Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: RPGs are totally useless.
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3
noonesshowmonkey
So...

Rockets scatter 4d6 meters (-1 meter per net hit), averaging at least 12 meters.

12 hits on a success test with heavy weapons is basically never going to happen without massively pumping a dice pool. And that is bevore comparing the opponent's defense pool, making the total net hits for a direct hit with a rocket something like 15 or 16, easy.

See thread title.

WTF?!

Way to have yet another totally useless rule, SR4A.
Yerameyahu
Yup. Known issue. Houserule it a little. It should still be tricky to nail something, but not quite that hard.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (noonesshowmonkey @ Mar 17 2011, 02:45 PM) *
So...

Rockets scatter 4d6 meters (-1 meter per net hit), averaging at least 12 meters.

12 hits on a success test with heavy weapons is basically never going to happen without massively pumping a dice pool. And that is bevore comparing the opponent's defense pool, making the total net hits for a direct hit with a rocket something like 15 or 16, easy.

See thread title.

WTF?!

Way to have yet another totally useless rule, SR4A.


Just use an Airburst Link, reduces Scatter to 2d6, which is not nearly so bad. IF you read the Accessory, it applies to Rockets as well...
Method
Didn't somebody come up with a good house rule for this recently? I seem to remember reading something in one of these threads...
Doc Chase
I came in here and thought, "What does a Jack Ryan novel have to do with tabletop?"
noonesshowmonkey
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Mar 17 2011, 05:03 PM) *
Just use an Airburst Link, reduces Scatter to 2d6, which is not nearly so bad. IF you read the Accessory, it applies to Rockets as well...


Something feels absurdly wrong if I'd have to augment a rocket launcher with something that fancy to make it work. As it stands, everybody would have an interest in a single shot, man portable, disposable dumbfire rocket capable of taking out light armor (just like everyone now does!). And, by RAW, such a weapon simply can't exist - or rather can't be practical enough for any military to actually want to use one...

Even missiles are retardedly hard to hit with. 4d6 - (1 x net hits) - Sensor Rating still produces easy misses even with 5 skill and 5 attribute and a rating 5 sensor suite - ie military grade training and equipment.

Considering that right now Predator drones are making it hard for anyone to get into a car anywhere near Afghanistan and not have their butt pucker a bit, there is something amiss.

I'm gonna noodle on some house rules for this.

Anyone have a rule that they use and have experience with how it works out?
TheFr0g
QUOTE (Doc Chase @ Mar 17 2011, 10:10 PM) *
I came in here and thought, "What does a Jack Ryan novel have to do with tabletop?"


You're not the only one.
noonesshowmonkey
QUOTE (Doc Chase @ Mar 17 2011, 05:10 PM) *
I came in here and thought, "What does a Jack Ryan novel have to do with tabletop?"


QUOTE (TheFr0g @ Mar 17 2011, 05:16 PM) *
You're not the only one.


Luckily, I was talking about the movie (operative verb: seen). biggrin.gif
Fix-it
rockets, missiles, and grenades have a blast radius.

direct hits are and should be hard against your average vehicle. they don't happen terribly often in real life, even with trained guys doing the shooting. the shrapnel and blast radius takes care of it.

anti-vehicles are hard to use, because they have a small, focused warhead. frag and HE are easier, because they are area effect.

this ain't Quake. rockets are not pinpoint accurate.

PS: Tom Clancy sucks.
Critias
Also, before bemoaning the terrible inaccuracy and all that, remember the size of your target. On most anything worth shooting an RPG at, there's an amount of acceptable scatter that can still result in a direct hit.
Jhaiisiin
Yeah, but guided missiles don't generally miss by 20+ meters. Otherwise, why would missiles be used as kill shots on airplanes? Current tech allows us to throw missiles, bombs and other munitions through friggin' windows. That's less than a meter scatter. 20+ is ridiculous.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Fix-it @ Mar 17 2011, 03:43 PM) *
rockets, missiles, and grenades have a blast radius.

direct hits are and should be hard against your average vehicle. they don't happen terribly often in real life, even with trained guys doing the shooting. the shrapnel and blast radius takes care of it.

anti-vehicles are hard to use, because they have a small, focused warhead. frag and HE are easier, because they are area effect.

this ain't Quake. rockets are not pinpoint accurate.

PS: Tom Clancy sucks.


Having fired hundreds of A/V Rockets during my time in the Military, I can assure you that it is not as difficult as you are making it out to be. Stationary is EASY PEASY (Especially with a SMAW), if you are good. Moving targets are a bit trickier, which is why you set things up to slow or stop a target before engaging it.

For Rockets with Explosive Warheads like Anti-Personnel and HE, it is even easier. After all, they are more akin to direct fire weapons than most people realize. The Blast Radius does indeed provide a fairly good cushion in the event of a Miss. In real life anyways.

Now, for the Game. The reason that these weapons are not as effective in the game is that thjey would KILL the characters more often than not, most of the time, outright. This is not a lot of fun for the players, so they have been made somewhat less accurate to provide more survivability. No big deal really. It is a sacrifice to make the game more playable and fun, instead of modeling the reality of the situation. After all, how fun is it to have your character driving along and be told " Okay, you see a great big white light... make a new character."
Fix-it
QUOTE (Jhaiisiin @ Mar 17 2011, 03:52 PM) *
Yeah, but guided missiles don't generally miss by 20+ meters. Otherwise, why would missiles be used as kill shots on airplanes? Current tech allows us to throw missiles, bombs and other munitions through friggin' windows. That's less than a meter scatter. 20+ is ridiculous.


SAMs targeted at aircraft use fragmentation warheads, which have very large kill zones.

those TV-guided missile vids from the 1st gulf war were the good shots. I guarantee there were a hundred more that didn't go "right through the window". the rules reflect this. it's not impossible to get precision hits with missiles, it's just not going to happen consistently.
Jhaiisiin
I didn't say SAM, though I do realize that anything that could be considered flak are designed for general area suppresion, rather than pinpoint targeting. My comment was more aimed at AAM targeting and usage.
Fix-it
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Mar 17 2011, 03:57 PM) *
Having fired hundreds of A/V Rockets during my time in the Military, I can assure you that it is not as difficult as you are making it out to be. Stationary is EASY PEASY (Especially with a SMAW), if you are good. Moving targets are a bit trickier, which is why you set things up to slow or stop a target before engaging it.


yes. it would be easy on a range against stationary targets. and by RAW you get a dice bonus for this situation. I would imagine it is significantly different when Bad People Are Trying to Kill You Back. having done neither, this is only supposition.
QUOTE
Now, for the Game. The reason that these weapons are not as effective in the game is that thjey would KILL the characters more often than not, most of the time, outright. This is not a lot of fun for the players, so they have been made somewhat less accurate to provide more survivability. No big deal really. It is a sacrifice to make the game more playable and fun, instead of modeling the reality of the situation. After all, how fun is it to have your character driving along and be told " Okay, you see a great big white light... make a new character."


the rules in the core book are for players.
NPCs should always operate by different rules, to avoid this exact situation.

it is indeed a crappy simulation, my point was it's not nearly as imbalanced as the OP makes it out to be.
Critias
QUOTE (Fix-it @ Mar 17 2011, 05:05 PM) *
NPCs should always operate by different rules, to avoid this exact situation.

I disagree. Strongly.
Yerameyahu
What stationary target dice are you getting, exactly?

Let's do it. Smartlinked, image-mag'd, perfect visibility attack on a parked vehicle with a Striker, AV rocket; skill 4, stat 6, so 12 dice? I guess that's 4 net hits. Disclaimer in advance: please point out math errors, I'm just spitballing. (Like I have to *ask* Dumpshockers to point out math errors! nyahnyah.gif )

Scatter is 4d6-1 per net hit (which is the worst of all scatter options). So, you have a ~1/1300 chance of hitting the thing, and you *must* have less scatter than 4m to for the blast to do more than 0 DV. That means your 4d6 must total 7 or less (is that under 3% chance?) to even scratch the paint. Right?

If you use Frag or HE, it certainly does get better: you only have to land it within 16m or 7m (respectively)… except the frag rocket does +5 AP and probably won't hurt an armored vehicle anyway. frown.gif So, you've chosen HE, and you only have to roll a total 11 on 4d6 (24% chance, I think, still assuming 4 hits). Note that this is just to scratch the paint.

And that's against a stationary target, no visibility penalties, no range penalties, no wound penalties, no nothing. I'm not aware of any bonus dice for a stationary target, but even if it's +3 or +6 (which I believe is wholly impossible), that's only getting you 1 or 2m closer.

--
Side note: on the Scatter Table, it says Airburst (2d6-1 per net hit); the actual rules text for Airburst Link (*and* Rockets) says it's 1d6, not 2d6.
Fix-it
shit. replied to all these, then browser ate my post.

QUOTE (Jhaiisiin @ Mar 17 2011, 04:03 PM) *
I didn't say SAM, though I do realize that anything that could be considered flak are designed for general area suppresion, rather than pinpoint targeting. My comment was more aimed at AAM targeting and usage.


so did I. a quick list of AAMs (many of which are dual-purposed as SAMs) lists most having blast or fragmentation warheads.

QUOTE (Critias @ Mar 17 2011, 04:29 PM) *
I disagree. Strongly.


and that's GM Fiat. I play to rule of fun. doesn't mean I don't challenge my players. but I don't do extended construction tests for NPCs to build things or modify equipment.

QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 17 2011, 04:33 PM) *
What stationary target dice are you getting, exactly?

Let's do it. Smartlinked, image-mag'd, perfect visibility attack on a parked vehicle with a Striker, AV rocket; skill 4, stat 6, so 12 dice? I guess that's 4 net hits. Disclaimer in advance: please point out math errors, I'm just spitballing. (Like I have to *ask* Dumpshockers to point out math errors! nyahnyah.gif )

Scatter is 4d6-1 per net hit (which is the worst of all scatter options). So, you have a ~1/1300 chance of hitting the thing, and you *must* have less scatter than 4m to for the blast to do more than 0 DV. That means your 4d6 must total 7 or less (is that under 3% chance?) to even scratch the paint. Right?

If you use Frag or HE, it certainly does get better: you only have to land it within 16m or 7m (respectively)… except the frag rocket does +5 AP and probably won't hurt an armored vehicle anyway. frown.gif So, you've chosen HE, and you only have to roll a total 11 on 4d6 (24% chance, I think, still assuming 4 hits). Note that this is just to scratch the paint.

And that's against a stationary target, no visibility penalties, no range penalties, no wound penalties, no nothing. I'm not aware of any bonus dice for a stationary target, but even if it's +3 or +6 (which I believe is wholly impossible), that's only getting you 1 or 2m closer.

--
Side note: on the Scatter Table, it says Airburst (2d6-1 per net hit); the actual rules text for Airburst Link (*and* Rockets) says it's 1d6, not 2d6.


standing on a gunnery range, you can do "Take Aim" actions equal to your weapons skill / 2 rounded down. also, edge and the rule of 6 improve your chances significantly, both on the range and on the street. I apologize for the "Stationary target bonus", can't seem to find it in SR4A. must have been a previous edition, different game or bad memory.

I don't like doing statistics on RPG systems because of the random nature of dice. sometimes you get snake eyes, sometimes boxcars.
Yerameyahu
Sometimes, yes, but *most* of the times… biggrin.gif That's why doing statistics on RPG systems is effective (vastly more so than on real life, in fact).

So, extended Take Aim (often unreasonable) will get you as many as 1m closer to your target. For AV rockets, that *is* a big deal. And yes, if you invested in Edge, some Edge *might* help you, but that's hardly a fair factor in a 'typical shot'.

Other than these details, is my sketch wrong? With very respectable 6 Agility and 4 Heavy Weapons, you probably can't even scratch the paint on a *stationary* target in ideal conditions. As someone pointed out, the Airburst Link is an utter necessity (depending on which part of the book is right, removing 1/2 or 3/4 of the scatter). That'll cost you an extra 500¥, but luckily all rockets and grenades can interface with it for free.

With the Airburst, things are basically fine. Probably *too* fine; you'll rarely miss a direct hit, I think? *shrug* Probably best to go with the 2d6, even though it says 1d6 on p322 *and* p325.
Mäx
QUOTE (Fix-it @ Mar 18 2011, 01:07 AM) *
also, edge and the rule of 6 improve your chances significantly

Because needing to use edge to hit a stationary target with RPG under perfect conditios totally makes sense, right?

Oh, wait no it doesn't. cool.gif
Fix-it
if it's really important that you hit that vehicle, I would say it's perfectly reasonable to use edge.
you're not going to consistently take out armored vehicles with an cheapass RPG even under ideal circumstances. it takes luck and skill. the rules reflect it. this is my opinion. if you don't like it, feel free to houserule. otherwise, stop being a tightwad and spend 500 on the airburst link. it's not like you can't reuse it.


just also noticed that ammo type for the Striker is listed as missile, not rocket. that's weird. and ambiguous
Yerameyahu
Indeed, I pointed out that the airburst eliminates the problem for a low cost. That was never the question. smile.gif The question is, 'are these rules completely broken… unless you avoid them by using an accessory that's 100% necessary?'. Hehe. Tymeaus pointed that out in the second thread response.

By the same token, it's wholly obvious that you can houserule anything; if you read the very first response in this thread, you'll see me suggesting that. We're just discussing the need to do so.

It's not about "consistently". AFAIK, my math demonstrates that you have no reasonable expectation of, again, *even scratching the paint* in ludicrously ideal conditions. That's not even close to, 'hey, this takes luck and skill'.

Missiles are just rockets with a couple thousand Nuyen worth of sensors and guidance. AFAIK, they're interchangeable in basically all launchers.
Garvel
This is our houserule for blast weapons. It is pretty easy in the game, but now I find it hard to write it down. Still I will try to expain it as simple as possible. The rule applies for rockets and grenades that explode on impact (not delayed ones).
The rule is similar to the opposed test in normal ranged combat, but instead of being able to dogde complety, net hits of the target bring it farther away from the center of the explosion. This way dodging will reduce the damage that reaches the target (before the normal damage resistance test is rolled).

-We use the old scatter table from SR4.

-The attacker picks one primary target or a spot where the rocket/grenade should land.

-The attacker rolls a normal range-combat-test and the scatter dice.

-The attacker compares his hits and the scatter-roll, to find out where the rocket/grenade lands. (If the attacker has net-hits beyond neutralising the scatter, note this net-hits.)

-All targets in the blast radius roll a normal range-combat defense-test (with the -2 dice modifier for area weapons). For every hit they count as being 1 additional meter away from the blast center. (If the attacker had net-hits, this net-hits are subtracted from the hits in the targets defense rolls, like it would be in an opposed test.)

-Only for the primary target applies: If the attacker has still net-hits left, after subtracting the scatter and the defence hits of the target, this left net-hits increase the damage like the would in a normal attack.
Fix-it
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 17 2011, 05:52 PM) *
Indeed, I pointed out that the airburst eliminates the problem for a low cost. That was never the question. smile.gif The question is, 'are these rules completely broken… unless you avoid them by using an accessory that's 100% necessary?'.


very well. my answer: No.

long answer: No, not any more broken than the rest of the rules. grinbig.gif

QUOTE
Hehe. Tymeaus pointed that out in the second thread response.

By the same token, it's wholly obvious that you can houserule anything; if you read the very first response in this thread, you'll see me suggesting that. We're just discussing the need to do so.

It's not about "consistently". AFAIK, my math demonstrates that you have no reasonable expectation of, again, *even scratching the paint* in ludicrously ideal conditions. That's not even close to, 'hey, this takes luck and skill'.


my apologies. depends on how gritty your campaign is then. although I would like some errata on scatter. if airburst link is actually 1d6. is the original supposed to be 3d6?
Mäx
QUOTE (Fix-it @ Mar 18 2011, 02:02 AM) *
if airburst link is actually 1d6. is the original supposed to be 3d6?

1d6 is the orignal 4:th edition scatter for airburst link.
They most likely just forgot to update link description when they upped the scatter in the Anniversary edition
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 17 2011, 04:13 PM) *
Sometimes, yes, but *most* of the times… biggrin.gif That's why doing statistics on RPG systems is effective (vastly more so than on real life, in fact).

So, extended Take Aim (often unreasonable) will get you as many as 1m closer to your target. For AV rockets, that *is* a big deal. And yes, if you invested in Edge, some Edge *might* help you, but that's hardly a fair factor in a 'typical shot'.

Other than these details, is my sketch wrong? With very respectable 6 Agility and 4 Heavy Weapons, you probably can't even scratch the paint on a *stationary* target in ideal conditions. As someone pointed out, the Airburst Link is an utter necessity (depending on which part of the book is right, removing 1/2 or 3/4 of the scatter). That'll cost you an extra 500¥, but luckily all rockets and grenades can interface with it for free.

With the Airburst, things are basically fine. Probably *too* fine; you'll rarely miss a direct hit, I think? *shrug* Probably best to go with the 2d6, even though it says 1d6 on p322 *and* p325.


Yeah, Airburst Links are the way to go, and at 500 Nuyen, not a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
CanRay
OK, maybe it's just me being a Civvie, but isn't there a major difference between "Rockets" and "Missiles"?
Critias
The simple version (as I understand it):

A bomb is an aerodynamic shell wrapped around a warhead.
A rocket is an aerodynamic shell wrapped around a warhead plus a propulsion system (normally a solid rocket motor).
A missile is an aerodynamic shell wrapped around a warhead, a propulsion system (normally a solid rocket motor), and guidance of some sort.
kzt
QUOTE (Fix-it @ Mar 17 2011, 02:59 PM) *
those TV-guided missile vids from the 1st gulf war were the good shots. I guarantee there were a hundred more that didn't go "right through the window". the rules reflect this. it's not impossible to get precision hits with missiles, it's just not going to happen consistently.

PGMs have a 90% hit probability. Really, look it up. It's best to not be the target.
CanRay
"Don't attract attention, it annoys everyone around you."
X-Kalibur
QUOTE (CanRay @ Mar 17 2011, 07:54 PM) *
"Don't attract attention, it annoys everyone around you."


Don't post in front, in attracts attention.
Fix-it
QUOTE (kzt @ Mar 17 2011, 08:24 PM) *
PGMs have a 90% hit probability. Really, look it up. It's best to not be the target.


right. 90% hit probability on targets the size of a small building. they still hit the building, but they don't always go through the door.

modern JDAMs, which are GPS guided. have a public error range of 15m. worst case is probably actually about half that, so 7m.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision-gui...-guided_weapons

the reason 7m is so great and results in a 90% hit rate is the 100+ lb warhead, something the RPG lacks. if you want to knock out a 2070s, or even a modern 1990s AFV with one punch, you're going to need to hit with something heavier.
Jhaiisiin
If missiles, rockets and such consistently missed by 20 meters or more, and had the small explosive radius that existed in SR, they'd *never* get used. They're too likely to cause collateral damage if the rules even remotely reflect real life. This is simulationist, but badly so. The Scatter rules are simply way too troublesome as is. It should be possible for a person with good skill and attribute to reduce the scatter to almost nothing (without special airburst equipment and ideal conditions and and and). But instead, the closest you can get is maybe a dozen meters without an airburst link? That's ridiculous. Hell, at 15m, almost every single explosive in the game is reduced to 0 power. If you can't get even remotely close with a missile or rocket, there is no damned chance to even damage your target. That's simply insane. Whoever came up with the original scatter rules was obviously on drugs.
Yerameyahu
You can get close. It's just very unlikely. smile.gif
Jhaiisiin
If I'm a professional person whose job it is to end life, the last thing I'm going to use is a tool that is "very unlikely" to even hurt, let alone kill, my target.
Yerameyahu
Hmf. No more jokes wasted on you, then. nyahnyah.gif

On the other hand, this explains why assault cannons exist: it's an alternate future where RPGs and LAWs *suck*, so they compensated with a crazy giant gun.
Fix-it
which is why you don't see many Professionals running around with RPG-7s. it's a People's weapon, designed to be produced and used En masse.
Yerameyahu
Hehe. Of course, the description applies to every man- (and vehicle?)-portable rocket launcher in the world of SR4, cheap or expensive. Good try, though. biggrin.gif The LAW in Arsenal is apparently "given to infantrymen in any well-equipped army or paramilitary security force", despite being cheap. I assume this reflects reality, anyway.

Another interesting error (I think?) is the fact that the various launchers in Arsenal are very explicit about saying they can't mount *any* other accessories (some come with imaging scopes). This means Smartgun systems *and* Airburst Links. frown.gif Obviously, I'm reading that wrong, or it's just stupid; I only point it out for fun. It *is* incredibly ironic that the only thing that can fix the rocket rules is illegal.
Dakka Dakka
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 18 2011, 05:59 AM) *
Another interesting error (I think?) is the fact that the various launchers in Arsenal are very explicit about saying they can't mount *any* other accessories (some come with imaging scopes). This means Smartgun systems *and* Airburst Links. frown.gif Obviously, I'm reading that wrong, or it's just stupid; I only point it out for fun. It *is* incredibly ironic that the only thing that can fix the rocket rules is illegal.
It's not that bad, even if you can't just houserule it as an error.
a) The weapons from the BBB don't have that restriction.
b) The text talks about accessories not modifications
c) You can at least use the airbrust link because its description fits the "unless noted otherwise" condition. How to get the required smartlink on the weapon see b.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Jhaiisiin @ Mar 17 2011, 10:36 PM) *
If I'm a professional person whose job it is to end life, the last thing I'm going to use is a tool that is "very unlikely" to even hurt, let alone kill, my target.


Fact is, for the game, if you use realistic scatter probability (read minimal to none), your characters are dead, do not pass go, do not collect 200 Nuyen. Which is very little fun for most people. If you have issues with the Scatter rules, and you do not like the Airburst Link (which is insanely cheap, as is reuseable, and applies to every Rocket/Grenade system in existence in the game), then just use SR4's Scatter rules, which were a bit more friendly in that regard.
Aerospider
Something I haven't seen mentioned in this thread is a bonus for a large or very large target, which you would expect if using an AV round. Listed in Arsenal I believe, but AFB. I think it's only one or two dice though.

Rockets and missiles don't tend to be used in the heat of the moment within a three second period (though such a thing is more likely in the Shadowrun setting than RL). Usually the launcher is some distance from the target and more often than not the target will be unaware, so Take Aim actions should be factored into all realism-calculations.

If firing at close range* and with only three seconds to go from "I wanna blow that up" to BOOM I would expect poor chances of a direct (or good-as-direct) hit, especially for a rocket. For example, cop car comes screeching into view 50m down the street, you swing round and let loose having had no more than one second to aim – how likely is it really that the rocket will hit close enough to cause meaningful damage? I get the impression that there are a lot of players here that would expect a fiery wreck on the first try.

Another thing – most of this thread seems to be focused on a metahuman gunner rather than a pilot program/AI/jumped-in rigger/sprite. I have the distinct impression that launchers are (or would be in SR) rather more commonly mounted on vehicles and electronically-controlled than not, so don't some of these other options improve the odds somewhat?

Not that I think the scatter rules are good enough as they are ...

* Anybody have a house rule that accounts for close moving targets being harder to hit than distant moving targets? Alternatively, can anybody tell me this is a myth?
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Aerospider @ Mar 18 2011, 06:57 AM) *
Something I haven't seen mentioned in this thread is a bonus for a large or very large target, which you would expect if using an AV round. Listed in Arsenal I believe, but AFB. I think it's only one or two dice though.

Rockets and missiles don't tend to be used in the heat of the moment within a three second period (though such a thing is more likely in the Shadowrun setting than RL). Usually the launcher is some distance from the target and more often than not the target will be unaware, so Take Aim actions should be factored into all realism-calculations.

If firing at close range* and with only three seconds to go from "I wanna blow that up" to BOOM I would expect poor chances of a direct (or good-as-direct) hit, especially for a rocket. For example, cop car comes screeching into view 50m down the street, you swing round and let loose having had no more than one second to aim – how likely is it really that the rocket will hit close enough to cause meaningful damage? I get the impression that there are a lot of players here that would expect a fiery wreck on the first try.

Another thing – most of this thread seems to be focused on a metahuman gunner rather than a pilot program/AI/jumped-in rigger/sprite. I have the distinct impression that launchers are (or would be in SR) rather more commonly mounted on vehicles and electronically-controlled than not, so don't some of these other options improve the odds somewhat?

Not that I think the scatter rules are good enough as they are ...

* Anybody have a house rule that accounts for close moving targets being harder to hit than distant moving targets? Alternatively, can anybody tell me this is a myth?


Well, I can say from practical experience that Close Moving Targets are Easier to hit than Far Moving Targets. At least with Rockets anyways (Specifically the LAAW/SMAW/AT4). The lead factor is miniumal at close range (assuming lateral Left/Right movement instead of Closing/Opening movement) as compared to Longer ranges.

As for the Game. Competent Metahuman gunners are likely to be more accurate with their Heavy Weapons than Drones will be, in most circumstances, due to high Agility Stats and Decent Skills with Specialties. You do not generally see Drones reaching a Dicer Pool at 20 after all.
DWC
This problem is pretty much why the Ares Heimdahl exists. Replacing the missile and rocket scatter mechanics with "this drone flies to this location and explodes" solves the scatter problem neatly, and the drone missile is a hell of a lot cheaper than an AVM with a comparable warhead.
DWC
This problem is pretty much why the Ares Heimdahl exists. Replacing the missile and rocket scatter mechanics with "this drone flies to this location and explodes" solves the scatter problem neatly, and the drone missile is a hell of a lot cheaper than an AVM with a comparable warhead.
Dakka Dakka
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Mar 18 2011, 01:54 PM) *
Fact is, for the game, if you use realistic scatter probability (read minimal to none), your characters are dead, do not pass go, do not collect 200 Nuyen. Which is very little fun for most people. If you have issues with the Scatter rules, and you do not like the Airburst Link (which is insanely cheap, as is reuseable, and applies to every Rocket/Grenade system in existence in the game), then just use SR4's Scatter rules, which were a bit more friendly in that regard.
And how is that different from the Manabolt to the face? From a skilled user both usually mean the incapacitation/death of the target. And both should be used sparingly by the opposition unless the PCs are blatantly obvious targets and have seriously pissed off the opposition.

If a PC is hit by a deadly rocket, there is always Edge to burn.

A hit from an AV rocket is very deadly because of its high damage and relatively low negative AP (Sniper rifles with the right ammo are better). Maybe a houserule would be to reduce the Damage to 10 and "increase" the rocket's AP to -12. So most personal armor is useless but the damage is not so high that it cannot be soaked.
In this case I would remove scatter completely but give the target a positive defense modifier (+1 or +2) for each range category above short.
Mäx
QUOTE (Aerospider @ Mar 18 2011, 02:57 PM) *
Another thing – most of this thread seems to be focused on a metahuman gunner rather than a pilot program/AI/jumped-in rigger/sprite. I have the distinct impression that launchers are (or would be in SR) rather more commonly mounted on vehicles and electronically-controlled than not, so don't some of these other options improve the odds somewhat?

If you manage to make a drone that has more then 37 dice(thats pretty much max you can get, with the max amount of aim actions used too) to shoot heavy weapons i would really like to see that.
Yerameyahu
I'm positive that the normal use case for a LAW (in SR4) is not vehicle-mounted. smile.gif

As others noted, protecting players by making a weapon useless for everyone is insane *and* ineffective.

Dakka Dakka, I don't actually see an 'if otherwise noted' for the Airburst Link, but of course it doesn't matter. The way to deal with stupidly broken RAW is *not* to humor them. smile.gif
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Dakka Dakka @ Mar 18 2011, 07:42 AM) *
And how is that different from the Manabolt to the face? From a skilled user both usually mean the incapacitation/death of the target. And both should be used sparingly by the opposition unless the PCs are blatantly obvious targets and have seriously pissed off the opposition.

If a PC is hit by a deadly rocket, there is always Edge to burn.

A hit from an AV rocket is very deadly because of its high damage and relatively low negative AP (Sniper rifles with the right ammo are better). Maybe a houserule would be to reduce the Damage to 10 and "increase" the rocket's AP to -12. So most personal armor is useless but the damage is not so high that it cannot be soaked.
In this case I would remove scatter completely but give the target a positive defense modifier (+1 or +2) for each range category above short.


You do have a point, no doubt. But at least for me, here is the difference. Surviving Magic is plausable and works in game. Surviving a direct hit from an AVM/RPG/ATGM is implausable and breaks verisimilitude 10 ways from Sunday. I have direct experience with the latter, and none for the former. That said, it is a game that is meant to be fun.

And Yerameyahu, you are correect. The LAAW/AT4 is not intended for vehicle use. It is used for the typical grunt in the field to have a semblance of hope against armor.

As an aside, I do not mind the bigger scatter, because it is easily compensated for. If you want to be more accurate with said weapons, you purchase an inexpensive piece of equipment, and then you use either the 2d6 (or 1d6) as your scatter. Problem solved. I do not expect a typical civilian/ganger schlub (read Mook) to have the ability to use such weapons in even the best of circumstances (which combat is not). Competent Schlubs will (and should) use everytthing at their disposal to make it work, thus the Airburst Link. This works for me in game.
Dakka Dakka
I'm not very familiar with military equipment, but does airburst work well against hard targets? I always thought it was designed so that the warhead does not need to explode on contact but can be triggered after it passed through a barrier that can be penetrated by its kinetic energy alone.
Ascalaphus
What about an "Aim Launcher" Complex action that reduces scatter by 1d6 for every time it's taken, to a minimum of one or two dice?

Anyway, suppose you don't explode the Heimdall drone... what kind of Ramming damage can it do?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012