IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Help me research RL police firearms accuracy rates, 80s run
Wounded Ronin
post Oct 17 2007, 03:38 AM
Post #1


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,640
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383



So on and off and little by little I'm working on my personal project "80s Run", where I'd use the framework of the SR dice system to make a game for role playing in the 80s. Since there wouldn't necessarily be magic I figure that firearms would be more important and I can go about trying to make firearms as realistic as possible for the purposes of a tabletop RPG or tabletop strategy game.

I figure that a good point to start would be police firearms accuracy statistics. This would give me at least a vague idea of how often people with basic levels of training should be able to hit their targets in a real combat situation. By analzying statistics I could come with a certain range of ballpark probabilities that should be hit by the rules under what would be considered average conditions with average participants.

However, I was having a hard time finding official police hit/miss stats on the internet. The only thing I found was New York Times article that had a few stats, but they're all rounds fired rather than hit/miss stats. I'll post the article text FYI here but the question I wanted to ask the enlightened ranks of DSF is if anyone knows where I can find police hit/miss stats.

Anyway, here's the article. It's actually kind of amusing and quaint (it's from 1995) because apparently some people were suggesting that a 15 round magazine in 9x19mm was too much firepower for the cops. It makes me sad. Note also incorrect use of term "clip" instead of "magazine".

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...&pagewanted=all

QUOTE

After a two-month study of the Police Department's new rapid-firing 9-millimeter semiautomatic handguns, senior police officials have decided to increase training in the use of the weapon. But department figures show no dramatic upsurge in shooting, and the officials say there is no reason to stop issuing the guns.

The powerful handguns have become standard issue among police forces throughout the country, including in the low-crime national park system. But they have been the source of controversy in New York City since the Police Department first began allowing officers, who felt outgunned by criminals, to use the weapons three years ago.

Concerns that the police were firing too many rounds with the guns, which are equipped with 15-round clips, stemmed from an incident last December in which officers fired 247 times during a shootout in Queens in which a bystander was killed.

And after a robbery in a Bronx bodega in February, during which officers fired 125 bullets, Police Commissioner William J. Bratton assembled a committee of his chiefs to study whether the traditional six-bullet, .38-caliber revolver should be issued to recruits.

The panel, led by First Deputy Police Commissioner John F. Timoney, expects to reach its conclusions by the end of the month. But officials say that only minor modifications in training and equipment are expected.

"We're not retracting the 9-millimeter," Mr. Timoney said. "It's here to stay."

In an interview on Friday, Mr. Timoney said the department would produce a new series of training videos for distribution to all precincts and Police Academy classes. The videos would outline different scenarios in which officers should use or not use their weapons, as well as how they can minimize the times they fire to accomplish their mission while protecting themselves and bystanders from errant bullets. Mr. Timoney said the aim of the videos will be to make officers act defensively. He said the panel is also looking into whether the department should replace the bullets now used in the semiautomatics with bullets that expand on impact. That would lessen the chance that they would pass through targets and hit bystanders, but it would increase the chance that the bullets would do more harm to those they hit.

Other officials said the department was looking into other safety measures, like tightening the triggers of the Glock, Sig Sauer and Smith & Wesson 9-millimeters now used by about 24,000 officers.

In recent months, the Police Department has collected statistics on how often officers fire their 9-millimeter handguns, which were published yesterday in New York Newsday. The published statistics, which the Police Department did not dispute, show that the average number of rounds fired by officers who shoot 9-millimeters is higher than the number of rounds fired by those who shoot other guns. But the numbers also show that the average number of shots fired by all 9-millimeters on the force is actually lower now than three years ago, when the department began issuing the weapon.

The average number of bullets fired by officers equipped with 9-millimeters during shooting incidents was 3.69 in 1992, 3.71 in 1993 and 4.08 in 1994. Officers carrying all other guns fired an average of 2.68 bullets per shooting incident in 1992, 2.74 in 1993 and 2.77 in 1994.

That means officers with 9-millimeter handguns fired one more shot per incident than those equipped with other guns.

The total number of bullets fired by the Police Department, comparing 1992 with last year, increased at almost exactly the same rate as the increase in the number of officers on the force. In 1992, 25,000 officers fired 1,094 bullets; last year, 31,000 officers fired 1,383 times.

Although the numbers show officers who fire 9-millimeters discharge more rounds per shooting, they also show no increase, and actually a decrease, in the average number of shots fired among all those officers carrying 9-millimeter weapon.

The 512 officers equipped with 9-millimeters in 1992 fired 48 shots, or an average of .093 bullets. In 1993, the 888 officers equipped with the weapon fired 126 shots, or an average of .14 bullets. But last year, the 15,000 officers equipped with 9-millimeters fired 710 shots, or an average .047 bullets.

Through the 1980's and early 1990's, the police unions lobbied for the 9-millimeter because its weight, trigger and reloading cartridge permits officers to fire much faster.

Shortly after becoming Commissioner last year, Mr. Bratton allowed officers carrying the 9-millimeters to increase their firepower from 10-round clips to 15-round clips. It was a move that pleased beat officers, who often complain that drug dealers and organized crime members are carrying more powerful weapons every year
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wounded Ronin
post Oct 17 2007, 03:49 AM
Post #2


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,640
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383



OK, when I narrowed my queries and searched for NYPD stats I found some commentary/news but still no dry list of statistics which is really what I'm looking for.

http://www.gunatics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1988

QUOTE

May 23, 2007 6:48 am US/Eastern

CBS 2 Exclusive: Dept. That Can't Shoot Straight
Documents Show Officers Struggle To Hit Live Targets
NYPD 2005 Firearms Discharge Report

Lou Young
Reporting

(CBS) NEW YORK CBS 2 HD has uncovered some disturbing statistics out of police headquarters. A confidential firearms report indicates a problem with gunfire accuracy in the NYPD.

It’s a troubling question -- when police officers shoot can they hit what they're shooting at?

Many officers find success at the range, but experts and now the statistics indicate there's a big difference between hitting a paper target and firing on the job.

On the firing range, New York City police officers are required to put 80 percent of their shots on target. In the field, they are considerably less accurate even as they shoot more bullets per incident.

A confidential NYPD report indicates an increase in every category of shots fired on the job, accompanied by a disturbing drop in accuracy.

Of 276 police bullets fired in gunfights in 2005 only 23 found their target -- an 8 percent accuracy rate. Comparing the trend to the year before we see gunfight bullet volume up 200 percent, while the accuracy has deteriorated significantly.

"My god, that's pretty poor ... pretty sad," firearms instructor John Parmerton said.

CBS 2 HD brought the report to Parmerton, a retired state trooper who also teaches many city cops. He said they complain that their on-the-job training isn't good enough.

"Not good enough for the weapons that they're carrying and not good enough for the confrontations that are occurring on the street," Parmerton said.

"The weapon" is a 9-millimeter handgun, first designed as a military sidearm capable of pumping out tremendous firepower in short order.

Law enforcement experts say that giving all cops such devastating firepower was a political decision whose success or failure rests on the level of training.

CBS 2 HD asked Robert McCrie, a John Jay College professor of criminal justice, if he thinks it was a mistake to switch to semi-automatic weapons exclusively.

"I think it was a mistake, but it's very hard to say to law enforcement we don't think you should have firepower up to the level of the criminal element," McCrie said.

The stats, in fact, show that during gunfights criminals are more than twice as accurate as NYPD officers with these semi-automatic weapons. Seventeen suspects fired 72 bullets in 2004, hitting officers 14 times -- an accuracy rate of 19 percent compared to the NYPD's 8 percent.

Parmerton said the department's weapons instructors have been turned into paper pushers.

"Because of the sheer volume, because of the requirement to get as many bodies through the place as possible they've become target posters and line callers," Parmerton said. "It's so bad that specialty units like Emergency Services Unit, like Organized Crime Control Bureau, like Counter Terrorism Unit have all extended their firearms training over and above what the rank and file -- the uniformed squads -- get because they realize it's inadequate to put their officers on the street."

NYPD spokesman Paul Browne dismisses the 2005 figures CBS 2 HD reported as "an anomaly."

He said city cops shoot less than they used to, but doesn't address the issue of how well they shoot.

CBS 2 HD asked the NYPD to see 2006 statistics, but we're still waiting for an answer.

An outside review of NYPD's training program, ordered after the Sean Bell shooting, is expected at the end of next month.

The story can be found at; http://wcbstv.com/topstories/local_story_1..._142170041.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Emperor Tippy
post Oct 17 2007, 04:06 AM
Post #3


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 418
Joined: 20-September 07
Member No.: 13,346



Cop's are generally not that accurate. Spray and pray is their method of shooting. Why do you think a suspect gets 90+ bullets fired at them for 2 cops (it happened in California about a year back) and only gets hit 9 times. Each cop reloaded his gun twice. So out of 45 bullets fired 4.5 hit on average for each cop. That is 10% accuracy.

A 70+ year old women down in one of the Carolinas was served with a no knock warrant and when the cops busted down her door she grabbed a revolver and fired 6 shots, she hit 1 cop with 2 shots and the other with 3 with 1 miss. Both cops were doubled tapped in the heart. They only lived because of the trauma plates in their bullet proof vests. The 2 officers fired over 50 shots and hit her 3 times.

These were cops knocking down the door of a 70 year old grandma who had fallen asleep in front of the TV. It was a drug bust and the cops had the wrong house. The women grabbed the revolver from the table next to her (which she had gotten recently because of a large number of break ins) and hit both cops.


The vast majority of police officers in the US can't shoot. And all but the ones military trained empty the clip at the target. Which is a terminally stupid idea, what if the guy you just put 15 bullets in has a friend? Your stuck reloading while the friend shoots you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wounded Ronin
post Oct 17 2007, 04:13 AM
Post #4


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,640
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383



That's very interesting. Does this suggest that police training actually makes you LESS accurate than you would normally be with a firearm (i.e. double tapping granny)?



Also, I found a Post article that had the following stats:

Percent of hits by cops involved in gunfights
2004: 20%, 2005: 8%

Percent of hits by cops shooting in defense of themselves or others, where perpetrator doesn't return fire
2004: 34%, 2005: 30%

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05232007/news/...ed_robinson.htm
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Critias
post Oct 17 2007, 05:03 AM
Post #5


Freelance Elf
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 7,324
Joined: 30-September 04
From: Texas
Member No.: 6,714



Saying "lol cops can't shoot" is something of an overgeneralization, just as much as it would be to say "every granny is a stone cold hitman."

There are cops that are into guns, and there are cops that only ever go to the range to requal once a year. Just like everyone else, there are those who practice and get very, very, good at shooting, and there are those who don't. Also just like everyone else, there are those who are heavily affected by the physiological side of a combat experience (tunnel vision, blood pressure shifts, shaking hands, etc) and those who are less affected or aren't affected until afterwards.

*shrugs*

That's just life for ya.

The hit ratio for soldiers isn't any better, but they've got the old "we were suppressing them, not actually shooting at them," fallback position. When in doubt, though, from various trainers I've always heard that about 10% is right for most combat shootings outside of touch-range, whether the shooter is LEO or military or other.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CyberKender
post Oct 17 2007, 05:23 AM
Post #6


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 52
Joined: 12-June 07
Member No.: 11,895



I don't have any actual statistics for you, but I can say a couple of things about police firearms training. I work for the local Sheriff's department, (No, not as an officer.), and we got to go down to the range with our Sargent and lieutenant for their quarterly recertification. They're not trained to empty the clip into a target, they are trained to put three shots into him. Two to the body and one to the head. They are also trained to use cover and angles to get the best shot quickly with the least amount of exposure.

Now, that said, I've been told the story of one of the lieutenants, who retired recently, who was going into a house on a drug bust. They knew the guy inside was armed and dangerous. The lieutenant in question went in, and confronted the guy in a small room in the back of the house. The guy was behind a file cabinet and waiting for the officer, about 5 feet from the door. Both men emptied their clips, and the lieutenant was not hit, and the guy was hit twice. From five feet apart. Surprise, fear, and adrenaline make for shaky hands and reactionary thinking, even when when trained. You have to be stone cold to pause and aim in a firefight. And if you want to say that the lieutenant wasn't all that good of a shot, he was a former marine who'd done three tours in Vienam, had been in the DEA doing work out of the country, and on the SWAT team. Which is why, afterwards, he said that it was exhilarating...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wounded Ronin
post Oct 17 2007, 06:15 AM
Post #7


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,640
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383



So if I'm trying to stay within the general framework of SR3, and typical, say, Pistols skills are going to be from 1-6, it would seem like there not being a huge difference between 4, 5, and 6 in a firefight would be pretty correct.

And it looks like I should be going for a typical to-hit rate of around 10%.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kzt
post Oct 17 2007, 07:59 AM
Post #8


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,537
Joined: 27-August 06
From: Albuquerque NM
Member No.: 9,234



Looking quickly: (I couldn't get access to "Police Quarterly")

http://www.policeone.com/writers/columnist...rticles/117909/

During a 13-year span, the Baltimore County PD, which Aveni regards as one of the best trained in the country, achieved an average hit ratio of 64 percent in daylight shootings - not ideal, but clearly much better than commonly believed. In shootings that occurred in low-light surroundings, however, average hits dropped to 45 percent, a 30 percent decline. The data from Los Angeles County (LAC) reveals a somewhat comparable 24 percent decline.

"Until this research," Aveni says, "performance has never been accurately matched to lighting conditions," even though as many as 77 percent of police shootings are believed to occur under some degree of diminished lighting. Some departments tally "outdoor" versus "indoor" shootings, but most appear not to precisely differentiate between low-light and ample-light events, despite the preponderance of shootings during nighttime duty tours.

A multiple-officer shooting, in which more than one officer fires during a deadly force engagement, has an even greater influence on hit probability, Aveni discovered.

According to the LAC data, when only one officer fired during an encounter, the average hit ratio was 51 percent. When an additional officer got involved in shooting, hits dropped dramatically, to 23 percent. With more than 2 officers shooting, the average hit ratio was only 9 percent - "a whopping 82 percent declination," Aveni points out.

Multiple-officer shootings, Aveni told Force Science News, are three times more likely to involve suspects with shoulder weapons than single-officer shootings. This tends to "increase the typical stand-off distance," he says. Many of these confrontations also embody fast-changing, chaotic and complex circumstances. These factors, Aveni believes, help explain the negative impact on accuracy.

Aveni also discovered a correlation between multiple-officer shootings and number of rounds fired.

With LAC shootings involving only one officer, an average of 3.59 police rounds were fired. When 2 officers got involved, the average jumped to 4.98 rounds and with 3 officers or more to 6.48. "The number of rounds fired per officer increases in multiple-officer shootings by as much as 45 percent over single-officer shootings," Aveni says.

Again, he judges distance to be a likely factor. "A higher volume of fire may be used to compensate for the lower hit ratio as distance increases," he speculates. He believes the highly violent nature these events often present may be influential, too. Anecdotally bunch shootings appear to encompass "many of the barricaded gunman scenarios, drawn-out foot and vehicular pursuits, subjects experiencing violent psychotic episodes, gang attacks and encounters involving heavily armed suspects," such as the infamous FBI Miami shootout and the North Hollywood bank robbery street battle.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Crusher Bob
post Oct 17 2007, 08:57 AM
Post #9


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,598
Joined: 15-March 03
From: Hong Kong
Member No.: 4,253



Here's some stuff for the NYPD:

NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS OF POLICE COMBAT SITUATIONS (1981) (executive summary?)

NYPD SOP 9 2000 FIREARMS DISCHARGE REPORT

and:

NYPD GUNFIGHT STATISTICS
1990-2000

CODE

YEAR    HIT PROBABILITY    FIRED PER GUNFIGHT      SHOTS FIRED PER OFFICER
1990          19%                         8.2                         4.4
1991          15%                         5.9                         3.7
1992          17%                         7.7                         3.6
1993          15%                         Unavailable                 Unavailable
1994          12%                         9.3                         4.4
1995          18%                         12.5                        6.2
1996          14%                         11.1                        6.1
1997          10%                         10.6                        5.3
1998          25%                         10                          5.5
1999          13%                         10.6                        5.9
2000           9%                         16.8                        6.9
MEAN SCORES   15%                         10.3                        5.2

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Critias
post Oct 17 2007, 10:31 AM
Post #10


Freelance Elf
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 7,324
Joined: 30-September 04
From: Texas
Member No.: 6,714



Honestly, Combat Pool notwithstanding, the core rules for Shadowrun would work pretty well for real-life firefights (not in terms of full auto, etc, but simply in terms of the sliding TN method) -- if your GM tallied up all the appropriate lighting, range, movement, and cover modifiers appropriately, and you kept it "real" by having at best a laser sight.

Without smartlink II's and Adept powers and Centering and cyberoptics (or Adept senses), and snipping Combat Pool (IE, "double your dice when it counts") out, you'd probably find yourself with a fairly realistic hit/miss ratio, with the basic system as written.

Take beat cop with a Pistols of 3, and have him shooting at someone outside of short range, in low light conditions, as the guy's running away (down an alley, let's say)? Odds are good it is going to take him a magazine dump to get the guy off his feet.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Oct 17 2007, 11:53 AM
Post #11


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,006
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



QUOTE (kzt)
A multiple-officer shooting, in which more than one officer fires during a deadly force engagement, has an even greater influence on hit probability, Aveni discovered.

According to the LAC data, when only one officer fired during an encounter, the average hit ratio was 51 percent. When an additional officer got involved in shooting, hits dropped dramatically, to 23 percent. With more than 2 officers shooting, the average hit ratio was only 9 percent - "a whopping 82 percent declination," Aveni points out.

Law Enforcement is really made up of ninja!

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nezumi
post Oct 17 2007, 01:41 PM
Post #12


Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet;
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,546
Joined: 24-October 03
From: DeeCee, U.S.
Member No.: 5,760



Keep in mind, there are more factors to consider. A really good source showed me that right around the early 80's we saw the availability of actual bullet resistant kevlar vests. These would successfully stop .32 and 9mm bullets. Hence, some police departments upped the caliber of their guns. There was also a gradual move from revolvers (where you have to really pick your shots) to semi-automatics (where you can spray more). Both of these would decrease accuracy, comparing say 1980 to 1989 (depending on the office).

More recently, we've seen police officers having a lot more trouble hiring qualified officers. I seem to recollect reading something recently that something like 10% of all officers on the street in a part of Canada had actually failed the minimum shooting requirements. Presently we're grabbing as many people as we can for the military, risks of wearing a badge are going up, and the pay continues to be terrible. So they're under a real crunch for qualified people, and standards in some places are dropping.

So what am I getting at? Don't expect a cop in 2007 to necessarily measure up to one in 1980. Unfortunately, the 1980's cops also tend to be less likely to beat the tar out of someone, which is probably a knock for your game.

That said, I'd love to watch your work and help proofreading and so on. You're a great writer and maybe I'll learn some of your 80's secrets. Don't feel compelled to take me up on that, but definitely, if you need help, don't hesitate to give me a buzz.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kzt
post Oct 17 2007, 03:52 PM
Post #13


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,537
Joined: 27-August 06
From: Albuquerque NM
Member No.: 9,234



Well, the 70's started with the CHP-Newhall Shootout. In which 4 CPH officers were killed by two ex-cons in a multi-minute shootout. IIRC, The ex-cons who only took effective return fire from a civilian who shoot back using one of the downed officers guns, the cops who shot back totally missed.

This caused come serious changes in how police were trained to shoot.

The 1986 FBI Miami Massacre caused more.

And if you think cops were less aggressive in the past you are simply wrong. Tennessee v. Garner was in 1985. Prior to that cops could simply shoot a fleeing felon. Use of force rules have become tighter over time, not more relaxed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nezumi
post Oct 17 2007, 04:00 PM
Post #14


Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet;
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,546
Joined: 24-October 03
From: DeeCee, U.S.
Member No.: 5,760



The difference is in 1980 they'd shoot people running away. Now they beat the tar out of 'em.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wounded Ronin
post Oct 17 2007, 11:23 PM
Post #15


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,640
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383



QUOTE (Critias)
Honestly, Combat Pool notwithstanding, the core rules for Shadowrun would work pretty well for real-life firefights (not in terms of full auto, etc, but simply in terms of the sliding TN method) -- if your GM tallied up all the appropriate lighting, range, movement, and cover modifiers appropriately, and you kept it "real" by having at best a laser sight.

Without smartlink II's and Adept powers and Centering and cyberoptics (or Adept senses), and snipping Combat Pool (IE, "double your dice when it counts") out, you'd probably find yourself with a fairly realistic hit/miss ratio, with the basic system as written.

Take beat cop with a Pistols of 3, and have him shooting at someone outside of short range, in low light conditions, as the guy's running away (down an alley, let's say)? Odds are good it is going to take him a magazine dump to get the guy off his feet.

It seems to me I need to figure out what TN would give me the 10-15% hit probability rolling 3 dice and work from that as a low average; set that as the baseline close range to-hit.

The system might require a little computer program to help roll all those dice with the lower to-hits.

I suppose that ammo expenditure, especially with automatic fire, could be more realistic in this way, since a person could dump a lot of round out each turn and have more chances to make that small hit probability.

Thanks to everyone for the info. I'm reviewing it and thinking right now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Crusher Bob
post Oct 18 2007, 02:08 AM
Post #16


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,598
Joined: 15-March 03
From: Hong Kong
Member No.: 4,253



The limits on accuracy in combat are largely physiological and psychological, not physical. People in combat miss their targets so much because of things like the stress (fight or flight) response making their hands shake, not because hitting the target is actually that difficult.

So note that the fight or flight response reduces accuracy from around 80-90% accurate on the range to around 10-20% accurate in combat. (Was it you who was asking about Grossman?)

The stuff from Grossman about violent videogames is that they reduce the stress response to combat like stimulus, not that they actually teach you to fire a weapon. But as we see, the stress response, not the quality of ‘range’ training is the main limiter on combat accuracy. This is why training for police and soldiers over the last ~50 years has striven to be as close to combat as possible, to reduce the effects of the stress response. (See work by S.L.A. Marshall and the responses to it.)

So, it’s not that stone cold granny had a firearms skill of 15, it’s just that her TNs were around 3 or 4 (just like the firing range) while the cops TNs were 6+ (suffering from fight or flight reflex). (And this is why the adrenal pump is a terrible idea from stone cold killas. Adrenalin makes your hand shake. Would anyone still want the pump if it gave you something like +4 str, +2 damage resistance, ignores stun, but also gave you something like +4 ranged combat TNs?)

Note also that the ‘amount’ of stress response is also important. That’s, in part, why retreats and ambushes tend to result in many more casualties, the guys doing the killing are under much less stress, so they shoot much better. (Note that a large part of this may be related to physiological factors, since people seem to really dislike killing other people.)

So, if you wanted to model combat, you could try having a ‘stress meter’ that went from 1-6. Every point on the stress meter you have increases your TN by 1. So, stone cold kill-bots don’t have really high level firearms skills, they just don’t have shaking hands. This also lets you implement supressing fire and the effect of close misses. Since they jack up your stress meter, they raise your TNs to shoot back.

I’m pretty sure I wrote all this before, since I remember pointing out how comparatively deadlier this would make drones, since they don’t suffer from stress; just another day on the firing range for them.

[edit]
Also note that this encourages kung-fu fighting. The fact that your hands are shaking does much less to your ability to grab the other guy and rip out his spine than is does your ability to shoot him right in the face.
[/edit]
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Oct 18 2007, 03:03 AM
Post #17


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,006
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



QUOTE (Crusher Bob)
The limits on accuracy in combat are largely physiological […] not physical.

:?

QUOTE
(And this is why the adrenal pump is a terrible idea from stone cold killas.  Adrenalin makes your hand shake.  Would anyone still want the pump if it gave you something like +4 str, +2 damage resistance, ignores stun, but also gave you something like +4 ranged combat TNs?)

Yeah, melee characters. Who are generally going to be the ones benefitting from strength and stun resistance, too :)

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kzt
post Oct 18 2007, 03:10 AM
Post #18


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,537
Joined: 27-August 06
From: Albuquerque NM
Member No.: 9,234



Before you get too worked up by SLA Marshals work that was built upon by Grossman, find a current version of "Men against Fire" and read the introduction. Where they admit that he basically made up all the stuff about firing rates.

http://www.theppsc.org/Grossman/SLA_Marshall/Main.htm
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Crusher Bob
post Oct 18 2007, 04:27 AM
Post #19


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,598
Joined: 15-March 03
From: Hong Kong
Member No.: 4,253



The point I was attempting to make here:

QUOTE

The limits on accuracy in combat are largely physiological […] not physical.

was that the limits are based on the failures 'poo flinging monkey', and not on the objective difficulty of butting a bullet into a moving target with bad lighting.

QUOTE
(Kagetenshi)
Yeah, melee characters. Who are generally going to be the ones benefitting from strength and stun resistance, too smile.gif


Of course, it's even harder to model the fact that adrenalin basically makes you 'stupid' as well.




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wounded Ronin
post Oct 18 2007, 07:36 AM
Post #20


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,640
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383



Crusher,

I've heard of what you mean by the adrenaline making you stupid. It's the tunnel vision people always talk about in conjunction with a combat situation, right?

Perhaps if I were to implement the "stress meter" in addition to the stress meter raising your ranged combat TNs it could also lower your Int score, which would affect combat pool, Reaction, and perception tests.


EDIT/addition:

I have been mulling over some thoughts on ways to base the firearms combat on SR but also make it more realistic/tactical. Here are some thoughts. Since I'm only an armchair warrior any and all comments are welcome. In fact, this is really just a draft, so comments and revision would be mightily appreciated.

Hit locations and cover:

If someone makes a ranged attack and misses but some of the dice rolled were only 1 less than the TN the attack counts as a "near miss" which would affect hand shakiness.

If someone scores a hit with only 1 success the hit is randomly determined to be an arm or leg. If someone is behind cover such that the arm or leg hit was actually impossible to hit the attack misses. The damage level of the weapon is reduced by 1 level.

If someone gets 2 successes the hit is to the torso or waist but not the lungs and heart. If the target was behind cover such that the torso or waist was covered up the attack misses. The damage level of the weapon is as written.

If someone gets 3 successes there's a nice center of mass hit over the heart or lungs. The damage level of the weapon is boosted by 1. If the heart and lungs are behind cover it's a hit to the cover instead.

If someone gets 4 successes or more the target was hit in the head. If the person was wearing a helmet it would be a hit to the helmet. The damage code of the weapon is boosted by 2.

If someone gets 5 successes the target is hit right between the eyes. Helmets that don't have ballistic visors (did those exist in the 80s?) don't do shit and the damage code of the weapon is boosted by 3. I suppose that if the shooter was behind the target (i.e. sniper) this puts a round right where the spine enters the skull or the spine right below the helmet line.

A character may choose to "downgrade" the hit he gets on an opponent to a hit which requires less successes. So someone with 5 successes could choose to hit as though he only had 1 success. This would eliminate the +4 TN called shot rule.


A thought on automatic fire:

For the purpose of suppression fire and other applications it would make sense to imitate Raygun and allow automatic weapons to fire at their real-world rate of fire. There are a few questions that arise:

1.) Each round that's fired should have a higher TN than the round before it since the weapon shakes a bit as you fire it. However, I think it's important that each round has a chance to hit to be more realistic. The question is if the per-round cumulative penalty should be more modest at close range (say +1 TN per round) than at longer ranges (for example +2 TN per round or +3 TN per round), since the weapon being perturbed would have a much bigger impact on where the rounds are going to hit at longer ranges.

2.) How could I model someone using a burst fire weapon such as a M16A2 for suppression fire? I couldn't just use the cyclic rate of fire since the number of rounds sprayed would also depend on how quickly the shooter can work his trigger finger. Perhaps allow 2 Burst Fire actions to merge into 1 Complex Action of Full Auto which produces 6 rounds? It seems like that might make the ROF for suppression with burst fire very very low.


Running and breath:

Perhaps if a character runs or uses the Athletics skill to perform a physical feat he gets a point on his stress meter to represent how his breathing is messed up and could affect his aim. The character then gets to roll his Athletics dice each turn to get his breathing relaxed again which would make Athletics more important. Would this work in the context of the SR system or is the SR system too...what's the word...granular?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nezumi
post Oct 18 2007, 01:32 PM
Post #21


Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet;
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,546
Joined: 24-October 03
From: DeeCee, U.S.
Member No.: 5,760



I don't know if I'd decrease Intelligence, since it requires a lot of record keeping and is open to abuse (on the one hand, you only see effects every other 'hit', but combat pool gets harder to constantly recalculate. On the flip side, low-int characters simply don't care.)

QUOTE
If someone makes a ranged attack and misses but some of the dice rolled were only 1 less than the TN the attack counts as a "near miss" which would affect hand shakiness.


This may be more work than it's worth, plus remember that I think most of us wouldn't be able to tell if a bullet zooming by is six inches away or six meters away. It's a loud bang and someone is shooting at us. I'm guessing you like LOTS of mechanics, but even so, just basing it off of how many shots aren't complete misses by some large margin (no successes over X) rather than how many are close hits, it could be a good deal quicker and more streamlined.

QUOTE

If someone scores a hit with only 1 success the hit is randomly determined to be an arm or leg.  If someone is behind cover such that the arm or leg hit was actually impossible to hit the attack misses.  The damage level of the weapon is reduced by 1 level.


Two points here.

Firstly, the TN currently already accounts for cover. If you're going to have shots that hit cover simply miss (or more realistically, have to deal with the armor value of the cover as well, since I don't think hitting a paper wall should have much impact), you can't include that modifier in the TN, or at least only count it as soft cover.

Secondly, rather than all these special rules for increasing or decreasing damage by levels, why not have attackers stage levels up every SINGLE success (and reduce all damage codes by 1), while defenders still stage for every TWO successes. Simpler to remember and more streamlined.

I like that you manage to drop the broken called shot rules. On the other hand, there's a disparity in regards to motivation. If I'm aiming for the guy between the eyes, don't quite make that, I shouldn't be able to say "I hit him in the hand instead". If I'm firing and trying to hit off the antenna but don't quite cut it, I shouldn't be able to suddenly say I'm aiming for the tires.

Also keep in mind, if you're going to do this, you're going to need to rewrite armor rules from scratch.

QUOTE
1.)  Each round that's fired should have a higher TN than the round before it since the weapon shakes a bit as you fire it.  However, I think it's important that each round has a chance to hit to be more realistic.  The question is if the per-round cumulative penalty should be more modest at close range (say +1 TN per round) than at longer ranges (for example +2 TN per round or +3 TN per round), since the weapon being perturbed would have a much bigger impact on where the rounds are going to hit at longer ranges.


The problem here is under current SR recoil rules, you're still going to find right around fire 10 the TNs go out the window anyways, so there's an effective cap on ROF anyway. On the flip side, if you decrease recoil, machine guns basically guarantee the guy dies, no question. The best suggestion I've seen is autofire doesn't increase damage, but adds dice. You balance the number of dice and recoil penalties to allow for a reasonable ROF, still only 1 roll, but it basically accounts for the fact that extra dice increases your chance of hitting with multiple bullets without penalizing the first bullet too much. Since more dice increases how much you're likely to stage damage up, it increases damage indirectly.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wounded Ronin
post Oct 18 2007, 10:30 PM
Post #22


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,640
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383



QUOTE (nezumi)
I don't know if I'd decrease Intelligence, since it requires a lot of record keeping and is open to abuse (on the one hand, you only see effects every other 'hit', but combat pool gets harder to constantly recalculate. On the flip side, low-int characters simply don't care.)

QUOTE
If someone makes a ranged attack and misses but some of the dice rolled were only 1 less than the TN the attack counts as a "near miss" which would affect hand shakiness.


This may be more work than it's worth, plus remember that I think most of us wouldn't be able to tell if a bullet zooming by is six inches away or six meters away. It's a loud bang and someone is shooting at us. I'm guessing you like LOTS of mechanics, but even so, just basing it off of how many shots aren't complete misses by some large margin (no successes over X) rather than how many are close hits, it could be a good deal quicker and more streamlined.

QUOTE

If someone scores a hit with only 1 success the hit is randomly determined to be an arm or leg.  If someone is behind cover such that the arm or leg hit was actually impossible to hit the attack misses.  The damage level of the weapon is reduced by 1 level.


Two points here.

Firstly, the TN currently already accounts for cover. If you're going to have shots that hit cover simply miss (or more realistically, have to deal with the armor value of the cover as well, since I don't think hitting a paper wall should have much impact), you can't include that modifier in the TN, or at least only count it as soft cover.

Secondly, rather than all these special rules for increasing or decreasing damage by levels, why not have attackers stage levels up every SINGLE success (and reduce all damage codes by 1), while defenders still stage for every TWO successes. Simpler to remember and more streamlined.

I like that you manage to drop the broken called shot rules. On the other hand, there's a disparity in regards to motivation. If I'm aiming for the guy between the eyes, don't quite make that, I shouldn't be able to say "I hit him in the hand instead". If I'm firing and trying to hit off the antenna but don't quite cut it, I shouldn't be able to suddenly say I'm aiming for the tires.

Also keep in mind, if you're going to do this, you're going to need to rewrite armor rules from scratch.

QUOTE
1.)  Each round that's fired should have a higher TN than the round before it since the weapon shakes a bit as you fire it.  However, I think it's important that each round has a chance to hit to be more realistic.  The question is if the per-round cumulative penalty should be more modest at close range (say +1 TN per round) than at longer ranges (for example +2 TN per round or +3 TN per round), since the weapon being perturbed would have a much bigger impact on where the rounds are going to hit at longer ranges.


The problem here is under current SR recoil rules, you're still going to find right around fire 10 the TNs go out the window anyways, so there's an effective cap on ROF anyway. On the flip side, if you decrease recoil, machine guns basically guarantee the guy dies, no question. The best suggestion I've seen is autofire doesn't increase damage, but adds dice. You balance the number of dice and recoil penalties to allow for a reasonable ROF, still only 1 roll, but it basically accounts for the fact that extra dice increases your chance of hitting with multiple bullets without penalizing the first bullet too much. Since more dice increases how much you're likely to stage damage up, it increases damage indirectly.

Hmm, very good suggestions.

1.) Instead of INT being reduced perhaps the rule should be that if you have any level of stress you must make a perception test to notice new things entering the firefight, such as more combatants. Thus people with low INT can become tunnel visioned.

2.) Instead of calculating actual "near misses", any time someone is fired upon and the attacker's TN was less than, say, 10, the target may gain stress, perhaps influenced by how many rounds have passed by so that machine guns are better at suppressing than semi automatic pistols. The TN threshold is so that you don't make a snap shot at someone with your pistol who is a mile away and all of a sudden his hands are shaking.

3.) I guess I forgot to clarify with my above system that TN penalties for cover would be eliminated in favor of more successes being required to hit. Rather than hitting cover necessarily being a miss I'd treat the round as if it were trying to fire through the cover in question. Also, I'd consider 5 successes not to necessarily be a "called shot" to the eyes, but rather a slightly more abstract ability to go and make a called shot to the eyes or any "lesser" target. That's just to clarify my original brainstorming intent.

One thought on simplifying to the point of scaling up by 1 succes at a time...while that would be simpler, I guess it boils down to whether it would be better to keep things simple and abstract or if the tactical/gameplay experience would be greatly enhanced by having hit locations and armor coverage locations.

4.) Interesting about autofire adding more dice. That would be a very elegant way to handle things. However, that would also clash with the called-shot-less hit locations idea, since spraying 30 rounds at someone isn't necessarily going to mean that you hit him once in the eyes so much as you're probably actually going to hit him several times in the torso and limbs. I guess it all goes back to the decision of whether the more abstract system is better for tactical and challenging gameplay or if hit locations and cover being more explicitly spelled out with the rules would make more a more interesting game.


Finally, is there any website that has got an online calculator for D6 and TN probabilities? If I could play around with some numbers and see % chances of a success I feel like I could start to nail down some "ideal" or "realistic" TNs for people of various skill levels.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Oct 18 2007, 11:03 PM
Post #23


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,006
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



There's one out there that does decent spreads, but I don't have the link—search for "Shadowrun probability calculator" or something. I'm working on one that's good for in-depth comparisons of various TNs, thresholds, and die quantities, but I apparently forgot basic combinatorics when I wrote it and just haven't had the time to figure out where I went wrong.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wounded Ronin
post Oct 19 2007, 01:35 AM
Post #24


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 6,640
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383



OK, I found it.

http://www.pvv.ntnu.no/~bcd/SR/dicerollcalc.html

It seems like if we're rolling 6 dice (let's say the NYPD cop has Pistols 3 and adds his 3 combat pool since he's totally focused on trying to shoot the perp) the TN we need in order to make the hit probability ~10% is 15.

Of course, according to the SR3 rules a TN of 15 would be something bordering on the impossible. It would seem that if I wanted to simulate reality a little better with the combat rules, though, that things would have to work out with TNs at close range coming to around TN 15 after visibility mods, stress, and those factors.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Link
post Oct 19 2007, 03:34 AM
Post #25


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 519
Joined: 27-August 02
From: Queensland
Member No.: 3,180



QUOTE (Wounded Ronin)
It seems like if we're rolling 6 dice (let's say the NYPD cop has Pistols 3 and adds his 3 combat pool since he's totally focused on trying to shoot the perp) the TN we need in order to make the hit probability ~10% is 15.

Of course, according to the SR3 rules a TN of 15 would be something bordering on the impossible. It would seem that if I wanted to simulate reality a little better with the combat rules, though, that things would have to work out with TNs at close range coming to around TN 15 after visibility mods, stress, and those factors.

Assume the perp is as desperate as the cop and puts their whole combat pool (5 dice) into dodging. This means the cop will need 2 successes to avoid a clean miss; a TN of 9 will result in about a 13% chance of a hit using the calculator.
Also, the range of light pistols is limited, so medium or long range is not an unreasonable assumption. This would mean only 3 or 4 points worth of TN mods need apply; +2 for target running comes to mind ;)

As for rules for adrenaline, nerves & psychology etc. combat and karma pool might account for this. Weapon skill too may include more than basic marksmanship, perhaps like IPSC type training.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th April 2024 - 02:17 PM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.