The FAQ is right, according to what is written: they are intended to be actual movement rates. Yes, this creates some truly ridiculous situations. Tactical Combat works great when dealing with low-speed situations, especially a mix of vehicles (drones) and people. In any other situation, where everyone is in vehicles racing along, then Chase Combat rules should be used instead.

If it works well, then it's not ridiculous. It's just you should change to the Chase rules when appropriate.

I think those rules work well: when it's a bunch of vehicles mixed with a couple pedestrians with rocket launchers, it's all going to be low speed. Think about Battlefield for those who've played it: you're never shooting at a guy behind cover at 50 mph, cause you'd miss your target. In tactical situation, the tanks never reach top speed.

That may be true, but then again, Tanks are not moving 200 Meters per Minute either (in a running Fight, this would be tantamount to suicide)... I have seen tanks hit targets at a fair clip (M1 Tanks anyways), as well as gunners using vehicle mounted weapons on moving vehicles... so your analogy is not entirely accurate...

Keep the Faith

Think of it this way - if you were in tactical combat and you accelerated like Tymeaus describes (which I actually agree sounds reasonable, it just doesn't follow the rules) - you'd drive yourself right out of the tactical situation regardless. If another vehicle went after you, you'd switch to Chase Combat, if not you'd just take any characters in that vehicle out of initiative order.

When you look at it like that, the "acceleration values are movement rates" rule makes a modicum of sense.

the main gun on a M1 is highly sensor assisted. First the target is painted with a laser designator, then a computer use a gyro to keep the barrel at the right elevation and direction independent of the vehicles movement. Only thing the gunner have to do is verify that its a valid target and push the button.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams#Aiming

this is the SR equivalent of getting a sensor lock before firing.

I think that there has been a miscommunication on my part... what I am describing IS Chase Combat, not tactical movement... when "Chase Combat" ensues, that is what we use, we do not try to make it fit the tactical situation as it quickly moves beyond that... as it tends to do in real life...

Tactical personnel are left wondering what happened when their targets quickly accelerate away from their carefully laid plans... that is what makes it CHASE COMBAT not tactical engagements...

Keep the Faith

The FAQ isn't right, it contradicts itself. It says Acceleration is movement, and then it shows an example of a vehicle moving faster than the Acceleration allows to begin with and increases the speed even more based on the Acceleration rating.. see my older post in the FAQ thread for details. No one has yet tried to explain to me what the FAQ actually says or what the rules mean... which is why we have this ZALGO thread to begin with.

I don't really see a need for a tactical combat speed rules where cars suddenly are slower than human at all, no matter how well it "works." People driving vehicles have the advantage of being able to get to a very high speed fairly quickly (even if the acceleration compared to top speed is alot less than a human's).

Having Acceleration be acceleration however should work well enough and not be so silly.

No. While movement rates are fixed in SR4, you can extend them by making a test to sprint. For charakters that an additional 2m/KR per hit, for vehicels, it's 5m/KR per net hit.

You are confusing the latter with part of the walking movement rate in the example.

A little experiment for you to try that should help illustrate why this is the case. You'll need:

• An empty parking lot
• A car
• 5-10 small beanbags

1. Go out into the middle of the parking lot.
2. Toss the beanbags in different directions and distances.
3. Get in your car and drive, in order, to where each of the beanbags landed as quickly as you can safely manage.
4. Get out of the car and repeat step 3 on foot.
5. Now imagine repeating this at the mall on a busy shopping day. (Just imagine, I'm not responsible for any wrecks you cause speeding around a crowded parking lot.)

Sure, given more freedom of movement, your car can almost certainly go faster than you can run. However, tactical combat (where acceleration-as-movement comes up) isn't taking place in situations where it has that kind of freedom (or if it does, it's moving out of the area where tactical combat is taking place). The low movement rates in tactical combat also cover the amount of extra time that the vehicle spends accelerating, decelerating, and turning - all of which a pedestrian can do almost instantly.

what the faq seems to say, imo, is that if you stay within the running part of the acceleration number, you can pretty much treat them the same as movement rates for metahumans. But you can also use them as acceleration rates.

so if you start out at 0, and then decide to "run" when in control of a vehicle, you accelerate up to a speed equal to the run part of the vehicles acceleration score. If you then decide to stay at that speed, you can come to a stop at any moment. But if you decide to accelerate again, of if you decided to take a vehicle test to add to the acceleration score, the vehicle equivalent of a athletics test for sprinting, the vehicles speed is now higher then the running part of the acceleration score, and will not be able to come to a halt on a single pass.

Unfortunately, the Walker Mod does not address this – in fact, it even halves movement rates. If the rationale for Acceleration is official, that should be errata'd to doubling Acceleration while halving Speed.

Turbocharger and Motor Tuning, on the other hand improve them.

If I had my wish, the next errata would overhaul the vehicle movement rules. Until then, we work with what we've got.

(Or ignore what we've got...)

I'm talking with the part that begins with the vehicle driving over it's Acceleration.

" Shadrach the Sasquatch is driving a GMC Bulldog Step-Van, which has Speed 90 and Acceleration 5/10. Moving along at 30 m/CT along I-4, Shadrach suddenly drives into a Yakuza/Mafia gunfight! The combat has 2 Initiative Passes; at its current movement rate (30 m/CT) the van will cover 15 meters every Action Phase."

In this example the vehicle is going 3 times it's running speed. That's not even possible without getting 4 hits on a driving test, or in other words, an outstanding success. Note that most driver probably only have 2-3 dice on their test to begin with. The example continues with the driver increasing his speed to 40 m/t.. using one of his hits on a driving test... wtf? It also seems to assume that going this speed on a highway (I-4?) requires a difficult vehicle test similar to being crashed into or shot half apart... figures.

Now would it ruin the system if we just assume Acceleration lives up to it's name? "Walking" Acc. is standard, while "Running" Acc. would infer penalties for movement (in addition for penalties for shooting out of a moving vehicle). The GM is of course free to require lower speeds in an area with lots of other cars and obstacles, but I don't think we should assume this as the default setting.

That's the same thing I was talking about earlier. The FAQ says Acceleration is a movement rate, then right there in the example he's cruising down the highway at well above his "movement rate". How did he get there?

I think somebody missed a sentence or two in the FAQ.

So then your point is that it's possible by RAW?

The problem is the area between tactical combat and chase combat, basically drive-by combat.

Well, by the example in the faq there is one difference between character movement and vehicle movement that people are missing. I know I missed it and I think I'm gonna look in my Rules to see if it's there.

It appears that when you "sprint" in a vehicle, net hits add to your current movement rate rather then recalculating from base movement rates. Hence the vehicle in the example only needed four hits over some number of phases previously to get up to 30m/CT rather then having to make them all at once.

Double post.

Possible, but unlikely except by a professional driver. Which still is silly. Why should there be a need to differentiate movement between tactical and chase combat at all? After all humans have the same movement regardless whether they're walking in the sidewalk, chasing after a target, or taking cover to shoot at an enemy.




Except the vehicle rules also say that NO test is required for normal driving. I'd say getting a vehicle up to 10 m/s should be automatic and not require a test by itself. Other cirumstances should require a test, but not simply accelerating.

Uh… see rationale provided in this thread.

Thank you for bringing up the FAQ example - this is exactly what I don't understand. The fact that he starts off moving at 30m/ct seems to imply that this isn't hard to do, but if he has to make a driving check... is this just because he is not considered to be in "tactical movement" before he is attacked?

If, as I understand it, net hits on your go fasta test add to your current speed then it wouldn't be too difficult to get to any speed you want given enough passes (and a low enough terrain threshold modifier). For example;

I'm driving along in open terrain (+0 modifier) at a running speed of 20m/CT at the start of a turn that has 2 phases in it.

Phase 1: I move 10m. I want to speed up so I spend an action and roll, getting 2 net successes. Now I'm going 30m/CT (20+2*5).

Phase 2: I move 15m. I want to speed up so I spend an action and roll, getting 3 net successes. Now I'm going 45m/CT (30+3*5).

End of turn: I didn't spend any actions controlling my vehicle so I make a crash test. Critical glitch! I slam into a wall at 45m/CT and die in a horrible ball of flames.

In my humble opinion, wheeled vehicles should use rules where acceleration and deceleration use the rules Tymaeus suggested, and walkers use the rules currently in the FAQ.

Actually, it might be best for walker drones to to walk and run pretty much the same way as metahumans, with vehicle tests being made to sprint but that the bonus from sprinting only applies per pass in the same way as sprinting does for metahumans.

This is somewhat concurrent with the FAQ. Although I can't see how making a test to drive fasta doesen't count as an action "controlling a vehicle." Reading the morning paper? Crash. Shooting out a window? Crash. Driving .... crash?

Yeah, I took a look at the rules last night and that whole end-of-turn bit is wrong by all accounts, so just take t as colourful narrative.

The only difference that I saw in the RAW between character and vehicle movement is that sprinting adds to running rate and driving faster adds to movement rate. I can see where the confusion comes from, so I'm gonna try running with my understanding from above.

What's bothering me now is what's the difference between a vehicle's walking and running rate? What penalties should it incur from running? There's already a penalty for shooting from a moving vehicle, but do you maybe apply the -2 for running to any gunnery tests?