bit of
trouble, as it shoots incredible low (though it does continue to put them in
the center of the target) even when fired from a bench rest. Dad says that I
will have to file down the front sight (something that will ruin the finish)
or get a new sight all together.
> St. St. St. Jon wrote:
FMA Difficulty Snub Regular Pistol Carbines Rifles HMG's D4 Poor D6 Mediocre
3m 10m 30m 100m 300m D8 Fair 6m 20m 60m 200m 600m D10 Good 9m 30m 90m 300m
900m D12 Great 12m 40m 120m 400m 1,200m
The FMA dice column is the extra die rolled by the target in addition to their
quality.
You could use a table like this for all weapons...
Any opinions on the ranges for the "D4 Poor" row?
> Personally , I prefer just the 3 range bands (CLOSE, MEDIUM and LONG),
I think that's a training issue, so troop quality covers it.
As a case in point, I shoot about the same with my.22 pistol
and .357 magnum revolver--and that despite more practice with
the.22 (ammo costs less).
Another case in point: I found (by direct comparison) that I shoot
much better at 100 yd with a .357 magnum revolver than a .30-06
rifle (Remington 700 Classic--no recoil absorbers). I could hit
a 2.5' circular target 75%+ of the time with the .357, but below
60% with the Classic--due to flinching with the Classic. 'Course,
I'd practiced a *lot* more with the.357. (Needless to say, I kept the.357 and
sold the Classic.) Been a while since I practiced, though; I doubt I could do
as well now.
- Sam
> The first one is to do with ranges of weapons; the draft version posted
I'd have to say that the range of the weapon is not dependent on the skill of
the user. If one of our shooters pulls the trigger or I do, the bullet (or
plasma) is going to go just as far. Now, I may not be able to HIT anything,
but that's a function of skill rather than the weapon itself.
So I'd say give each weapon its range bands. That also allows for the
weapon which has a good "to-hit" as close range, but falls off quickly
at
longer range. And if you have a range modifier--say a die shift
down--then
the Greens and Untraineds will have no chance of hitting at long range anyway.
G'day guys,
Can't claim to have kept up with all this FMA stuff [OK I haven't read it to
be honest, so I'll just send this and wait for the excumincation notice to
arrive;)], and I know zip about firearms (beyond using them against snakes and
stuff on the farm), but with regard to the mechanics of ranges could you maybe
combine the range bands and the firer's skill? For instance:
Shooter ----------------|--------------------|------------------|
Point Effective Ineffective
blank fire fire
Where the end point of ineffective fire is the absolute max range of the
weapon and then the relative widths of each of the 3 bands depends on the
shooter's quality - so really good guy would have longer point
blank/effective fire ranges whereas 'green' guys would have a much
longer
ineffective fire band (as their point blank/effective fire ones had been
much contracted).
That was probably absolutely no help, so I'll shut up now.
Cheers
Beth
In a message dated 7/18/99 11:08:08 PM EST, beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au
writes:
<<
Where the end point of ineffective fire is the absolute max range of the
weapon and then the relative widths of each of the 3 bands depends on the
shooter's quality - so really good guy would have longer point
blank/effective fire ranges whereas 'green' guys would have a much
longer
ineffective fire band (as their point blank/effective fire ones had
been much contracted).
> [quoted text omitted]
I don't think you'll get excommunicated, but a thought about POINT BLANK
fire. target movement is much harder to keep up with as the target gets
CLOSER. A tiny twitch of the barrel targets somebody 300 yards out, but you
might have to swing the muzzle through 180 degrees to cover someone 3 feet
away. Reaction time is the decision maker up close and personal. That counts
in hand to hand as well: hence "telephone booth" karate techniques.
> G'day guys,
Well, I have to agree and disagree at the same time. Although to keep it
simple, doing a combination is probably the better solution IMHO since a well
trained soldier will be able to lay down more effective fire at almost all
ranges. But since the costing system that has been proposed in the beta rules
depends on the range bands for it's costs, there may be a significant
difference in 'price' for these experienced troops.
I say this because I know many of the guys I pay against came from the Wh40K
environment and want to bend the rules and costs as best they can to their
advantage (IMHO in 40K this is a good thing, since the higher the point values
of each figure the less you will have to 1) paint & 2) buy from
GW at their ridiculously high $/figure ratio). Much of the
range/effectiveness is going to be applied based on the figure's
quality. I have included an example of both scenarios:
Scenario 1: Not supporting the combination of skill and range: (Snipped from
FMA Beta Rules)
Assault rifle: Firepower total = 10+8+6 = 24, multiplied by Close
range band (12) = 288. Divide by 10, = 29, then add Impact value (10) for
final cost of 39 points. Elite Grenadier (D12) using 39 point assault rifle:
Close = D12, Medium = D8, Long = D6 Green Grenadier (D6) using same 39 point
AR: Close = D6, Medium = D4, Long = Ineffective Untrained (D4) as above: Close
= D4, Medium & Long = Ineffective
Scenario 2: Supporting the combination of skill and range:
Elite grenadier w/ Assault Rifle: Firepower total = 10+8+6 = 24,
multiplied by Close range band (12 + Quality D type (12) = 24) = 576.
Divide by 10 = 58. Then add impact value of 10 for a final cost of 68 points.
Now this increases the range bands by double, which is the same effect
of aiming (in the non-combined version). So now this elite trooper can
fire 24" in close range, 48" if aiming (on my table that is usually all the
way across the board BTW) with a D12. Medium range is then extended to 48" (or
if you only apply the combination of skill and range to the close range band
and keep the quality die type as the range band values then you would then
have a 36" medium band) with a D8 to hit, and at long range at 48" with a D6
die type. That would make the elite trooper quite deadly.
Now the supporting part. I believe that an elite soldier would be able to
perform so much better than any others, but would the effects of the weapon
change because of who is using it? Probably not. As has been stated in an
other post, the weapon continues to have the same characteristics, it's just
the user who is making the difference(s) in effect of the fire. How to
accommodate this in the game? Well, I think that the quality dice are the
appropriate factor to make the difference. You already apply a higher range
band based on the quality die type. One house rule that we use to make this
effect is a negative die shift for the oppress once the dice have reached the
highest point. For example:
A soldier fires a medium range burst at a green figure who is in position and
in light cover. So the soldier takes a die shift down for range (regular = D8,
medium range = D6, in position = D4), in position would shift one down again,
hard cover would make an other negative die shift, but since there are no more
negative shifts to be had, the defender's die type is shifted up to
accommodate until there are no more shifts available. So the green trooper
starts with the quality die type of D6, but the cover modifiers that could not
be applied to the fierier are then shifted up to the defender. So the green
trooper would move up one shift to D8. I know that shifting for cover is not
covered in the skirmish version, so don't nail me on it. We had played where
light cover shifted down one die, hard cover 2 shifts. Easier to remember than
the die type used.
Just some thoughts.