Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Non shiva-arms trollBow
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
longbowrocks
I felt bad about the Uber Troll Bow topic because you guys are right. On first inspection of the rules, it appears that ANY weapon can be fired twice in one simple action if dual wielded: "If a character has one weapon in each hand, he may fire once with each weapon by expending one Simple Action." (core book, simple action, fire weapon). But that sentence references "attacker using second firearm" which dictates that this rule may only be used for pistol and SMG class weapons.

In light of this, I felt it would be prudent to bring a more legal character to the table. May I present: mr. McKillAnythingInOneShot.

A lot of the following will look familiar, but bear with me. To begin with, just a simple troll for my metatype.

before mods:
10 STR (maxed)
6 AGI (Exceptional Attribute and Genetic Optimization)
6 EDGE
spend the rest somewhere else.

max archery at 6 and specialize in bows for +2

Bioware to get:
+1 STR => muscle augmentation
+2 AGI => muscle toner
+1 AGI, STR => suprathyroid gland
+1 archery => reflex recorder
+2 initiative passes => synaptic booster

qualities:
Aptitude (+1 Archery nat. max.)
Exceptional Attribute (+1 AGI nat. max.)
Hawk Eye (range modifiers reduced by one step)

Final stats:
12 STR
9 AGI
7+1=8 archery (aptitude quality and reflex recorder)

other equipment:
Rating 12 bow with smartgun system
piles of explosive arrows
MRSI software


Here's the breakdown on how this guy is used in abstract:
1. Use MRSI to analyze the high and low trajectories for your bow.
2. Set those trajectories to aim for called shots.
3. ???
4. Profit.

and rules wise:
IP1: ready weapon, take aim
IP2: call shot for +4 DV, fire weapon, ready weapon
IP3: take aim, call shot for +4 DV, fire weapon, roll attack

Hopefully you hit whatever you were aiming for with (14+1+4)*2 = 38 DV + hits. That is, if you can make your attack roll of (AGI 9 + Archery 8 + specialization 2 + smartgun 2 - called shot 4) 17 (+6 for 23 if you use edge). If you average 1 hit per 3 dice, then your average modified attack is either 44 or 45.
According to the flight time rules in WAR, the target can avoid the first arrow if he moves (I'd love to have some debate on this), but that can be counteracted by Hawk Eye with Adept, and replacing the synaptic boosters with improved reflexes level 3 (the other bioware costs 1.4 essence). Simply use your first initiative pass normally, then use the last 3 as above. Its doubtful your enemy will act in the last 2 IPs.

So, if you manage to make your attack, and your GM buys hits for his armored vehicles, You could probably destroy the strongest land vehicle I've ever seen in one Combat turn. That is to say this:
Aztechnology Cuanmitztli which has 36 body 30 armor, Would last 3 seconds against a guy with a bow.

All in all, even a pornomancer can't take these rods. Can I get a high five?
Stahlseele
The Pornomancer will talk these rods into letting him put his rod into one of them.
longbowrocks
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Apr 2 2011, 02:58 AM) *
The Pornomancer will talk these rods into letting him put his rod into one of them.

A. Painful to get a rod put in your rod.
B. Silly Stahl, you can't get the hollow point mod for arrows!
Stahlseele
No, but you can get something similar to it.
At least, damage-wise. And you can get Explosive Arrow Tips too, i think.
Think Rambo, from Rambo 2 i think, here. Even more Damage.
Basically, you CAN be your very own Artillery Unit ^^
longbowrocks
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Apr 2 2011, 03:07 AM) *
No, but you can get something similar to it.
At least, damage-wise. And you can get Explosive Arrow Tips too, i think.
Think Rambo, from Rambo 2 i think, here. Even more Damage.
Basically, you CAN be your very own Artillery Unit ^^

I included Explosive arrows tips in the calculation. You can add hollow point to that?
Stahlseele
Ah, did overread that.
And no, you can't add hollow point to that . .
Which is a pity, really. Hollow Point Explosives.
Basically HEAPDS Arrows ^^
longbowrocks
oh yeah. I've often regretted that ammo modifications in this game are represented as ammo types rather than modifications to basic ammo.
Method
I will never understand the facination some people have with troll bowmen.

Yes. You can build a character that breaks the system. There are many ways to do it.

Search function please.
Stahlseele
Because it's awesome. Dot Com!
longbowrocks
Agreed with Stahl. It's fun!

Anyway, as with the pornomacer, this is more of a number exercise than anything else. I would probably use a gun if I wanted to optimize my character for taking out mobs, and only use this guy if... Well, actually, he'd do more damage if I didn't use MRSI (even counting the fact that the defender would get more chances to roll). However, it's still fun to imagine releasing a pair of arrows that simultaneously hit a tank and drive through it in the same style as an energy blast in DBZ.
Method
I understand. I'm just pointing out that these builds have been done to death in multiple other threads.

But, hey whatever floats your boat.
K1ll5w1tch
QUOTE (Method @ Apr 2 2011, 05:34 AM) *
I understand. I'm just pointing out that these builds have been done to death in multiple other threads.

But, hey whatever floats your boat.



Yeah because nothing more fun than building a metagamed, overpowerd, game killing character thats more about stats, numbers and loopholing rules, then personality and authenticity. biggrin.gif It's crap like that, that casues so many house rules to be put in place. I mean really a guy with a bow can take out and armored vehicle with a normal arrow paaleeese. Sorry no arrow is going to damage a vehicle ever. I don't care what year it is in the future, armor will keep up with the technology and relegate arrows to what they've always been, nice quite ways to kill PEOPLE. Sorry but your arrow despite being expertly shot just bounces off harmlessly. "Ohh but it was explosive tip MR.GM". Ohh in that case that half an ounce of explosive leaves nice scorch mark on the paint.

Sorry net damage shouldn't determine hardened armor penetration, base damage of the weapon should.
Glyph
I don't get how you're doubling the damage. Does the MRSI software do that? Really? If it does, then War! is even more incredibly unbalanced than I've been hearing.
Ramorta
QUOTE (Glyph @ Apr 2 2011, 12:11 PM) *
I don't get how you're doubling the damage. Does the MRSI software do that? Really? If it does, then War! is even more incredibly unbalanced than I've been hearing.


You basicly make two seperate attacks, and then if they both hit, the DV gets added together for a "single" impact. (Read: Damage resistance test) Which is why the damage is doubling. MSRI is artillery software designed to be used with mortars (and other ordinance). Using it with a bow is.... *cough*
longbowrocks
QUOTE (K1ll5w1tch @ Apr 2 2011, 07:21 AM) *
Yeah because nothing more fun than building a metagamed, overpowerd, game killing character thats more about stats, numbers and loopholing rules, then personality and authenticity.


AW YEAH! You recognized immediately that loopholing is my favorite part. That can make some really juicy characters. grinbig.gif

QUOTE (K1ll5w1tch @ Apr 2 2011, 07:21 AM) *
Sorry no arrow is going to damage a vehicle ever.


1. That's why this is so awesome!
2. You forget that MY arrows weigh several kilograms any fly at supersonic speeds.
3. Oh, and I'm thinking of adding some sort of laser tagging system to the arrows so I can get bonuses for firing the 18 DV half-10 AP Aztechnology Itzcóatl Gauss Cannon mounted on my back. rotfl.gif
(jk on that last one)

QUOTE (K1ll5w1tch @ Apr 2 2011, 07:21 AM) *
Sorry net damage shouldn't determine hardened armor penetration, base damage of the weapon should.


Bad idea. The bow has higher base damage than any other PC carryable weapon in the game. They shouldn't even have bows in the future, or they should have +(a lot) AP like shotguns.

QUOTE (Ramorta @ Apr 2 2011, 08:25 AM) *
Using it with a bow is.... *cough*


"but it can also be used with grenade launchers and even bows." (WAR, description of MRSI)
Most arrows fly in a pronounced arc and suffer flight time rules, so even in real life it would make sense. Other than that, great recollection of the important bits.
Epicedion
Physics to the rescue:

When you launched the first (high trajectory) arrow into the air, at a leisurely 100 m/s (which is about the launch velocity for a 100lb English longbow), it would take 15-20 seconds to reach its target. Given some ridiculous launch velocity from a STR 12 bow, say, 250 m/s, you're looking at more like 50 seconds to reach the target, fired almost vertically.

Edit: To be clear, that means you could fire two rounds to strike simultaneously, you'd just have to wait 16 combat turns to fire the second shot.
longbowrocks
QUOTE (Epicedion @ Apr 2 2011, 09:36 AM) *
Physics to the rescue:

When you launched the first (high trajectory) arrow into the air, at a leisurely 100 m/s (which is about the launch velocity for a 100lb English longbow), it would take 15-20 seconds to reach its target. Given some ridiculous launch velocity from a STR 12 bow, say, 250 m/s, you're looking at more like 50 seconds to reach the target, fired almost vertically.

Edit: To be clear, that means you could fire two rounds to strike simultaneously, you'd just have to wait 16 combat turns to fire the second shot.


Oh god, we're getting deep into RL territory now. In the case of MRSI, I only have to wait a combat turn because I can't fire again until next IP (the world warps to suit me that way) otherwise, arrows are instant transmission like bullets in this game.
Draco18s
QUOTE (Epicedion @ Apr 2 2011, 12:36 PM) *
When you launched the first (high trajectory) arrow into the air, at a leisurely 100 m/s (which is about the launch velocity for a 100lb English longbow), it would take 15-20 seconds to reach its target. Given some ridiculous launch velocity from a STR 12 bow, say, 250 m/s, you're looking at more like 50 seconds to reach the target, fired almost vertically.


I have to ask:

1) How far away is the target?
2) Why does it take the faster arrow a longer time to reach the same target if the first (slower) arrow is on the "high" trajectory?
Epicedion
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Apr 2 2011, 02:08 PM) *
I have to ask:

1) How far away is the target?
2) Why does it take the faster arrow a longer time to reach the same target if the first (slower) arrow is on the "high" trajectory?


1) Assuming within maximum range of the bow. At STR 12 this is 720m.

2) The faster an arrow is the farther up it has to travel before it reaches its peak, turns around, and starts to come back down. An arrow fired at 250m/s straight up is going to travel about 2 miles up before it comes back down. It's about 25 seconds to reach its peak, and 25 seconds more to reach the ground.

A 100m/s arrow (strong unaugmented human) only travels about 500m straight up, or less than a third of a mile. It completes the trip up in about 10 seconds, and the trip back down in another 10.

Arrows fired at these velocities would have to be launched at ridiculously steep angles (87-88 degrees) to land within the weapon's maximum targeting range, meaning that the travel times are mostly accurate (since they're based on a 90 degree launch). The only way to change this would be to dramatically reduce the launch velocity, which in turn would dramatically reduce the power of the weapon.

Since you're fixing velocity (for power) and range to target isn't changing, the only variable then is angle. There are two angles at which you can fire. One will be almost vertical (16+ combat turns to hit), and the other will be almost flat (<1 combat turn to hit).

I'm sure there's a range at which the times to target are within a combat turn of each other (allowing you to fire twice in a row), but it's well outside the SR4 maximum bow range.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
It should go without Saying, but Maximum Bow Strength is 8, not 12.
longbowrocks
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Apr 2 2011, 10:35 AM) *
It should go without Saying, but Maximum Bow Strength is 8, not 12.

This comes up a lot, but it's meatbook vs. pdf. The pdf says rating 12.
Draco18s
QUOTE (Epicedion @ Apr 2 2011, 01:26 PM) *
Stuff


There. You went all mathy and left out the important details.
longbowrocks
I really don't understand why everybody gets so up in arms about bows. To begin with, firearm users have an overwhelming advantage in terms of mods, use options, number of shots per round, and having spare points after they power up their guns. As for bows, they ARE balanced: it's just that the 3rd edition guys are still grinding away at power gaming a weapon that has lost its power.
I said about 45 modified DV before resistance test, right?

Let's compare this to a pistol so weak that I could cry about it:
6 DV, total dice pool 12. average 4 hits.
The guy using this pistol is a moron: he isn't dual wielding; has a dice pool that could fill a thimble; has no ammo mods for DV or AP; and is using a weak gun to begin with.
This pistol can attack twice per IP. The guy has 3 IPs per round. Assuming your hits cancel out the defender's reflex roll to dodge, and his resistance test afterwards, you're doing about 6 DV per shot. 6 DV per shot * 2 shots per IP * 3 IPs per combat turn = 36 damage per combat turn.
Yerameyahu
Not the point. smile.gif Even if 45 wasn't significantly more than 36 (because they're both just examples), one big hit is better than 6 small hits. It matters against armored metahumans, but it matters *a ton* against vehicles and spirits.

People don't like the idea of a bow tearing open a tank or a spirit, when most firearms will do literally nothing against the same enemy. You made this point yourself in the first post, man.
Glyph
QUOTE (longbowrocks @ Apr 2 2011, 11:52 AM) *
This comes up a lot, but it's meatbook vs. pdf. The pdf says rating 12.

No, the unupdated version of the pdf says rating 12. This isn't some discrepancy in sources - it's deliberately picking a pre-eratta version of something.
longbowrocks
QUOTE (Glyph @ Apr 2 2011, 01:12 PM) *
No, the unupdated version of the pdf says rating 12. This isn't some discrepancy in sources - it's deliberately picking a pre-eratta version of something.

Ah, I had assumed that the pdf was more up to date than the book, but I guess my GM could have a later copy.
toturi
QUOTE (K1ll5w1tch @ Apr 2 2011, 11:21 PM) *
Yeah because nothing more fun than building a metagamed, overpowerd, game killing character thats more about stats, numbers and loopholing rules, then personality and authenticity.

Ah, but then the real challenge is to put personality and authencity to such a character. First you build the mechanics of the character than you wrap it up in a plausible cover story.
I do not think that it is impossible that an arrow could plausibly damage an armored vehicle, it is just that most people are unable to wrap their heads around such an occurance.
Method
QUOTE (Glyph @ Apr 2 2011, 10:11 AM) *
I don't get how you're doubling the damage. Does the MRSI software do that? Really? If it does, then War! is even more incredibly unbalanced than I've been hearing.


My playtest group actually warned against this because we thought it was a little too powerful. They took our feedback in part on Overlapping Grenade Blasts (we also suggested that the base damage for a single grenade be used to determine hardened armor penetration but...). We made the same suggestions for MRSI.

Mind you, the MRSI concept is used in real life but it's based on additive effects of explosive artillery shells. I don't think it's intended for game-breaking troll archers.
longbowrocks
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Apr 2 2011, 01:07 PM) *
Not the point. smile.gif Even if 45 wasn't significantly more than 36 (because they're both just examples), one big hit is better than 6 small hits. It matters against armored metahumans, but it matters *a ton* against vehicles and spirits.

People don't like the idea of a bow tearing open a tank or a spirit, when most firearms will do literally nothing against the same enemy. You made this point yourself in the first post, man.

"Assuming your hits cancel out the defender's reflex roll to dodge, and his resistance test afterwards"
And actually, if the total damage dealt (after resistance) is near (not even equal to) the single hit, then the small hits are better since they allow you to spread your damage. In my experience, GMs tend to swarm you rather than send one big enemy. And you can't hide from/maneuver around the swarm nearly as easily.

Here's a better example off the top of my head:
Barret 121 = 9 DV -4 AP
add AV rounds for -4/-6 AP
12 AGI
6 EDGE
8 longarms
+2 sniper rifle
+2 smartgun
= 30 Dice pool

I wasn't rolling for the tank correctly before, so here are the new results:
Tank has 66 dice pool vs bow, and buys 16 hits.
Tank has 56 dice pool vs rifle, and buys 14 hits.

Bow gets modified DV 45 for 1 attack = (45-16) = 29 Damage vs Tank's 26 boxes
Rifle gets modified DV 19 for 6 attacks = (19-14)*6 = 30 Damage vs Tank's 26 boxes

The Bow has been powergamed to the limit to kill this tank. That is all it can do.
Rifle can outdo the bow, AND kill six enemies per combat turn.
Yerameyahu
I did read that part, longbowrocks. Did you read mine? smile.gif It's a question of beating armor, not merely dealing with multiple dodge and soak tests. You do understand that 19 DV against that tank's 36 armor does literally 0 damage, right?

And even against targets with less than 19 armor, when you use the single most overpowered rifle (literally assault cannon power) in super-optimal conditions, you just hide the issue. It's like saying Superman isn't too strong, because God can beat him. And you're right: the bow isn't better at multiple small enemies… but that's not what we're talking about at all. smile.gif

I just don't see why you're arguing against yourself. Your own posts already said that it's a game-wrecking 'numerical exercise' that can kill anything in 3 seconds.
longbowrocks
QUOTE (Method @ Apr 2 2011, 05:58 PM) *
My playtest group actually warned against this because we thought it was a little too powerful. They took our feedback in part on Overlapping Grenade Blasts (we also suggested that the base damage for a single grenade be used to determine hardened armor penetration but...). We made the same suggestions for MRSI.

Mind you, the MRSI concept is used in real life but it's based on additive effects of explosive artillery shells. I don't think it's intended for game-breaking troll archers.


Actually, I was starting to get tired of struggling against the rules. My next aim was to build a game breaking grenadier. Firing selection change from arsenal allows Full auto grenade launchers, enabling full auto narrow or wide bursts. This can Attack. Multiple. Targets. And still do serious damage to a tank.

Again, you can one shot enemies with pretty much any weapon in the game. The bow just makes it the ONLY shot you can make.
Draco18s
Going down that road only leads to Pun-Pun. A thought exercise and not a legitimate character.
toturi
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Apr 3 2011, 12:08 PM) *
Going down that road only leads to Pun-Pun. A thought exercise and not a legitimate character.

A thought exercise is only one player away from being a legitimate character. Remove the player from any legitimate character and it is only a though exercise.
longbowrocks
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Apr 2 2011, 06:07 PM) *
I did read that part, longbowrocks. Did you read mine? smile.gif It's a question of beating armor, not merely dealing with multiple dodge and soak tests. You do understand that 19 DV against that tank's 36 armor does literally 0 damage, right?

And even against targets with less than 19 armor, when you use the single most overpowered rifle (literally assault cannon power) in super-optimal conditions, you just hide the issue. It's like saying Superman isn't too strong, because God can beat him. And you're right: the bow isn't better at multiple small enemies… but that's not what we're talking about at all. smile.gif

I just don't see why you're arguing against yourself. Your own posts already said that it's a game-wrecking 'numerical exercise' that can kill anything in 3 seconds.


I fail to understand what you're saying here. The rules in 4e dictate that you roll your armor + body for the damage resistance test, so... Ah, I know what you're referencing. I almost lost my head there man, give a guy a hint. Anyway, sorry about missing what you meant before about the armor. The combat rules in this game are a mess. wink.gif
If the attack's modified DV does not exceed the armor's modified rating, the attack automatically fails.
However, the modified Armor rating is 20 (30-10) and the modified DV of the attack is 19 average. You'll still get a hit about half the time, so maybe two combat turns to destroy it?
If that isn't strong enough, you can always get the Panther XXL (which can be fitted with Firing Selection Change) or the Ares Thunderstruck gauss (which probably can't, but I can wish).

And what do you mean "super optimal conditions"? The bow needed much more restrictive conditions (example: target can't move after first shot is fired. Kind of a game breaker unless the tank forgot what makes it a tank).
Method
QUOTE (toturi @ Apr 2 2011, 10:20 PM) *
A thought exercise is only one player away from being a legitimate character. Remove the player from any legitimate character and it is only a though exercise.

The difference is that a rational character can exist in balance with the game world (I.e.- legitimate). Actually playing this character would require everyone at the table and all opposition to be equally as ridiculous. That's great if you like to play "Troll Bow" and hope the opposition doesn't get the first shot.

Me, I like to play Shadowrun. biggrin.gif
K1ll5w1tch
QUOTE (Method @ Apr 2 2011, 09:55 PM) *
The difference is that a rational character can exist in balance with the game world (I.e.- legitimate). Actually playing this character would require everyone at the table and all opposition to be equally as ridiculous. That's great if you like to play "Troll Bow" and hope the opposition doesn't get the first shot.

Me, I like to play Shadowrun. biggrin.gif



Exactly but with all that massiveness of the mighty troll bow I'm sure his Will is all of about 2 or 3 so I'll have my metagamed mega mage control mind on him and make him shoot himself with that silly bow of his.
toturi
QUOTE (Method @ Apr 3 2011, 12:55 PM) *
The difference is that a rational character can exist in balance with the game world (I.e.- legitimate). Actually playing this character would require everyone at the table and all opposition to be equally as ridiculous. That's great if you like to play "Troll Bow" and hope the opposition doesn't get the first shot.

Me, I like to play Shadowrun. biggrin.gif

A rational character need not exist in balance with the game world. That rational character can be a force majuere and still be rational. Playing this character does not require everyone at the table and all opposition to be equally ridiculous (to use your words, not that I think that such a character is ridiculous at all).

Playing Troll Bow is playing Shadowrun.
longbowrocks
QUOTE (toturi @ Apr 2 2011, 09:49 PM) *
A rational character need not exist in balance with the game world. That rational character can be a force majuere and still be rational. Playing this character does not require everyone at the table and all opposition to be equally ridiculous (to use your words, not that I think that such a character is ridiculous at all).

Playing Troll Bow is playing Shadowrun.

I feel strong kinship. TrollBros for life.
longbowrocks
QUOTE (K1ll5w1tch @ Apr 2 2011, 08:59 PM) *
Exactly but with all that massiveness of the mighty troll bow I'm sure his Will is all of about 2 or 3 so I'll have my metagamed mega mage control mind on him and make him shoot himself with that silly bow of his.

That WILL guess was on the button.
I wasn't even thinking of that aspect of balance. Instead I took 60 pts of negative qualities (don't worry, I only credited myself 35, and they fit well with my roleplay).
Method
QUOTE (toturi @ Apr 2 2011, 11:49 PM) *
A rational character need not exist in balance with the game world. That rational character can be a force majuere and still be rational.
Sure if that's what you enjoy.

QUOTE
Playing this character does not require everyone at the table and all opposition to be equally ridiculous (to use your words, not that I think that such a character is ridiculous at all).
It does if you want to challenge this PC without killing everyone with him. There arent many ways to do that that aren't contrived. Thus you either change the whole world or... change the whole world.

QUOTE
Playing Troll Bow is playing Shadowrun.
. Only in so far as trolls and bows both exist in the system and a troll can use a bow within the rules. Beyond that we clearly disagree.
Irion
How I love things like this. This is always the time for a GM to smile.
Players tend to forget so much, if using such builds.
"You know, you are in a building?"
"You know you are in a narrow street with neon signs everywhere?"
Etc....
toturi
QUOTE (Method @ Apr 3 2011, 06:08 PM) *
It does if you want to challenge this PC without killing everyone with him. There arent many ways to do that that aren't contrived. Thus you either change the whole world or... change the whole world.
That is correct. If you want to challenge this PC. When the whole point of the PC is probably not to be challenged. No need to change the whole world at all.
Yerameyahu
longbowrocks, I read your post as specifying 36 armor. If it's less than that, then the Barrett might indeed hurt it. smile.gif Sometimes. Remember that you have to *exceed* the armor.

My point about optimal was that the Barrett in the configuration shown is perhaps the *only* firearm that could beat the armor and do more than literally zero damage. Using unimaginably high stats and Edge. So it's hardly a general point about bows vs. firearms. You did indeed optimize the bow, but you don't need 45DV to crack a tank. You only need 30 or 36 (whichever the armor is), and every target in the game is weaker than that. You could kill a Boston-class attack sub.

It's arguable that any of the assault cannons can have Firing Selection Change; it doesn't matter, because Burst fire doesn't help against armor. The only proviso is that Wide Bursts *can* help you eke out an extra hit or two against targets who are already dodging well.

The Gauss is *designed* specifically to pierce hard armor, so it's not a problem for it to be good at it.
KarmaInferno
This is kinda why I miss the "damage reduction" aspect of armor in previous editions.

Currently, the Resistance Test is a test to negate the damage if successful. Which is also what the Dodge/Reaction test is for. Why two different tests to do basically the same thing? And it results in tanks that can withstand massive amounts of fire, but ANY fire that penetrates the armor tends to instantly reduce the tank to scrap metal.

Previously, the Dodge test was to negate damage (by avoiding it), and the Resistance Test merely attempted to REDUCE the damage, and could result in variable lower amounts of damage rather than a binary result.




-k
Yerameyahu
It is a little odd. They are different, though, and it's nice to have options. Dodge is boosted by skill and reduced by Wide Bursts; soak is boosted by Body and armor, and reduced by AP. Extra AP doesn't affect dodge.

You can fully dodge things, but I'm kinda glad that you can also partially dodge. For one thing, an almost dodge isn't nothing. smile.gif

I fully agreed that the system creates all-or-nothing attacks (esp. for vehicles), and that's a problem. In theory, it's kind of okay: bullet bounce off, but that AT rocket wrecks it. Still, an issue.

I've been toying with the idea of dramatically increasing AP for most weapons. All the weapons have DV much higher than their AP, and I can't think of a good reason for that for some cases. Haven't done the numbers at all, though, so maybe it's a flawed idea.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (longbowrocks @ Apr 2 2011, 12:52 PM) *
This comes up a lot, but it's meatbook vs. pdf. The pdf says rating 12.


My PDF says 8... *shrug*
longbowrocks
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Apr 3 2011, 05:51 AM) *
longbowrocks, I read your post as specifying 36 armor. If it's less than that, then the Barrett might indeed hurt it. smile.gif Sometimes. Remember that you have to *exceed* the armor.

"Aztechnology Cuanmitztli which has 36 body 30 armor, Would last 3 seconds against a guy with a bow."
36 -> body and 30 -> armor. Sorry about that, I really should have used a conjunction or separator or something.

QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Apr 3 2011, 05:51 AM) *
My point about optimal was that the Barrett in the configuration shown is perhaps the *only* firearm that could beat the armor and do more than literally zero damage. Using unimaginably high stats and Edge. So it's hardly a general point about bows vs. firearms. You did indeed optimize the bow, but you don't need 45DV to crack a tank. You only need 30 or 36 (whichever the armor is), and every target in the game is weaker than that. You could kill a Boston-class attack sub.

More or less. There are a few other firearms that could perform similarly to (or better than, more on that next) the Barret. I also want to point out that that is the strongest vehicle I could find in the game, so the tank had super-optimal conditions as well. I think the next tier down is a large drop in armor, and the weapons capable of damaging vehicles skyrocket as armor decreases.
As for the attack sub, I was going to use a naval vehicle in my example, but the sinking rules made it less cut and dry. frown.gif

QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Apr 3 2011, 05:51 AM) *
It's arguable that any of the assault cannons can have Firing Selection Change; it doesn't matter, because Burst fire doesn't help against armor. The only proviso is that Wide Bursts *can* help you eke out an extra hit or two against targets who are already dodging well.

Yeah, burst fire can be nice that way, but I just meant to add SA mode to assault cannons, for all intents and purposes turning them into sniper rifles. The Panther XXL outclasses the Barret in both DV and AP, so with SA it would hit much more often than the Barret (those two points take it from less than half the time to over half the time).

QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Apr 3 2011, 05:51 AM) *
The Gauss is *designed* specifically to pierce hard armor, so it's not a problem for it to be good at it.

You got me. biggrin.gif
Yerameyahu
You see my point, though. Most firearms can't *ever* hope to scratch the 16+ armor vehicles in the game, whereas a bow in this configuration can. It's a stark difference.
longbowrocks
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Apr 3 2011, 09:19 AM) *
You see my point, though. Most firearms can't *ever* hope to scratch the 16+ armor vehicles in the game, whereas a bow in this configuration can. It's a stark difference.

Kind of. With the stats I gave for the sniper man, even a pea shooter (6 DV) can hit a 16 armor vehicle about half the time , and thats without AP. Most reasonably good weapons (sport rifles, snipers, heavy pistols, and assault cannons) can expect to hit armor 20 vehicles with a little modification (the stats and/or the AV bullets).

I really want to expand on that sniper now though. All my reading so far has been dedicated to those confounded troll archers. biggrin.gif
Stahlseele
*snickers*
you do your handle proud ^^
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