I was skimming through my Arsenal, amusing myself while feeding my daughter her bottle, and I noticed something that popped out at me.

I'm sure folks here have noticed that the Segway and the humanoid (cyborg) drones shuffle along at roughly the speed of a crippled dwarf:

Human: 10/25
Dwarf: 8/20
Drones: 5/15

Was this ever corrected, or was there some reason that a cyborg with 4 init passes should be outrun by an old lady with a walker?
The Otomo in particular was supposed to be mimic-option capable, so shouldn't it move at roughly the speed of a human?

And I thought Segways were supposed to move slightly _faster_ than a person walks?

Was there an eratta on this that I missed?

You're comparing 2 totally different thinks here.
5/15 is Otomos acceleration stat, it's speed is 30 and the segway has a speed of 40.

The basic error is that walker mode halves all of the the original, wheeled movement speeds. It should double tactical movement aka "Acceleration", while still halving the original, wheeled top speed.

True - But all drones and vehicles use their acceleration for their run/walk speed in combat turns if I am not mistaken.

Hence the worries about cyborgs and those insane hackers who ride around on segways in full VR.

Checking...
OK...

Vehicle Combat SR4A p 167 : Acceleration is used for walk/run in combat

Interestingly enough, in Augmentation, p 159, there's an inconsistancy. Cyborgs don't have a run/Walk but use Speed for their movement rate.

Hmm.

The cyborg rules in general are pretty inconsistent with the rest.

I think you're misreading it. You still use their real Speed in combat. They simply have a walk Accel and a run Accel, and you can boost it significantly with a Vehicle Test. Obviously, a car (or, jesus, an airplane) doesn't slow to its Accel just because 'combat starts'.

Robert, why would a walker double acceleration? Wheeled vehicles can accelerate pretty well. So can 'legged' creatures, but twice as much?

Unfortunately, no.

In tactical combat, as opposed to chase combat, it is limited to those speeds, needing to constantly slow down and accelerate to maneuver.

That's why walkers are more efficient at this type of movement, instead of less.

I agree that a vehicle will likely *need* to go slowly if it wants to stay in the combat area, but it doesn't magically lose speed simply because it's in combat in the first place. If you're changing directions significantly, obviously you're not going full speed. That's hardly the same as 'your car can only go 30 in combat'.

I agree that walker is good at this (mostly because it's going so slowly to begin with, though), but that's an argument that it shouldn't be *halved*, not that it should be *doubled*.

Remember that the Walker mode is a refit of a existing vehicle, not a ground up design. As such it needs to change a drive train built for torque into something that can drive multiple small engines or pistons.

Also, one is comparing sprint to marathon. While the otomo may not win the sprint, it can keep on running until the opponent is exhausted.

There is no exception for variants, though.

It is better at this than a wheeled vehicle, which should be reflected in the stats.

Walkers would arguably be better at tight quarters manuevering (meaning they don't suffer handling penalties indoors and so on) but they don't inately have a better ground-friction to mass ratio, which is what ultimately determines how fast you can accelerate. Try to accelerate to fast, and either your foot slips or the wheel spins- and the limit of force is the same either way.

The reason most folks would tend to expect walkers to accelerate faster is because muscles have excellent "low rpm torque", and gas engines have lousy low rpm torque. Most walkers you've seen are muscle powered (AKA animals), and most wheeled vehicles you've seen are gas powered (AKA cars). With electric robots, there's really little to no difference, excepting walker systems are invariably heavier than wheels (and hence slower). An electrical omnidirectional wheel system can be scary fast an manueverable... but is bad on uneven ground.

Which is what "Acceleration" in SR4 is all about – tactical movement.

It has nothing to do with actually accelerating.

Only because you say so. Walkers *do* get a handling bonus, and rough terrain bonus. I think that's plenty.

No, because RAW says so: See Acceleration on p. 167 – and don't miss the part on the following page that sets a fixed increase for each hit on the "running" test, no matter if you pilot a truck or a jet.

Yes, that part is very silly.

It amazes me that I am still amazed by the mess the vehicle rules are. The "Acceleration" value is actually the "movement" value, and has nothing to do with acceleration. The "Speed" value is the "top speed" of the vehicle. And except for the "Handling" value, which can modify a Vehicle Test roll, nothing makes any difference to how fast any vehicle can accelerate.... Indy500 sports car or GazWilly Nomad.

Speed is the maximum safe speed of a vehicle. Drivers may accelerate beyond this, but may encounter difficulties in doing so (like control, making your engine explode from an extended red-line performance, etc.). Even on the acceleration values, a driver can make a vehicle test to add 5m to the movement rate per hit (SR4a, pages 167-168). Beyond that, yeah, the speed rules are chunky.

Of course, flesh and blood characters can push beyond their Walk/Run rates as well with a Simple Action for a Strength + Running test that adds 2m to movement per hit for that Combat Turn (SR4a, pages 136 & 148).

I can't believe I've never noticed the accelleration and speed rules being this retarded in 4th edition, though now that I think about it, relative speeds haven't ever been an issue with drones except in chase combat...

I forsee a future in which I houserule this into being "hey, every hit on your test accellerates you by your accelleration value!" such as Yeremeyahu suggested. Because as it stands, it is retarded.

The naming of "Acceleration" is really unfortunate. If it was labeled "Tactical Speed" and the other speed "Overland Speed" that would've made more sense.

Or: if Acceleration represented how much a vehicle's speed can, you know, accelerate per turn. Combine that with some formula to compute maximum safe and stunt speeds when doing an X degree turn and you've got the beginnings of a (quite granular) movement system for vehicles.

In the end, the fact is that little old ladies are not outracing your Otomo. And you shouldn't have an Otomo.

Using your vehicle skill to add movement nets 5m/turn/hit, where as using the run skill to augment your movement only nets 2m/turn/hit. Metahumans are faster without spending effort, vehicles are faster when you do spend effort.

Sure, but it doesn't really solve the problem of "suddenly my fixed wing drone drops from 500 kph to 90 kpg because it has opted to release bombs on these guys down here."

Only if you admit that problem even exists. I don't.

All Acceleration-as-combat-movement means is that your vehicles can't jump to lightspeed, dodge, turn, juke, stop on a dime, and zoom again during the same couple combat rounds. If they're going fast, they need a Vehicle test for major deceleration/stopping (check the chart); if they're stopped, they need a Vehicle test to exceed their listed Accel; they need a Vehicle test for a turn that they're going too fast for; etc. It's all very simple.

Well, given that I hadn't noticed the problem, I guess I don't need to do anything differently than what I was already doing...

Think of it as that dramatic slow-motion scene in the movie where you see the bombs released...

How about this, vehicles are crazy good at long term linear movement. But if they want to tangle with humanoids they need to slow down to near dead stop. Iirc, one reason for the A-10 shape is that it allows it a very low stall speed. This means that it can move over the battlefield at speeds that would make a fighter jet drop out of the sky because their wings can't produce enough lift. This allows the pilot more time to zero in on slow moving targets like tanks and trucks (or even humans).

That's true, as far as it goes: *if* vehicles are attempting human-like combat mobility (ducking behind cover, changing direction constantly, etc.), then they're limited by their acceleration (which is really just the normal definition). However, a vehicle can *certainly* make drive-by (fly-by) attacks at vastly higher speeds, as well as entering/exiting the 'combat scene' at those higher speeds.

Indeed, but there are no real rules for that kind of action in SR (except maybe the iron in Arsenal, and there it basically behaves like a grenade throw). Still, such a action would more or less be a running attack that starts and ends "off stage". So perhaps applying a running modifier would be reasonable for such activity?

Another option may be to employ Chase combat rules, with the group on the ground represented as a vehicle with a speed no greater then the slowest member (and the driver being the designated group commander, if any).

As such, the hit and run vehicle can maintain some range band (unless the group rolls crazy good) while deploying weapons.

Given the longer time scales for the chase turns, one get something like a aircraft circling a location and firing at each available pass.

Why not? I earned my Otomo... It ONLY Took 300 Karma and 300,000 Nuyen, but I finally managed to save up the money and finally purchase it...

May i suggest dropping the "old lady" part? As SR have no rules for how old age affects the body, the numbers given in the book suggests a reasonably healthy human.

How about swapping "old lady" for "morbidly obese"? (See RC, page 116, Adiposis quality)

Is the Karma gain relevant, or just that you gained 300 karma in the proccess of accumulating the nuyen for the otomo?

Karma Gain by itself is not all that relevant except to delineate the time it took to to acquire it. Required about 18 months, or so, to gain that level of Karma... The Money was also put aside for that express purpose, and took almost as long to save (I was saving for a lot of other things as well)...

Yah, there are some weird blind spots in the rules. It's like the editors didn't notice the issues with the Matrix or vehicles. I've got my own chase combat rules that I wind up dropping into far too many game systems.

Like Earthdawn 3rd ed. Can you believe that the rules for airships weren't included in either of the players' books? They found room for full cavalry rules in the main book with only one mount-based class, but the Air Sailor and Sky Raider are left completely out in the cold.
For the love of dice, the game is Named after an airship!

Would you care to share those? I'm curious how you set them up, I found it difficult myself.

If the game still has Stall Speed rules, you could have an awful lot of fun with the airplane case

("I emerge from the lavatory with my newly-reassembled all-acrylic SMG and shout 'nobody move, this is a hijacking!'" "Roll Initiative. There's a sputtering sound, and the engine noise vanishes…")

~J

This is a chase-combat system, meaning it assumes that either person A wants to flee or person B wants to keep line of sight to Person A. I realized it really doesn't mean a big deal what the *absolute* speed is most of the time so this is all about relative position. It abstracts the system and generally makes it not turn into some weird miniature combat game. If you want that, use other rules.

I didn't rewrite the vehicles ground-up, that's too hard and a total pain for players when new books come out. So the system is designed to work with the existing stats. I also don't want to really break the existing system or add a lot of overhead.

The basic mechanic is an Extended Test by both pursuers and quarry. If the quarry acquires enough net successes, he evades pursuers. The relative number of net successes indicate the range between quarry and pursuit. The threshold for escape and chase combat ranges are based upon line of sight. Meaning that while it may be hard to drive in a snow storm on a mountain road, it doesn't require many net successes to break away, while on the interstate you can be 2 miles ahead and still clearly in sight.

In most games I vary the target number based on the environment (interstate in summer = easy, mountain road in a blizzard = super hard). I simply use the Terrain table (on p160 on my SR4) for a threshold modifier to stay compatible with SR4 design concepts.

The driving tests are modified by the vehicle Handling rating and the relative "Accel" or Speed. For all conditions but Open, Pursuers get a +1 for every 5 their Acceleration (aka "Run") is higher than the quarry and a -1 for every 5 their Acceleration ("Run") is lower than the quarry. Under Open terrain, like an interstate, pure speed is more important. Pursuers gain a +1 for every 10 their Speed is higher, -1 for every 10 their Speed is lower.

Relative Speed modifiers ALWAYS affect PURSUERS and NEVER the quarry. There's always the likelihood of a mixed group of pursuers, who could even be in different terrains (i.e. a police helicopter and squad car). If you have a mixed group of quarries (such as a biker gang) each pursuer should choose a particular quarry or, if the group is trying to stick together, the slowest vehicle in the group.

If a group of quarries are trying to escape as a group, the group accumulates net successes equal to the lowest rolling member of the group. Which can suck. A lot. Groups are better off splitting up so each quarry has a smaller number of pursuers.

After making the driving test subtract the Terrain table thresholds. Meaning if a driver in Tight conditions only rolls 3 successes they get 0 effective successes and need to make a Crash test. Add up each vehicle's effective successes in the Extended Test. Compare the pursuers total effective successes to the quarry's total effective successes to determine range category.

Compare each round's driving tests. If the quarry has more effective successes in a round than a pursuer, the quarry get to choose the specific distance, staying within the range category. If the pursuer has more effective successes in a round, the pursuer gets to decide the distance, staying within the range category. this gets real important when ranged weapons are brought into play. The side with the best guns wants to be as close to the target as they can while the other side wants as much distance as they can.

Yes, that adds complexity but it also makes the rolls in any individual round still matter as it can be the difference between the samurai being at Medium and Extreme range for their SMG.

There are 4 range categories: close, medium, long, and escape. Escape isn't a range as it is the threshold for breaking contact. Close range is always 0-50m and is the only distance at which Ramming is possible. Any time the pursuer has more total successes, it is Close range. If the quarry has more successes, you'll need to check the table below. Remember that if there are pursuers with different Terrains (i.e. a mix of aircraft and groundcraft), use the pursuer's Terrain.


Tight Environment
close med long escape
>=1 2 3 4 Net Quarry successes from Opposed Extended Test relative to each pursuer
0-50m -100 -200 -300m distance for each range category

Restricted
close med long escape
>=1 2-3 4-5 6 Net Quarry successes from Opposed Extended Test
0-50m -300m -500m -750m distance for each range category

Light
close med long escape
>=2 3..4 5..6 8 Net Quarry successes from Opposed Extended Test
0-50m -300m -500m -750m distance for each range category

Open
close med long escape
>=3 4..6 7..9 12 Net Quarry successes from Opposed Extended Test
0-50m -500 -1km 2km+ distance for each range category


Rules interactions: Crash tests and Ramming need to know specific speeds, so use the most recent Driving test result in accordance with SR4's existing rules on determining speed. Just don't think about it as a velocity per se and just part of the Crash/Ramming process and it will be easier.

I'm tired so I'll post an example tomorrow.

I'm bookmarking this for future reference. It looks pretty sound in principle. I especially like how you managed to use both Acceleration and Speed as meaningful attributes.

But how does a pursuer overtake or force to stop a quarry? Do you use the stunts as listed in the book? (I don't really understand those, but I've read a lot of people who thought they were very flawed.)

I intentionally try to use existing stats so I don't need to convert vehicles. Better to spend effort on a system that incorprates what is there than to force repeated manual processes.

As for stopping a quarry, Ram them. Or shoot them. That's what police do today. Just as in normal SR4 rules, you can initiate a Ram at close range.

The trick is to not kill yourself in the process. A police officer is trained to do that spinout-inducing bump. Treating it as a vehicular Called Shot would be fair: pull it off and the target makes a Crash test but you don't. Damage is cosmetic though, so no double threat.

Other notes:

Always apply visibility and injury modifiers. Remember to combine driver and vehicle injury mods.

For offroad maneuvers consider using Acceleration (walk) values. Air and watercraft might use the Walk value when in Tight Terrain (canals, between buildings, etc)

Any time the pursuers have MORE successes they can pull alongside or even ahead of the quarry. Some form of stunt or maneuver of cutting off a quarry should be possible but I haven't looked too hard at the existing stunt mechanics.