Firing Modes | Eclipse Phase

Tue, 2011-01-25 21:22

#2

Prime Mover Prime Mover's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Low on ammo and a need to conserve, clip getting low or called shots to wound or warn.

—

"The difference between truth and fiction, people expect fiction to make sense."

Tue, 2011-01-25 22:14

#3

fellowhoodlum fellowhoodlum's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Also, more bullets in the air increases chances of detection.

Wed, 2011-01-26 01:05

#4

Wyldknight Wyldknight's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Considering it's not a stretch of the imagination to carry 300 rounds of ammunition I wouldn't call that an issue. I mean if you wake up on a space station with barely 200 bullets between everyone in the group ammo is probably the least of your worries. If they didn't hear the first shot, they won't hear the next nine. One gun shot is really, really loud. A bunch is just like adding a blow horn to a loud speaker. It may be louder but it was already loud to begin with.

—

C-rep +1

Wed, 2011-01-26 06:36

#5

fellowhoodlum fellowhoodlum's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Sure if a firefight breaks out in a tin-can station. But a 20-km long derelict habitat? Or the highlands of Mars? Sound is only an issue if there is sufficient atmosphere. I'm thinking more along the lines of the heavier weapons which have maximum ranges of at least two to three kilometres _under Earth-like gravity_.

Wed, 2011-01-26 12:29

#6

Wyldknight Wyldknight's picture

Re: Firing Modes

So when you say attention drawing to you mean the spare rounds hitting something they shouldn't? I'm not sure how you would express that mechanically. If each 1d10 is one bullet does that mean every shot that misses means a bullet went past them? And if that's so what about the enemies behind that target? Do you roll for them to see if the spare bullets hit them?

—

C-rep +1

Wed, 2011-01-26 12:56

#7

CodeBreaker CodeBreaker's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Heavy Pistol - 16 shots, normally does 2d10+4 damage. Firing at a single target, focused fire. Both the attacker and the defender has a Speed of 1. For the sake of argument, every single attack hits, because otherwise the numbers are more difficult and I cannot really be assed. Standard ammo is used, as is the Average DV value. Firing on SA, AP 1 - Two shots fired, both hit - DV of 30 - Ammo left = 14 Firing on FA, AP 1 - One volley fired, it hits - DV of 31 (15 + 5.5, round up + 10) - Ammo left = 6 Both weapons do very close to the same amount of damage, and I would argue that SA is in a better position during a firefight, they can put of reloading for longer. Including miss rates changes the numbers ever so slightly, SA technically has a higher miss chance, however it also affects FA (And in some cases it does so more, sometimes it is better to make many attacks rather than focus all your damage into a single one). On the following AP the attacker using FA either falls back into SA/BF or they have to reload, which makes them lose even more damage. FA isn't actually all that great. Its better with the Machine Gun, but you do not really get many chances to run around with one of those. It isn't FA you should be worried about, its BF. With any weapon other than the Light Pistol there is very little reason to not use it. In my home game I actually felt the need to increase the BF ammo usage to 5, up from 3.

—

-

Wed, 2011-01-26 17:34

#8

Lord High Munchkin Lord High Munchkin's picture

Re: Firing Modes

If I remember correctly, the FGU game 'Aftermath!' (and which still has new material published occasionally), used two burst-fire ratings: "AB" of three rounds used by most burst-capable weapons, and "super" AB of five rounds (used by more "modern" weapons... given that this was 1980).

Wed, 2011-01-26 20:23

#9

emaughan

Re: Firing Modes

You're right. There is no reason not to use full auto under the current rules. Unless your group is a long way from resupply, it is better to - using an old military axiom - get there the fastest with the mostest. Put lots of lead downrange faster than the bad guy can. We are homebrewing the combat in EP and I'm using a game suppliment called Guns, Guns, Guns or 3G3. Very good crunchy, book on weapon design at various tech levels for use in RPGs. Not for the week at math but can be used to make all sorts of weapons based on realistic ballistics and physics. Once the weapons are designed they can be adapted to many different rule sets. This book along with some of my old ICE Spacemaster crit charts and EPs clever idea of crits occuring whenever one roles a duplicate, and we get a very gritty but fun combat system.

Wed, 2011-01-26 20:59

#10

CodeBreaker CodeBreaker's picture

Re: Firing Modes

emaughan wrote:
You're right. There is no reason not to use full auto under the current rules. Unless your group is a long way from resupply, it is better to - using an old military axiom - get there the fastest with the mostest. Put lots of lead downrange faster than the bad guy

Except, you know, those pesky numbers that show other wise. An accurate shooter using anything better than a heavy pistol, who is shooting at a single target, should almost always use either SA or BF. Both options come out ahead compared to FA when using either an Assault Rifle or a Machine Gun. The only benefit FA gets is that it is more effective against armour, as you are focusing all of your damage into a single attack instead of splitting it across two. And that is not taking into account things like special ammo or wielding multiple weapons. Doing so puts SA/BF mode even further ahead, as damage modifiers are effectively added twice. The only time it is really beneficial to use FA is when you are firing at more than 2 targets, and even then BF can do the same thing, except against a potential 4 targets further spread out. I am sure there are some reasons to use FA for putting out damage. Apart from the technically increased AP I cannot find one. I encourage you to run the numbers and prove me wrong though :)

—

-

Wed, 2011-01-26 21:16

#11

fellowhoodlum fellowhoodlum's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Wyldknight wrote:
So when you say attention drawing to you mean the spare rounds hitting something they shouldn't? I'm not sure how you would express that mechanically. If each 1d10 is one bullet does that mean every shot that misses means a bullet went past them? And if that's so what about the enemies behind that target? Do you roll for them to see if the spare bullets hit them?

The larger the burst, the bigger bonus to Perception check by the enemy combat team to get a fix on the firer. Considering even individual PCs can have _radar_ installed in their heads, detecting airborne missiles wouldn't be much of a stretch. Maybe I run my sniper duels a tad on the paranoid side, but no sniper would like to be rained on with thermoabaric seeker rounds. :)

Wed, 2011-01-26 22:29

#12

Wyldknight Wyldknight's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Huh, the math doesn't lie. That doesn't make sense. Wait, what about armor? It's not hard to get armor of 20 or so. That semiauto heavy pistol won't pierce that. A decent sniper won't make more then 2 or 3 shots from the same position anyway. Especially in a future with seeker weapons so easily attainable.

—

C-rep +1

Thu, 2011-01-27 21:15

#13

mds

Re: Firing Modes

FA vs BF depends a bit on the armor. For a light weapon like a light pistol, it makes sense if the opponent has more than 10 armor or so, at least on an expected damage per turn basis, without taking reloading into account. For a heavier weapon like an assault rifle railgun, it doesn't make sense to use FA vs BF unless there's over 30 armor on the target. http://alfedenzia.com/ep/index.html has a bunch of charts that I've made to compare the average performance of different weapons under ideal circumstances (opposed roll vs. 25, no bonuses or penalties).

—

[img]http://alfedenzia.com/eprep/?r=2[/img]

Fri, 2011-01-28 01:10

#14

emaughan

Re: Firing Modes

Quote:
Except, you know, those pesky numbers that show other wise. An accurate shooter using anything better than a heavy pistol, who is shooting at a single target, should almost always use either SA or BF. Both options come out ahead compared to FA when using either an Assault Rifle or a Machine Gun. The only benefit FA gets is that it is more effective against armour, as you are focusing all of your damage into a single attack instead of splitting it across two.

Ah, but those pesky numbers are based off of good 'ol fashion M16s (and other weapons) which generate recoil - I believe part of the argument is that 2100 or whenever this game is based, recoil has gone the way of DOS. Also, a part of the reason that British empire was so successful is that they had the Maxim machine gun, the natives did not. WWI was a prime example of how being able to pump out lots of lead can bring whole infantry based armies to a standstill. Finally, just because many of the bullets do miss when firing in full auto - does not mean that it is less effective at killing. Lets say Bob sends two good shots down range and has a 50% hit ratio while Mike sends 200 rounds down range and has only a 5% hit ratio - who just got in more hits. Another thing to remember is supression is key in foiling an enemie's ability to fight effectively. Full auto weapons do a much better job at pinning a unit than single fire.

Fri, 2011-01-28 02:34

#15

Lord High Munchkin Lord High Munchkin's picture

Re: Firing Modes

The whole point of FA is suppression. It isn't to get more hits... it's to control their actions. If a character has to hide behind a wall to prevent themselves being riddled with lead... then they aren't charging down the corridor.

Fri, 2011-01-28 07:30

#16

CodeBreaker CodeBreaker's picture

Re: Firing Modes

And BF does the job much better, and for most weapons, much longer. This thread asked a particular question. By the Eclipse Phase Core rules, is there any reason not to use FA. I answered that yes, in fact on many occasions FA is much less useful than, in particular, BF. Unless the target is stacking armour (And if they are, you should not really be using normal rounds against them anyway, that is what Splash rounds filled with Scrapper's Gel or Liquid Thermite is for) FA should not be used when you want to deal damage to a target quickly and efficiently. Now, if you want to introduce House Rules for suppression fire to make FA weapons more useful, then yes, they do amazingly become more useful. However I would argue that for many of the smaller ammo weapons that BF would still be more useful over time. If you are suppressing a corridor with FA fire with a Rifle, you have 3 turns worth of ammo to keep it clear. If you are suppressing a corridor with BF (Delaying your actions until people show their faces and then firing on them) you have 5 turns worth before you have to reload, 10 if you only fire a single burst every turn. Now you might argue that that is not the point, that by the narrative FA should do a better job. But we are not discussing the narrative here. We are discussing the rule implications of using FA over any of the other fire modes. And by the Core rules, FA is not that great.

Quote:
Ah, but those pesky numbers are based off of good 'ol fashion M16s (and other weapons) which generate recoil

Except that is not what we are basing those numbers on. Those numbers are based of the weapons and the rules presented in the Core rulebook, the numbers that, if we are going to have a sensible argument about balance on an online forum, we must stick to (At least outside of the Homebrew section.) I do not really care about recoil, or what happens to the bullets if you miss a target. Using Eclipse Phases narrative combat, that is up to the GM, however if you do miss you do not deal damage to what you are aiming at. You might hit the bulkhead behind your target, but again by the rules of the book you are not going to do much (EP Station bulkheads have an armour of 50). You might spray the crowd behind the target, but that should only really happen on a critical failure.

—

-

Fri, 2011-01-28 11:13

#17

Wyldknight Wyldknight's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Ok so against fleshy targets BF is best but on average FA would probably be best because honestly why wouldn't someone be stacking armor in a firefight? Both the gel and thermite require an electric charge so do you have one gun loaded with Zap rounds and the other loaded with the chemical and you switch off firing them both?

—

C-rep +1

Fri, 2011-01-28 11:50

#18

mds

Re: Firing Modes

Wyldknight wrote:
Ok so against fleshy targets BF is best but on average FA would probably be best because honestly why wouldn't someone be stacking armor in a firefight?

Looking at the armor cheese threads, the max armor I saw was 50/42, which is in the "FA is better" range for all weapons I've looked at. Below 30, though, and you you're better with BF railgun automatic rifle with AP rounds. I also wonder if it might be worthwhile to use BF against a target with ablative patches and reactive coatings just to strip away +2/+2 per round instead of +1/+1, and then switch back to FA once they hit 41/35. Against 42 kinetic armor, you're only doing on average 3 more damage with FA. The difference in armor levels gives you 5 extra damage per round on average with FA (about 4 more than with BF).

—

[img]http://alfedenzia.com/eprep/?r=2[/img]

Fri, 2011-01-28 12:19

#19

Wyldknight Wyldknight's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Well the average person we fight in our game is using around 15/10 or somewhere around that. But that's just fleshy targets. It's even worse when fighting a synth. So with most small arms full auto is the only option. I try to avoid using rail guns. If subtlety doesn't matter then awesome but most of the time it's many of them VS few of us so going in loud with a weapon that can't be silenced isn't the best option. Wait, what are you shooting them with?

—

C-rep +1

Fri, 2011-01-28 14:36

#20

emaughan

Re: Firing Modes

Quote:
Except that is not what we are basing those numbers on.

Ok - I thought you were refering to the study conducted by the U.S. army which lead to their "one shot, one kill" program for training.

Thu, 2011-02-03 19:09

#21

It that must no... It that must not be named's picture

Re: Firing Modes

emaughan wrote:
You're right. There is no reason not to use full auto under the current rules. Unless your group is a long way from resupply, it is better to - using an old military axiom - get there the fastest with the mostest. Put lots of lead downrange faster than the bad guy can. We are homebrewing the combat in EP and I'm using a game suppliment called Guns, Guns, Guns or 3G3. Very good crunchy, book on weapon design at various tech levels for use in RPGs. Not for the week at math but can be used to make all sorts of weapons based on realistic ballistics and physics. Once the weapons are designed they can be adapted to many different rule sets. This book along with some of my old ICE Spacemaster crit charts and EPs clever idea of crits occuring whenever one roles a duplicate, and we get a very gritty but fun combat system.

OMG!!! Are you into Greg Porter's stuff too? Do you like EABA? As to EP and combat, in real life full auto is usually used to increase the chances of getting at least one or two hits on a target at range since it real combat people rarely have the luxury of aiming extensively. It's rare to hit someone with every round from a burst except at close range. Having a lotta bullets flying increases the chance of hitting with at least one at longer ranges when you can't spend a lot of time aiming. Full auto has been discouraged my the US military for assault rifles, and the modern M-16 only fires 3 round bursts, but can do so quite rapidly, so at least the US military sees some problems with full auto as a standard option. I think rules for FA should reflect the above, but don't get too uptight over it if they don't. Generally with FA I like systems where the burst lowers the difficulty to hit due to the spread, and the better you roll the more rounds hit. Another option for FA is spread fire to hit more than one target in close proximity (wastes a lot of ammo!) or hosing one target you really hate. Also if a target is armored hitting it multiple times might increase the chance of a round getting thru the armor. Another option is to fire a burst at moving targets hoping the bullet spread overcomes the target motion penalty. Generally the problem with FA is the recoil become hard to impossible to manage, resulting it penalties in subsequent rounds until you stop. If EP era weapons have beat recoil, or at leat reduced it, or eliminated it in the case of lasers, then FA becomes maybe more attractive. (BTW, I know a guy who was a marine in vietnam, and his comment on full auto was that after about the third round you're basically an anti-aircraft weapon.) One thing to remember is that as of gatecrashing, laser weapon clips recharge themselves so you can use FA on such weapons and not worry about running out of ammo in the field as in a couple hours your clips will be full again. Maybe FA would be good for lasers and you could save your ammo using weapons for lower rates of fire. As to the OP's closing comment re using FA to end a firefight, I'd say the answer to that was "Yes!" if you A. are fairly certain that the burst will hit the target and B. you have the ammo to spare and C. you're not worried about hitting anything else. Then again if you can draw a bead on the target good enough to be sure to hit with a burst, you can almost certainly hit with SS or SA fire.

—

"I learned the hard way that if you take a stand on any issue, no matter how insignificant, people will line up around the block to kick your ass over it." -Jesse "the mind" Ventura.

Fri, 2011-02-04 17:11

#22

apoc527

Re: Firing Modes

First post, prior lurker, long-time GM of many games... What if we used the MoS to determine the number of hits you get? Out of ten rounds: Standard: 1 round 30+: 2 rounds 60+: 3 rounds Critical: 5 rounds Roll damage separately for each hit applying armor individually.

—

-apoc527

Sat, 2011-02-05 13:46

#23

Lord High Munchkin Lord High Munchkin's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Basically FA is not intended to be aimed at a single target... it's for covering an area. It's not for guaranteeing a hit, but rather for denying target options by filling a volume with rounds, so a hostile has to decide whether to enter the "hail of fire" (and hopefully halt and choose not to). A good mechanism (from GDW's 2300AD), was having a 'Coolness under Fire' stat. Fail that roll and the character "dithers" and "hesitates"... and fails to react. May, or not work, but could be done in EP by making a Willpower Test (or some other similar type test)... make it and carry on, fail and loose time.

Sat, 2011-02-05 14:06

#24

CodeBreaker CodeBreaker's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Lord High Munchkin wrote:
Basically FA is not intended to be aimed at a single target... it's for covering an area. It's not for guaranteeing a hit, but rather for denying target options by filling a volume with rounds, so a hostile has to decide whether to enter the "hail of fire" (and hopefully halt and choose not to). A good mechanism (from GDW's 2300AD), was having a 'Coolness under Fire' stat. Fail that roll and the character "dithers" and "hesitates"... and fails to react. May, or not work, but could be done in EP by making a Willpower Test (or some other similar type test)... make it and carry on, fail and loose time.

The addition of a Suppressive Fire action might work. On the characters phase, they declare an area to be suppressed (Down that corridor, that doorway, towards the guys in cover), and to move through that area a character must make a WIL * 3 check, and even then they still take an attack for moving through. Apply modifiers depending on what weapon is being used, and you are set; SMG applies a -10 modifier to the WIL check, Assault Rifle applies a -20, and Machine Gun applies a -30. If they fail the WIL check, they cannot force themselves to run through the spray of lead. The Suppressive Fire action costs 10 ammo and can only be done with FA capable weapons. The area is considered suppressed until the character decides otherwise, however they must sustain the action on their next action turn (Note, turn), and take a -10 to all physical actions attempted while sustaining. You could also consider the addition of a new kind of Burst/FA action. Focused Fire, instead of getting a bonus to damage you instead get a bonus to your attack. It can only be used against a single target. You get a +10 to hit when using it with Burst attacks (And you lose the +1d10 damage), and you get a +30 to hit when using it with FA attacks (And you lose the +1d10+10 damage).

—

-

Sat, 2011-02-05 14:56

#25

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Firing Modes

If you're going to take it from Shadowrun, might as well make Suppressive Fire 20 ammo, instead of 10. You're still getting a (or, potentially many) full attacks, plus other benefits. The sacrifice of 'holding' the fire might not be enough to balance that.

Sat, 2011-02-05 16:26

#26

Lord High Munchkin Lord High Munchkin's picture

Re: Firing Modes

It's not just that failing the WIL*3 roll should mean a disincentive to move through the "zone of suppression", but also that a complex action is forced to be taken by diving for cover/ducking/freezing in terror... or whatever (i.e. not returning fire). Being blasted away at basically forces an involuntary "skin-saving" reaction. I also think the higher ammo use would be better too.

Sun, 2011-02-06 16:33

#27

Wyldknight Wyldknight's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Ok, speaking of higher ammo that is another huge issue I have with the firearms in this game. Why does the Sniper rifle of all things have more ammo then the assault rifle? That makes no sense. Especially when you could just modify the sniper rifle to fire in BF mode and you have an all around better weapon. I switch the amounts around and then lower them with the assault rifle getting a base of 40 rounds and the sniper rifle 20. Even 20 is high for me but I am willing to let it slide because at least it's more believable. I don't feel like making a whole new thread for this but I was wondering why someone should take the beam skill? Only one weapon is better then the kinetic weapons. Am I missing something?

—

C-rep +1

Sun, 2011-02-06 20:15

#28

apoc527

Re: Firing Modes

I believe the errata corrects the issue with the sniper rifle.

—

-apoc527

Sun, 2011-02-06 22:04

#29

emaughan

Re: Firing Modes

Quote:
OMG!!! Are you into Greg Porter's stuff too? Do you like EABA?

I thought I was the only one on the face of the Earth that new about Greg Porter. Love 3G3, but have been disapointed in some of his other stuff. His CORE ruleset just did not do it for me at all, too much crunch for little return on fun. I don't mind 3G3 being math heavy and crunchier than a box of Grapenuts, it's purely a tool for the GM to make realistic weapons for various time periods and then adapt them to the game of your choice. The crunch never enters the game, but does make the weapons more balanced and realistic. That book is GREAT! We do not use any of EPs weapons but instead go with 3G3 guns designed at tech level 13 with tech level 14 power sources. As for EABA, I purchased "Fires of Heaven". Some of it I liked, but the mechanics, again, were not for me. Also, I'm too much of a "Transhuman Futurist" to buy into any SciFi where it is basically just people in space. Aliens fall into the mundane been their seen that before. To me Aliens would fall into the catagory of Angels or Apes (very unlikely we will run into aliens that are anywhere close to our tech level), not just funny looking next door neighbors. In all of his rulesets, he does a great job at balance - too good in fact. This makes it great for equipement design, but not so hot for character design and mechanics.

Mon, 2011-02-07 01:56

#30

Wyldknight Wyldknight's picture

Re: Firing Modes

apoc527 wrote:
I believe the errata corrects the issue with the sniper rifle.

It drops it down to SA but the magazine is still bigger.

—

C-rep +1

Thu, 2011-02-17 19:01

#31

Decivre

Re: Firing Modes

One thing I think should be noted is that zero recoil renders fully automatic fire and burst fire nearly useless. Recoil ensures that every round follows a different trajectory, that it is more likely that at least one round hits the target, and that each hit will potentially hit a different vital spot. Zero recoil means that every round hits the same exact spot, and a first-round miss means that all other rounds will follow the same missing trajectory. For an analogy of this, picture a car windshield and a BB gun. If that BB gun fires and hits the windshield, it will put a hole in it, and spider-web a good portion of the shield. Recoil ensures that a rapid-fire BB gun will put multiple holes into that windshield, doing major damage. No recoil means that a rapid-fire BB gun will put a single hole through the windshield, with the remaining rounds traveling right through that hole. This can be mitigated in certain ways. Professional snipers using an FA rifle will likely move the rifle as they fire, creating a cutting line of rounds rather than multiple rounds delivered to a single spot. A soldier producing suppression fire will move his gun in whichever way he chooses to deliver the suppression pattern he wants. For the most part, any advantages that recoil grants to multiple rounds can be reproduced by movement. However, there are certain disadvantages to rapid-fire that are an addressable issue today. The biggest one being ammo management (which was already covered), but other issues like prevention of trajectory tracking (finding out which direction surprise fire is coming from) and overheating (likely very common with railguns) are better handled through less shots. While most of these aren't handled with in-game mechanics, one disadvantage that is a part of the mechanics is damage-per-bullet. Full auto deals about triple damage in 10 rounds, while single shot fire deals 10 times the damage in 10 rounds.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Fri, 2011-02-18 00:04

#32

ssfsx17

Re: Firing Modes

The only reason not to use Full-Auto at short and medium range, assuming that killing your target is priority #1, is to conserve ammunition for long engagements in which resupply is unlikely. The M-16, and all those experimental assault rifles that use smaller or caseless ammunition, were all explicitly designed to output lots and lots of bullets, really fast. Also take a look at modern soldiers, who are carrying, let us say, a lot of clips. It is true that, by the rules, full-auto can only be sustained for three rounds before needing a reload. Hence, squad tactics, drills, and disciplines were developed so that each member of a squad is fully aware of who is reloading and which fire sectors need to be hosed down at any given moment. Also, regarding the efficiency of BF vs. FA - most things that the PCs will be shooting at that can be killed by bullets in the first place can probably take three or four bullets before going to zero Durability, possibly more if your dice hate you (a common condition). Causing one or two wounds on a target is not enough to fully neutralize a threat. BF might be better for those who are skilled enough to ensure that all three bullets hit (currently not handled by the rules), but FA is the only way to make sure. With the technology level of Eclipse Phase, the reduced or nonexistent gravity of everywhere but Earth, the reduced recoil on weapons, and the fact that only poor criminals would need to look down any sights or scopes, it is most logical for security forces to dual-wield machine guns and fire them on full-auto all the time.

—

@-rep: 2 | x-rep: 1 | y-rep: 1

Fri, 2011-02-18 00:44

#33

Janusfaced Janusfaced's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Decivre wrote:
One thing I think should be noted is that zero recoil renders fully automatic fire and burst fire nearly useless. Recoil ensures that every round follows a different trajectory, that it is more likely that at least one round hits the target, and that each hit will potentially hit a different vital spot. Zero recoil means that every round hits the same exact spot, and a first-round miss means that all other rounds will follow the same missing trajectory.

I have some experience in Shadowrun 4th, so I interpret "no recoil modifier" isn't "no recoil". In SR4, you can fire either "wide burst"(harder to avoid) or "nallow burst"(more damage). So I can imagine "medium burst"(a little harder to avoid and a little more damage). With some recoil compensation, it would a little harder to hit. And balance out hit-modifier with avoid-modifier, you got a burst mode a little more damage without any modifier. It is EP burst, I think.

—

Your average, everyday, normal, plain and dull transhuman Janusfaced's outpost(writtern in Japanese) http://janusfacedsoutpost.blog.fc2.com/

Sat, 2011-02-19 10:17

#34

Decivre

Re: Firing Modes

ssfsx17 wrote:
The only reason not to use Full-Auto at short and medium range, assuming that killing your target is priority #1, is to conserve ammunition for long engagements in which resupply is unlikely. The M-16, and all those experimental assault rifles that use smaller or caseless ammunition, were all explicitly designed to output lots and lots of bullets, really fast. Also take a look at modern soldiers, who are carrying, let us say, a lot of clips.

And are weighted down as all hell. Weight management has become a greater hurdle for the modern soldier, and one of the key reasons that military exoskeleton research has become a focus of the US Military. Today, soldiers primarily use fully automatic fire for the explicit purpose of target suppression. Burst fire is used for short and medium range, while single fire is used for long range accuracy. Even as we transition to more advanced munitions, this hasn't changed. Ammo conservation is a key element of logistics, and while killing a target may be priority #1, survival is also a very high priority... and a soldier caught with no ammunition has probably failed at fulfilling that priority. This is even true despite modern soldiers carrying a boatload of ammo; the M16 can go through an entire ½ pound, 20-round magazine in just over 2 seconds (less than with newer models)... and even with a hundred clips at your disposal (50 pounds of ammo), that might not last you in a prolonged firefight (some of which can last for hours).

ssfsx17 wrote:
It is true that, by the rules, full-auto can only be sustained for three rounds before needing a reload. Hence, squad tactics, drills, and disciplines were developed so that each member of a squad is fully aware of who is reloading and which fire sectors need to be hosed down at any given moment. Also, regarding the efficiency of BF vs. FA - most things that the PCs will be shooting at that can be killed by bullets in the first place can probably take three or four bullets before going to zero Durability, possibly more if your dice hate you (a common condition). Causing one or two wounds on a target is not enough to fully neutralize a threat. BF might be better for those who are skilled enough to ensure that all three bullets hit (currently not handled by the rules), but FA is the only way to make sure.

This argument basically defeats itself. Yes, full auto does work more effectively when you utilize squad tactics... but so does limited ammunition expenditure. To go with your numbers, if three or four individual rounds can take down a target, then a squad of two men can take down a single target in one round (2 shots each) while only expending three to four rounds total.

ssfsx17 wrote:
With the technology level of Eclipse Phase, the reduced or nonexistent gravity of everywhere but Earth, the reduced recoil on weapons, and the fact that only poor criminals would need to look down any sights or scopes, it is most logical for security forces to dual-wield machine guns and fire them on full-auto all the time.

Doubtful. Fully automatic fire leaves a soldier extremely vulnerable for long periods at a time, especially if he is dual-wielding. The soldier in your example (I'm assuming you meant sub-machine guns, as machine guns are 2-handed weapons) could fire for only two rounds. He would then have to spend two rounds reloading his weapons. Even if he smartly managed his weapons by firing only one at a time, yet still fired them both in full auto, he'd get four rounds of gunfire with two rounds of reloading. That same person could get ten rounds in single shot, even using both at the same time. He could get at least three in burst fire, up to six if he did it wisely. So I still humbly disagree that full auto is always a wise choice. Full auto is useful in a very narrow set of parameters (one-on-one fight, no other targets being the most obvious), and far less useful in the wider spectrum of combat scenarios.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Sat, 2011-02-19 10:28

#35

sjmcc13

Re: Firing Modes

ssfsx17 wrote:
The only reason not to use Full-Auto at short and medium range, assuming that killing your target is priority #1, is to conserve ammunition for long engagements in which resupply is unlikely.

No, that is not the only reason, though it depends on the stats of your opponent. Really you have to do some math to calculate average damage per action if you want to decide which is better. The factors being : # of attacks, chance of hitting, targets armor value, average damage per hit, chance of critical, MoS modifier chance. Well I think that is all. With FA you will do +10 dmg, if your average damage per burst attack is above 10, then BF is a better choice then FA since you can attack twice with BF for every FA attack. For an example, lets go against a sample opponent from NPC file 1 : Prime, assuming a kinetic skill of 60 for the attacker with a smart linked weapon (effectively 70). Against the Basic security trooper with a Fray of 40 (effectively 20 to dodge firearms)and an armor value of 11/12 You have a 67.79% chance of hitting as near as I can calculate (might be some errors in the numbers) with the excellent success chance being 38.33% for a 30+MoS (+5 dmg) and 9.33% for a 60+MoS (+10 dmg or effectively, a second +5) and a 6.99% chance of a critical. A burst fired rail automatic rifle would do 3d10+8-(12-9) per normal hit which averages 21.5 dmg per hit. FA averages 31.5 and an extra 3 on a critical. FA DPCA = 31.5*.6779+5*.3833+5*.0933+3*.0699 = 23.95 BF DPCA = 2*(21.5*.6779+5*.3833+5*.0933+3*.0699) = 34.34 Edit; Added critical hits to math, and some spelling

Sat, 2011-02-19 10:45

#36

Wyldknight Wyldknight's picture

Re: Firing Modes

There aren't any suppressive fire rules in EP are there? I did a search through the PDF and it came up with no matches. Maybe taking the rules from SR and porting them over would be the best choice.

—

C-rep +1

Sat, 2011-02-19 10:48

#37

sjmcc13

Re: Firing Modes

Wyldknight wrote:
There aren't any suppressive fire rules in EP are there?

core rules, pg 204 second column

Sat, 2011-02-19 13:34

#38

Wyldknight Wyldknight's picture

Re: Firing Modes

I spelled suppressive correctly and everything, maybe the search function just doesn't like me.

—

C-rep +1

Sat, 2011-02-19 19:30

#39

CodeBreaker CodeBreaker's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Wyldknight wrote:
I spelled suppressive correctly and everything, maybe the search function just doesn't like me.

Don't feel bad, my normally fairly good memory of the rules failed me here as well. Not sure what happened, but I am almost certain when I searched through the PDF for suppressive fire nothing came up.

—

-

Tue, 2011-02-22 09:50

#40

It that must no... It that must not be named's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Decivre wrote:
One thing I think should be noted is that zero recoil renders fully automatic fire and burst fire nearly useless. Recoil ensures that every round follows a different trajectory, that it is more likely that at least one round hits the target, and that each hit will potentially hit a different vital spot. Zero recoil means that every round hits the same exact spot, and a first-round miss means that all other rounds will follow the same missing trajectory. For an analogy of this, picture a car windshield and a BB gun. If that BB gun fires and hits the windshield, it will put a hole in it, and spider-web a good portion of the shield. Recoil ensures that a rapid-fire BB gun will put multiple holes into that windshield, doing major damage. No recoil means that a rapid-fire BB gun will put a single hole through the windshield, with the remaining rounds traveling right through that hole. .

I have to disagree vehemently. A FA burst that hit the same spot would be deadly as it would allow the shot to drill thru tougher armor. Once you're thru the armor with the first couple shots, the rest are pure damage to the wearer.

—

"I learned the hard way that if you take a stand on any issue, no matter how insignificant, people will line up around the block to kick your ass over it." -Jesse "the mind" Ventura.

Tue, 2011-02-22 11:19

#41

Decivre

Re: Firing Modes

It that must not be named wrote:
I have to disagree vehemently. A FA burst that hit the same spot would be deadly as it would allow the shot to drill thru tougher armor. Once you're thru the armor with the first couple shots, the rest are pure damage to the wearer.

Actually, only the next one is pure damage. The rest will drill through the hollow produced by whichever round digs through the body. It will do more damage than a single round, but not significantly moreso... definitely not as much as multiple wounds would. This is especially inefficient if the shooter hits nonvital organs with that round, or misses altogether. All future rounds would follow its awful trajectory. Any advantages that full auto might have with no recoil and a single trajectory can be reproduced much easier and more efficiently by using single fire rounds with either higher velocity or mass. Full auto's biggest advantage is multiple trajectories, and that's lost.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Tue, 2011-02-22 14:45

#42

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Recoil or no, the hypothetical here (multiple bullets in perfect coincidence) doesn't seem realistic. Why not assume instead that FA in EP is indeed multiple impacts, just more perfectly under the shooter's control? I think this point was made earlier.

Tue, 2011-02-22 19:39

#43

apoc527

Re: Firing Modes

I don't care what kind of fancy fluid energy absorption systems you have, no weapon that fires a mass will be perfectly recoilless. Only lasers fit that bill. Moreover, the impacts from the first two rounds will adjust the target's body enough that additional impacts will be spread around a bit. Finally, there is no way even am ranshuman can hold a weapon steady enough to get no variation in trajectory. Only a fully stabilized mounted gun could be so accurate.

—

-apoc527

Wed, 2011-02-23 17:23

#44

Gee4orce

Re: Firing Modes

If EP guns can fire with zero recoil, and IF that's a disadvantage when firing FA due to lack of spread, then I think it's safe to assume that the weapon designers took that into account and added mechanisms to induce spread. Therefore the point is moot. One advantage of FA that's not apparent in the rules is the ability to 'walk the burst' onto the target: ie observe where the shots are landing and adjust the aim accordingly. In general, you'd think that a FA burst would be more likely to hit the target than BF, and BF more likely to hit than a single shot. Suppressive fire is a different case, and already handled by specific rules. Here's a simple house rule idea: BF gives you a +10 bonus, FA gives you two +10 bonuses. These bonuses can either be spent as a bonus on your TN to hit ('spreading it around' to increase the chance of hitting), or as a +1d10 bonus to the DV of the attack (focussed attack), or in the case of FA, one of each. Each bonus you add to the attack TN also allows you to hit one additional target within a 1m area. This slightly reduces the DV of a concentrated FA burst - if you prefer, rule that if you add both bonuses to DV, it calculates as the standard 1d10 + 10. The upshot of this rule is that you can play it exactly the same as the rules as written, or the player has the option to increase the chance of hitting at the expense of reduced maximum damage.

Wed, 2011-02-23 17:48

#45

CodeBreaker CodeBreaker's picture

Re: Firing Modes

Gee4orce wrote:
STUFF

Way ahead of you;

CodeBreaker wrote:
You could also consider the addition of a new kind of Burst/FA action. Focused Fire, instead of getting a bonus to damage you instead get a bonus to your attack. It can only be used against a single target. You get a +10 to hit when using it with Burst attacks (And you lose the +1d10 damage), and you get a +30 to hit when using it with FA attacks (And you lose the +1d10+10 damage).

:D Used it in my game last week, one of my munchkins used FA for the first time ever (He really, really wanted to make the shot). I will be including it in my houserules from now on.

—

-