Dual Weapon's and Smartgun Links Options

[Yerameyahu]

*sigh* What way are you now talking about? It's hard to tell because all you ever say is 'you're wrong about how human vision works'. I don't think I ever took a position on human vision at all.

[JonathanC]

*sigh* What way are you now talking about? It's hard to tell because all you ever say is 'you're wrong about how human vision works'. I don't think I ever took a position on human vision at all.

Your argument makes no sense, given the way that human vision works. As I've repeated over and over again, you cannot apply the necessary level of focus for aiming a goddamn firearm to two separate points in your field of vision at the same time.

[Yerameyahu]

And I'm not asking anyone to do so. More precisely, *I'm* not asking them. They're already doing it of their own free will, because they're the ones who want to use the Multiple Target option in the RAW. This happens with or without lasers/smartlinks. I'm not the one who put that rule in the game; if you wanna say that it's impossible, that's a fine house rule. I'm only saying that, given they're already doing this, I don't expect the smartlink to have no effect (the RAW). At minimum, I'd expect it to help on one target (as Medicineman sorta suggested, and I mentioned earlier). (For completeness, I am of course fine with the RAW from a balance POV in this case; I'd also prefer the Multi-Target penalty be *worse*.)

In the case of *single* target, there are not two separate points. There's one point. At no time did I suggest that your eyes are following the little dots as they swing up from the left and right, but *when* they get into your focus, why wouldn't they help? When someone uses 1 gun with a laser sight, they do not follow the dot with their gaze for the entire trip from their feet to the target. They swing the 'goddamn firearm' up into the ballpark, and then correct (as always, apologies for slangy terminology, gun guys!).

[Saint Hallow]

I still like the idea of a houseruled super-expensive Deltaware smartlink that allows for the use of 2 smartlinks for dual wielding pistols. Or at least, takes away the penalty for dual wielding.

[KarmaInferno]

Eh. I happen to agree with Yerameyahu about smartlink and two-guns-on-one-target.

He is NOT saying the full Smartlink bonus should apply, nor is he saying your ability to aim would be just as good. In both cases there should be some negative effect.

But aiming two-guns-on-one-target WITH smartlink should be somewhat easier than aiming two-guns-on-one-target WITHOUT Smartlink. That was his point.

I find that opinion perfectly reasonable. It is NOT silly to suggest that 'something' might be better than 'nothing'.

Hm. Maybe add the ability to use the Smartlink in dual-wielding to the Mark 74 Smartlink from WAR. At least then it'd actually have some purpose, instead of supposedly being 'special' since it can do friend-or-foe identification that normal smartlinks can't... oh wait, yes they can.

The bit about "it's not dots it's crosshairs" made me laugh, though. Mostly because I can't see why that distinction matters. Even today you can have as your sighting reticule dots, crosshairs, circles, hell, even smiley faces. I'm sure by 2070 they might have a few other options. None of which really matter to the discussion at hand. Two aim points are two aim points, regardless of their form.



-k

[Yerameyahu]

That's always cool, Saint Hallow. If I may, though: the grade typically doesn't affect the effect. A Deltaware Synaptic Booster is the same as a Basic one. I'm assuming that you just mean that it's a pre-market prototype kind of thing, though? Honestly, I'd consider this tame enough to be a moderately-priced 'normal' item, myself. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Niche market.

[crash2029]

@Yerameyahu-
Thanks for answering my question.

[Mäx]

another good experiment to try is to goto a video arcade (if they still exist in your local area). Find an FPS shooter game for multiple players. House of the Dead, GunBlade, etc... try to play as both characters and use a gun in each hand. See how shooting at separate targets or the same target is when you have 2 target cross hairs on your screen.

I have actually done that a couple of times, the result weren't that good, but i'm one hundred percent sure that they would have been even worse if the game didn't have those reticules on the screen.
Witch ofcource has always been the point of my comment, along with correcting Jonathan C:s misconception about smartguns being fired thought the gun cam as SOP.

[JonathanC]

I have actually done that a couple of times, the result weren't that good, but i'm one hundred percent sure that they would have been even worse if the game didn't have those reticules on the screen.
Witch ofcource has always been the point of my comment, along with correcting Jonathan C:s misconception about smartguns being fired thought the gun cam as SOP.

Not all of those games have reticles on screen; you can still adjust your aim based on where the bullet impacts are. Seeing as you aren't taking the time to properly aim either way when you're double-gunning, the reticle would have been irrelevant.

[Miri]

For all of you arguing that the human mind and body is not capable of following the two separate (or apparently single target with both guns trained on it) targets. The Adept in question was Ambidextrous and had Multi-tasking. So yes, this particular character was in fact able to follow two different targets that were in line of sight without any issue and when his brain told his left arm to do something there was no chance of crossed wires and his right arm starting then stopping and the left arm doing as it was told. Also note, this is an AWAKENED character and a highly skilled (had rank 5 Pistols, specialization and two ranks of Adept power Improved Ability Pistols) one at that in his chosen weapon, he was not a mundane normal unaugmented character.

[Yerameyahu]

Um, JonathanC, doesn't that mean that the impacts you're using are just cruddy reticules? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) And having to miss several times seems like the definition of "i'm one hundred percent sure that they would have been even worse if the game didn't have those reticules on the screen."

While that's not at all what that power is for, Miri, yes, being magic-awesome clearly is different. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Still, this issue applies to everyone. It might be a good idea to add a house rule edit for that power though: "Unlike mere mortals, adepts with this power *can* do X." (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[JonathanC]

For all of you arguing that the human mind and body is not capable of following the two separate (or apparently single target with both guns trained on it) targets. The Adept in question was Ambidextrous and had Multi-tasking. So yes, this particular character was in fact able to follow two different targets that were in line of sight without any issue and when his brain told his left arm to do something there was no chance of crossed wires and his right arm starting then stopping and the left arm doing as it was told. Also note, this is an AWAKENED character and a highly skilled (had rank 5 Pistols, specialization and two ranks of Adept power Improved Ability Pistols) one at that in his chosen weapon, he was not a mundane normal unaugmented character.

Two things:

1. Even on a single target, you'd still be visually aiming two separate points.
2. Multi-tasking allows your mind to do two things at once, yes. That solves half of the problem. The other half of the problem relates to (god I'm tired of repeating this) the nature of human eyesight. Within your entire field of vision, there is only a tiny part of it that you have full visual acuity in. It's called the Foveal. That's why everyone who has tried to dual-wield in a light gun game had such bad luck; you weren't actually aiming two guns at once; you were switching between the two, making minor adjustments. And your limited success was due more to the fact that enemies in light gun games are designed to be shot, rather than the existence of a reticle.

[JonathanC]

Um, JonathanC, doesn't that mean that the impacts you're using are just cruddy reticules? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Just when I thought you couldn't possibly say anything dumber, you prove me wrong. If bullet impacts count as reticles, then you should always be getting smartgun bonuses, whether you have a smartgun or not.

And having to miss several times seems like the definition of "i'm one hundred percent sure that they would have been even worse if the game didn't have those reticules on the screen."

How exactly does failing in the same way that you would without reticles prove that the reticles provide a significant bonus?

[Miri]

Two things:

1. Even on a single target, you'd still be visually aiming two separate points.
2. Multi-tasking allows your mind to do two things at once, yes. That solves half of the problem. The other half of the problem relates to (god I'm tired of repeating this) the nature of human eyesight. Within your entire field of vision, there is only a tiny part of it that you have full visual acuity in. It's called the Foveal. That's why everyone who has tried to dual-wield in a light gun game had such bad luck; you weren't actually aiming two guns at once; you were switching between the two, making minor adjustments. And your limited success was due more to the fact that enemies in light gun games are designed to be shot, rather than the existence of a reticle.

When was the last time you looked at an eye chart from the medical diagnosis distance? When you read line 1 does line 2 and below suddenly disappear? I would wager it does not, and I would wager that unless your target is less then point blank range (one to two arms length) that the focal point of your Foveal will in fact encompass both smartgun dots. With enough physical training and muscle memory you can train yourself to point both guns at one point.

[Yerameyahu]

Always so insulting. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I thought it was obvious, but I was talking (as were you) about bullet impacts *on screen in the arcade game*. If you're judging your aim by the colorful 'splash' images on the screen, that's like a cruddy version of the colorful 'reticule' images on the screen. (I thought it went without saying, but reality offers no such 'impact' cues, though you can use tracers with automatics… shockingly, they provide a similar bonus.)

Mäx's statement is that it would be worse, which is the opposite of "failing in the same way". Maybe he's wrong, but that's what he said.

1. Even on a single target, you'd still be visually aiming two separate points.

Nope.
Also, I'm curious about the difference in focus between an arcade game (flat screen, a few feet away) and the reality (3D world, at least yards away). (Exactly, Miri.)

[JonathanC]

When was the last time you looked at an eye chart from the medical diagnosis distance? When you read line 1 does line 2 and below suddenly disappear? I would wager it does not, and I would wager that unless your target is less then point blank range (one to two arms length) that the focal point of your Foveal will in fact encompass both smartgun dots. With enough physical training and muscle memory you can train yourself to point both guns at one point.

When was the last time you tried to read both lines on the eye chart at the same time?

[Miri]

When was the last time you tried to read both lines on the eye chart at the same time?

I don't need to. I just have to have the (single) target in view and both smartgun dots in a hand sized grouping on the targets chest. Fine focus is not needed for this, just enough information for the brain to know where the target is and where both dots are, if they are next to each other and center of mass then excellent. Pull the triggers.

[JonathanC]

Nope.

Nope what? What is this nope based on? What is your argument for nope? I'm willing to let this go and just write you off, since you haven't bothered to make any kind of logical point in 4 pages.

[Yerameyahu]

I've addressed that exact point 3 times. You are not being asked to focus on two separate points at once (in the single-target scenario); you are focusing on one target the whole time. (Exactly *again*, Miri. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) )

And in the multi-target scenario, you were *already* trying to do so with or without the smartlinks/lasers, so it's hardly their fault. They can't hurt you.

[JonathanC]

I've addressed that exact point 3 times. You are not being asked to focus on two separate points at once (in the single-target scenario); you are focusing on one target the whole time. (Exactly *again*, Miri. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) )

And in the multi-target scenario, you were *already* trying to do so with or without the smartlinks/lasers, so it's hardly their fault. They can't hurt you.

The "two points" in question aren't the targets, they're the "points" that you are aiming at. Your eyes will naturally swap from one point to the other while you're aiming. This is distracting enough to make playing a light gun game (in which the targets are barely shooting at you and are standing there waiting to be shot) extremely difficult; in an actual combat situation you'd be killed trying this idiocy.

[Miri]

Okay, so you're an idiot. Thanks for clarifying.


The "two points" in question aren't the targets, they're the "points" that you are aiming at. Your eyes will naturally swap from one point to the other while you're aiming. This is distracting enough to make playing a light gun game (in which the targets are barely shooting at you and are standing there waiting to be shot) extremely difficult; in an actual combat situation you'd be killed trying this idiocy.

Well two things. It is a good thing I am not in fact doing this in real life or a combat situation and this is in fact also a game.

I would also appreciate it if you would lay off the 'idiots' and 'are you stupids'. It makes your tone of voice and posts feel very combative.

[KarmaInferno]

The other half of the problem relates to (god I'm tired of repeating this) the nature of human eyesight. Within your entire field of vision, there is only a tiny part of it that you have full visual acuity in. It's called the Foveal.

Your area of acute vision is indeed limited to a "tiny part" of about 15 degrees.

Funny thing. When you're aiming two Smartguns at the same target, the targeting dots are BOTH GOING TO BE IN THAT TINY PART.

And it is in fact possible to hold a discussion without resorting to insults and personal attacks. As a point, they usually WEAKEN your argument, not make it stronger, because now instead of focusing on the subject people start focusing on the insults. If nothing else, many folks are likely to start wondering if the insulting party is perhaps a juvenile, and thus assign less importance to what they say as a result. No, it's not a rational reaction, but it is an inevitable one.



-k

[Yerameyahu]

We're tired of you repeating it, too. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) You're not looking at (focusing on) the dots. You're looking at the target. Dots are bright, salient, and crucially don't need to be focused on.

Actually, the funny thing is that not even Multiple Targets requires dual *simultaneous* focus; there's no facing in SR, and no requirement that the two targets not be, say, directly to your right and left. Very John Woo, which is presumably where the penalty comes from (though, again, I'd kinda like it bigger). Anyway, the argument is the same: if you're firing two guns straight left and straight right, I bet smartlink/laser dots help.

[JonathanC]

We're tired of you repeating it, too. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) You're not looking at (focusing on) the dots. You're looking at the target. Dots are bright, salient, and crucially don't need to be focused on.

I want you to try something. Go hunting, and just stare at some deer. Don't bother paying attention to where you want to shoot them, just stare at the deer, pull the trigger, and hope for the best. Let me know how that works out for you.

[Miri]

I want you to try something. Go hunting, and just stare at some deer. Don't bother paying attention to where you want to shoot them, just stare at the deer, pull the trigger, and hope for the best. Let me know how that works out for you.

Does my gun have a laser pointer since we don't have the tech for smartgun links? Cause I can assure you, if I am staring at that deer then I can also see the laser point skittering all around on its body and so I have a pretty good idea of where the round is going to land.