So what happened in the end?, CGL, state of Dumpshock, etc. Options

[Wounded Ronin]

While I miss the standardization of firearms and the resulting uber guns. It has kind of already happened in the US military with soldiers outfitting their guns with the accessories they need for the mission (Laser sights, scopes, flashlights, etc, etc).

Flashlights, laser pointers, and optics on top of the weapon are one thing. Those shouldn't inherently make the firearm less reliable, although if you go overboard you could add to bulk.

Stuff that complicates the mechanical workings of the firearm are a different thing. Think about a smartgun system. If the gun can now do all of its functions with a mental input from the user, this means there now has to be a parallel electronic mechanical system that can do everything the user used to do by hand. This means there's a lot more parts and components that can fail.

Just look at power windows vs. hand roll windows in a car. Have you ever seen someone take apart a power window system in order to service it, clean the electronic connections, replace burned out motors, and so on? It's amazing how many components are added to the window system just by adding power windows.

[Wounded Ronin]

So another thing that keeps coming and going through my mind is a suppression fire mechanic.

As I read more and more Vietnam war memoirs I get the impression that for small elite units use of suppression fire was key for breaking contact, as was smooth execution of "leapfrogging" type break contact manuvers. That's not the only thing or only appropriate course of action when there's sudden unexpected contact of course but it was an important thing that many teams used often, based on my reading.

So you would think that in Shadowrun the situation would be much the same. You have a small team who are (hopefully) elite and platoons of corporate security who can be mobilized against them. You'd think that a key part of what a team of shadowrunners would want to be able to do would be this kind of break contact maneuver.

So it would seem to me that for quality tactical gameplay you'd want a really good suppression fire mechanic that allows not only strictly individual suppression fire but allows you to handle it well if, say, three team members all suppress while their three buddies fall back, or something like that.

And then you'd want to smooth out the movement rules, so that there is a satisfying and consistent way to determine how far someone falls back, whether they got hit before they made it to cover or not, takes into account lateral movement versus back and forth in terms of direction of fire when running, and all this kind of thing.

Another thing I've come to appreciate from my reading is the role of "friction" in allowing a smaller group to escape a bigger group. From my reading, I've got the idea that theoretically if a larger group ambushes a smaller group and they execute it well the smaller group should be annihilated. And yet as harrowing an experience as it is there are real world examples where the smaller group survived or escaped. And part of this has to do with "friction"...there are gaps or delays in the consecutive action of the larger group, due to poor coordination, lack of drilling, terrain problems, weapon stoppages, etc. and these gaps are what allow the smaller group who has their shit together to get an opening to fire back and escape.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'd also consider is adding some variance in NPC initiative scores maybe based on professional rating or something. Have it so that the less professional the group the more likely they're going to have more dispersion in their initiative scores which leads to "friction" in the combat turn. Or maybe below a certain professional rating you're not allowed to delay your action in order to act in perfect concert with your teammates or something, your turn just happens when it happens.

All this would add to the importance of encumberance rules, carrying more ammo (which would be more realistic), and also, if combined with rules for stoppages, would also incentivize realistic carrying of back up weapons as well. If you're suppressing with a rifle that has a 1% stoppage rate you're going to get some stoppages, much more so than if you only shoot at a few targets on an individual basis.

[Nath]

Another thing I've come to appreciate from my reading is the role of "friction" in allowing a smaller group to escape a bigger group. From my reading, I've got the idea that theoretically if a larger group ambushes a smaller group and they execute it well the smaller group should be annihilated. And yet as harrowing an experience as it is there are real world examples where the smaller group survived or escaped. And part of this has to do with "friction"...there are gaps or delays in the consecutive action of the larger group, due to poor coordination, lack of drilling, terrain problems, weapon stoppages, etc. and these gaps are what allow the smaller group who has their shit together to get an opening to fire back and escape.

The thing is, your random group of RPG players often gets the benefits of instantaneous communication between its members, instantaneous assessment of shot accuracy (and to a lesser degree, a good indication of the damage caused) and at least one or two minutes to gather and integrate these information for every three seconds of action.

It take weeks if not months of drills for a SWAT team to be able to open a door and enter a room with their weapons readied, without bumping into each other, while checking every corner for hostiles. That is done casually by any PC team, without breaking a sweat.

[kzt]

Suppression is hard to do effectively in a game where the players get to make choices. Real world you get poorly trained troops suppressed by fairly ineffectual fire while the better trained troops around them continue to fire and maneuver. But crossing the FPL of a properly set-up tripod mounted machine gun is a whole other thing.

[Wounded Ronin]

Suppression is hard to do effectively in a game where the players get to make choices. Real world you get poorly trained troops suppressed by fairly ineffectual fire while the better trained troops around them continue to fire and maneuver. But crossing the FPL of a properly set-up tripod mounted machine gun is a whole other thing.

Yeah...

Thinking about it this could simply be tied to professional ratings. To keep things simple, player characters aren't affected psychologically by suppression fire (though of course they can be hit by it) however characters that have professional ratings increasingly take penalties across the board if they're being suppressed.

Psychological effectiveness of suppression fire could be tied to the noisiness of the weapon and the size of the impact it makes and the scariness of the sound it makes as it flies past you, so basically it could be tied to base Power rating of the weapon.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

The thing is, your random group of RPG players often gets the benefits of instantaneous communication between its members, instantaneous assessment of shot accuracy (and to a lesser degree, a good indication of the damage caused) and at least one or two minutes to gather and integrate these information for every three seconds of action.

It take weeks if not months of drills for a SWAT team to be able to open a door and enter a room with their weapons readied, without bumping into each other, while checking every corner for hostiles. That is done casually by any PC team, without breaking a sweat.

This is so very true...

[Wounded Ronin]

This is so very true...

Having thought about this overnight I think the solution is abstraction. Instead of having separate advanced rules for tactical computers and specialized communication rigs, just assume that the PCs have this stuff, and this explains their super communication ability. Then get rid of the advanced rules.