Last I heard, hit rate was more in the single-digit percents. Does someone have a study to link to?

~J

You bring up good points about the lighting, but cover is a whole other beast. Yeah, it get's reduced with a smartlink, but it's still a +2 or +6 for "blind fire" aka full cover. Then you have the target running mod. where if the target is running at the time of the attack or during their previous action there is a +2 to hit them. Plus whatever manuevering the shooter is doing adds to the tn.

EDIT- 5% in combat sitituations is what is in my booklet they gave me in BCT.

Blind fire is a +8, not a +6. Baddies also don't get cover if the PCs are going first (and they haven't moved behind cover yet), ditto running, etc. There are also plenty of times cover isn't available. There are also plenty of times, again, where all these modifiers are just rendered moot by smart Centering and the wise application of an Aim Action and some Combat Pool.

Most of this conversation is besides the point, though, as it was brought up concerning extremely long range shots (for Shadowrunners) and additional modifiers to be applied specifically to them -- if you're sniping at someone 200 (or more) meters out, in Shadowrun, are they really expecting it? Running around, ducking and bobbing and weaving, while taking full cover behind a dumpster or something...against someone they can't see, a couple football fields away?

And, in fact, for follow-up shots after that first horrible aimed headshot, if the rest of the targets in this hypothetical sniping scenario are all tossing smoke grenades, running around, ducking and diving behind cover (just like people do IRL) -- shouldn't the guy trying to shoot them through the limited field of vision imposed on him by his scope have a hard time hitting? Or are you okay with them just snapping off shots as quickly as a guy blasting away with a semi-auto pistol, with all the accuracy and power of a sniping platform?

As a clarification I took the -2 for the smartlink out as I was using it earlier in the sentence.

Adding an extra +1 TN on all shots of "100m or 200m or something" is hardly "all shots with all weapons."

I was thinking police actions.

~J

The problem with the rules for suppressive fire, as written, is that it really isn't very scary. Nevermind just the way it clashes so much with the rest of how combat is supposed to work (with the huge stack of modifiers it completely ignores, both positive and negative), most serious combat guys can shrug off an 8M (rolled at TN 6) without much trouble.

If you had three or four people all suppressing the same area (and with a decent enough combat skill to score at least one token success on the would-be attack rolls, which requires a 6 minimum), it could whittle someone down okay... but, really, it's a little silly how weak it is (particularly with the "super velocity" guns that they claim would be custom built for this sort of work, but which all have their damage code neutered as a result of their improved rate of fire).

There are only two times I've seen it really be worth much. The first was when we had a pair of heavy-firepower Adepts (made for a custom bug-hunting game) both use it at the same time. The two of us suppressed the line of oncoming bugs, one with an HMG and one with an Assault Rifle, and we were each rolling 13 dice per attack. We also did so as the way to open the fight, during an ambush round, so none of the bad guys could spend Combat Pool to even try to dodge -- the end result was each of us (absurdly) hosing down every living thing in a five meter spread.

The other was when the GM ruled my Centering vs. Penalties would offset the +2 TN for each attack roll, not just for one of them. And that time we ended up with a great horrid bloody pile of corpses, all stacked very neatly outside a the doorway they were rushing at us through, and an empty magazine in an AK 97. Which was pretty neat because it's how assault rifles should to work, but at the same time felt kind of broken because Centering is the only thing that can lower that TN (which makes Suppression into something for gun Adepts, and no one else, to ever bother using).

Suppressive Fire works pretty decently with MMGs and heavier, but it isn't something I'd want to try with an SMG or most ARs in Shadowrun. It probably should get reworked. Though now and then people can do impressive things with it...

~J

there's one other instance where suppressive fire is a good option (or rather, it's the least-bad option available): when you've got a lot of ammo and no skill. one of my characters made great use of his 6 Str using an MMG to hose down wave after wave of low- to mid-force shedim.

I think I must have been using the rules wrong. You're not going to kill anyone with that method, but has been plenty effective at applying fresh perforations to incoming troops.

well, i had plenty of time to light them up. i could spend a full round (3 passes, with his init) suppressing a small group, inflicting a few Ms and an S on each of them.

EX-EX actually makes it decently viable, even for an assault rifle. 10M is a fair bit nastier than 8M, and 11/12S than 9/10S. You won't put down many Trolls, but other than that...

~J

Sorry for jumping back in on this post a little late but my home PC is busted right so I'm writing this from work so please forgive me if I'm going back to some old posts.

Cybereyes, Smartlinks, & Imaginers: To me it doesn't make any sense that you can't use these systems in conjunction with one another. It seems that the "balance" fairy has popped in and done her trick. To me if you have smartlink, with cybereye vision mags and a rangefinder they should work together since a smartlink is just going off where the muzzle of the gun is pointing. Now you could argue that with the vision mags the distance is different than normal vision so the computer couldn't adjust. Bulldrek. You would think the eggheads would have fixed that if that were the case. Why would you have two systems that you can't use together? To me I've always played that they work together even with a digital scope on a smartlink rifle. The tech just links up together.

Target hits: The difference between a well-aimed snipe and a pistol shot is that 9 times out of 10 the sniper has time to aim and the person with the pistol is reacting. Basically the reason you have a lot of missing in real-life police situations is because police officers aren't trained like Delta Force. In the snipe situation your adrenaline may be pumping but you have time, hopefully, to calm down and adjust. If you're in an ambush then you're reacting and you're adrenaline is kicking in and that is what most likely makes your shots go wild. In a panic situation you'll fallback to your highest level of training. You don't have time to think and adjust you're just reacting.

To me if you wanted to make it more realistic you would just get rid of combat pool. You'd have a lot of more misses.

I do really think we need a kickass suppressive fire rule, but I feel that to model that realistically you'd need realistic high rates of fire for automatic weapons. 10 rounds sputtering out over the course of 3 seconds isn't very suppressive compared to a real life FN Minimi going at 1000 rounds per minute.

On the other hand, suppressive fire rules need to apply to truly low RoF firearms like standard handguns. It's not much use saying to your partner 'cover me, I'm going in!' when all that means is he'll be rolling two shots against a TN of 12+.

A fix for that (the low RoF of handguns) was once attempted by me, but that particular game fizzled and the house rule never really came into play. Basically the maximum rate of fire for a semi-auto was your Quickness score, or Pistols (applicable specialization), if you were just out to empty that mofo in someone's general direction -- and it turned into burst fire or full auto (depending on the number of shots fired), and followed all the normal rules, with doubled uncompensated recoil (like shotguns) to reflect the less-than-stable firing platform compared to a full sized weapon.

The lack of recoil compensation on most handguns anyways (compared to ARs and machineguns, at least) meant it wouldn't be horrifically effective (game breaking, at least), but it still gave you the option, at least.

As is, a maximum rate of fire of two shots per three seconds for anyone lacking magic or cyberware is just...obscene.

One time I remember suggesting a rule similar to the split spellcasting.

As a simple action, you can fire up to as many shots from a gun as you have dice in the appropriate skill. Split the skill between shots, and add combat pool up to the number of skill dice used.

So, with a skill of 6 and a SA pistol, you can shoot one bullet with a good chance of hitting as a simple action, 6 bullets with little chance of doing anything, or a few with a moderate chance.

I have not tested this, so I don't know if the increasing recoil penalties balance it against wearing down the target's dodge ability.

Didn't Raygun cover ROF on his website? I seem to remember he had a lot of cool rules on there for combat.

I guess I just feel we need a stray bullet mechanic (still). I mean seriously, if I were running down a hallway towards someone, and the guy ducked into a doorway, stuck his arm out and aimed his gun in my general direction and started shooting, I would take evasive action. In SR, you just figure the guy is against a TN of 12+ and so is just wasting bullets.

Perhaps the solution is to require you allocate dodge test BEFORE the attacker rolls his attack roll.

sticking your gun around the corner and firing blindly, i would call suppressive fire.

Right, but you can only call it suppressive fire if they happen to be doing it with a full auto weapon.

One of the problems that games frequently run into is they do not model the physiological and psychological effects of combat at all, or if they do, they to a horrible job of it. So that fact that the adrenalin, increased heart and breathing rate, the sensory exclusion, etc are all kicking in combat situations greatly degrade hit rates.

For SR3, you could try modeling combat stress by adding something like (5- professional rating) to all ranged combat TNS (and maybe half that or less to melee combat). So the stone cold killers at professional rating 5 use the rules as written and can practically headshot someone every time, while the untrained civilians have trouble getting the gun pointed in the right direction.

This will lead to some interesting bits of rules fallout, for example drone will become much more relatively deadly as they don’t have the typical TN modifiers.

interesting, but hard to apply to PCs. you'd have to figure out how professional the PCs are, how much it costs to raise your professionalism level, how your level affects other stuff, and so on.

Just start all PCs at professional level 5 and let them sell down if they want to. As for cost, I dunno I guess that the cost of combat paralysis/2 per level? (don't have the books handy to check). The hard part would be figuring out the rules fallout.

Having them start at max and sell down is, unless you do the selling via Flaws, identical to starting them at zero and giving them x+n build points, where x is how many you were giving them before and n is the value of selling from 5 down to 0. It isn't much of a solution.

~J

Err.. It seems like a fully functional solution, you've simply pointed out that there are two different ways of doing it.

So we can let PCs 'buy' their professional rating up to 5 (or whatever) at say 2 points a pop, and add 10 points to your build. Assumedly, all PCs will buy this up to 5 unless they have an awfully interesting reason why they want to suck at combat. Meanwhile, NPCs only have it based on what we feel is appropriate. On top of the standard modifiers, rent-a-cops have an additional +3 modifier on all combat actions (ouch), the Professor has +5 (double ouch), Lone Star has +2, excepting the real shock troops, and only the real violent sociopaths (legally or otherwise) play combat as written.

Ultimately, I've seen at least four different attempts to force 'combat realism' on PCs and NPCs alike (creepwoodrun being one of the best examples), and I for one feel all of them have come off as heavy-handed and too predictable. If only there were a way to get people to PRETEND their characters are frightened, confused and adrenaline-charged, even when the player isn't. Some way that we can sort of 'act out the part' during the game. Hmm...

Or you could just not worry about it because no one wants to be the schmuck who gets gut-shot and then spends the rest of the fight only at Moderate damage (but still in shock and unable to do anything), or the guy who flubs the roll when the lead starts flying and spends the duration curled up in a ball, crying.

We make fun of Creepwoodrun for a reason, gang.

I find a decent number of people want to be that schmuck. They're the melee guys who don't take Pain Resistance or carry big reach weapons.

(Not a slam on people who play that, my point is that a non-rare type of character will indeed have to bow out of most fights when they hit +2 from wound mods)

~J

If you're a good melee guy, you don't need Pain Resistance 'cause you won't get hit (in a melee, at any rate) in the first place.

*hides his rocker character with Unarmed 4, pistols 4 and no other appreciable combat skill*

Rockers need Clubs or Polearms.

~J

And leather pants.

I went skin tight leopard print. The jacket is leather, and I didn't want to go full body leather.

If the Village People can do it, you can too.

~J

something like -1 TN on firearms test, and -2 CP.

Speaking from my shooting experience, my biggest problem was often holding the gun upright over prolonged periods, followed by compensating for breathing. Both of these would be trivialized, I believe, if I had cyberlimbs and a cyber torso. I've never shot under anything close to combat conditions, but I rather imagine those problems would be exacerbated, and that isn't simply a problem of the brain going crazy.

I suppose that if we wanted to be very sensitive and detailed, we might exress these thoughts with the following hypothetical rule revision:

A Smartlink being used by somebody who doesn't have cyberlimbs to operate his gun with gets the -1 TN bonus when shooting since seeing little crosshairs in your vision is essentially like a longer-range version of a laser sight. However, if the shooter has a cyberlimb AND a smartlink then the smartlink software uses the cyberlimb to deliver mechanically precise and stable aimed shots at targets in the HUD, and so the -2 TN bonus is delivered, which is quite significant.

the best way to represent that would be to include the concept of fatigue--taking small amounts of stun damage just for being in a fight for an extended period of time. cyberlimbs, and especially a cybertorso, would increase resistance to fatigue.

Every time a rule like the last two are created, it produces an eventual state of confined protocol and expectation.

There would eventually be Sam's everywhere with cyber-arms for no other reason than these rules.

As it is, it's poor enough that Smartlinks are like having an arsehole.

This is a bad result.

I think he's saying we all need smartlinks. Hopefully SL2s with rangefinders

Right. His point is that a Smartlink is not merely recommended but practically obligatory—the intersection between the set of characters who will use a gun with any frequency whatever and the set of characters who would be silly to not buy a Smartlink is almost the set of all characters who will use a gun with any frequency.

~J