Combat!
- Thread starter BP
- Start date
Yea, the Action Point system seems to me to be an accounting nightmare. My players enjoy dropping into the tactical mini-game, but probably not that much. There are times when *I* would like that, and so if it works for your group, more power to you!
Point being, the "stock" MGT rules are a good compromise between Action Points and freeform chaos and use an action economy very similar to d20, which is useful in teaching new players the game. It's also far more advanced from a game design perspective (IMO) than what's in CT or other CT-based systems (T4, etc).
That's why I like it, and that's why I use it. The house rules are more tweaks than substantial alteration, and anyone who's gamed with me knows that I always mess with a game's autofire mechanics (because so few games get it right IMO).
Point being, the "stock" MGT rules are a good compromise between Action Points and freeform chaos and use an action economy very similar to d20, which is useful in teaching new players the game. It's also far more advanced from a game design perspective (IMO) than what's in CT or other CT-based systems (T4, etc).
That's why I like it, and that's why I use it. The house rules are more tweaks than substantial alteration, and anyone who's gamed with me knows that I always mess with a game's autofire mechanics (because so few games get it right IMO).
AKAmra said:
This I don't quite get. How does MGT not model this as acceptably as other games? I feel that the TL-by-TL comparisons between weapon damage and armor protection scale pretty well. The only complaint I have is the relative ineffectiveness of low TL armor vs low TL weapons, and that's fixed with a simple house rule that I've seen in several places (double Protection against low TL bladed/bludgeon weapons, quarter protection vs firearms/lasers/etc).
Aside from that, it seems to be about on par with other games that use a TL system (GURPS and Alternity, to name two). One thing people tend to discount is the effectiveness of a sword. Swords, pound for pound, are probably more lethal weapons than many guns. The difference, of course, is in the training required to use it effectively (something not modeled with much particularity in MGT, but that's a minor thing), and the range. I've always said that I'd rather be shot once than stabbed once, because a stabbing wound probably has a higher chance of causing a fatal wound than an average gunshot (I think this has been substantiated before, but I don't recall where--either way, it's a personal preference--knives creep me out).
So even though a two-handed sword (what the game oddly labels "broadsword") can in theory penetrate combat armor (or battledress), even assuming that a horde of sword-wielding barbarians could *survive* to start beating on the Marines, they would be cut down so quickly that the probability of any Marines actually dying would be very small.
(I've seen someone on these forums complain mightily about the weapon damage vs armor, but he tended to use max damage, which makes little to no sense when dealing with real world dice rolls--4d6 can do up to 24 damage, but that will happen once in a blue moon--the average of 13.5 is far, far more likely, and even with Effect 6, you are sneaking 1 or 2 damage past battledress--that's not going to get you very far.)
justacaveman
Mongoose
Actually the average damage from a Gauss Rifle when firing a Burst is 18 points before adding effect, and ignores 4 points of armor (Unless you use DSAP ammo, which ignores 8 points).
If you use the DSAP ammo (a good idea if you're shooting at Battle Dress), you will do an average of 10 points of damage after subtracting armour and before adding effect.
Edited 6-10-10
If you use the DSAP ammo (a good idea if you're shooting at Battle Dress), you will do an average of 10 points of damage after subtracting armour and before adding effect.
Edited 6-10-10
justacaveman
Mongoose
In an ambush situation I don't do intiative rolls until after the ambush is revealed.
This will happen in 1 of 2 ways: The ambushers fire, or the ambush is detected.
The ambushers don't have to roll for initiative, they are considered to have rolled a 12 for this combat (page 60).
The ambushees are in a much worse sitution. They are probably in the open, may not even have their weapons drawn, and have to spot the attackers before they can even shoot at them (This may not be easy if the attackers are well camouflaged, using suppressed weapons etc..).
A group of prepared shooters using Gauss Rifles could easily take out twice their number of Battle Dress equipped soldiers, quite possibly with no casualties on their side.
BTW, most soldiers don't fight to the death, they surrender when faced with an impossible situation (such as an ambush that wounds or kills half of their number in the first 6 seconds).
This will happen in 1 of 2 ways: The ambushers fire, or the ambush is detected.
The ambushers don't have to roll for initiative, they are considered to have rolled a 12 for this combat (page 60).
The ambushees are in a much worse sitution. They are probably in the open, may not even have their weapons drawn, and have to spot the attackers before they can even shoot at them (This may not be easy if the attackers are well camouflaged, using suppressed weapons etc..).
A group of prepared shooters using Gauss Rifles could easily take out twice their number of Battle Dress equipped soldiers, quite possibly with no casualties on their side.
BTW, most soldiers don't fight to the death, they surrender when faced with an impossible situation (such as an ambush that wounds or kills half of their number in the first 6 seconds).
Nathan Brazil
Banded Mongoose
Yep. The main book was Fire, Fusion and Steel. It was a tech or worksheet designer dream come true. For personal combat equipment, it had detailed design sequences forBP said:
- *Cybernetics
*Personal Armor (including non-powered Archaic Armors)
*Small Arms (all kinds)
*Black Powder Cannons
*Black Powder Firearms
*Bows (and Crossbows)
*Wagons (using draft animals)
As a side note, if you look at FFS and 3G you will see the common design sets (the guns) are very similar.
Chuckhazard
Mongoose
justacaveman said:
Definitely. On the other hand I've never seen a group of PCs quit fighting without using the narrative shortcut "you are quickly incapacitated"
District268
Mongoose
justacaveman said:
Why would you use DS ammo with a gauss weapon? Given how they are supposed to work, I wouldn't have thought using DS ammo would be any advantage.
justacaveman
Mongoose
On page 81 of the CSC you will see that all Gauss weapons are Full AP weapons (ignoring 1 point of armour per damage die). Using DSAP ammo converts them to Super-AP weapons (ignoring 2 points of armour per damage die).
That is why I would use DS ammo. If I was going to use a Gauss Rifle to attack someone in Battle Dress it is the only ammo I would use.
Personally if I was going to try ambush someone wearing Battle Dress I'd use a TL 10 Anti-Materiel Rifle firing DSAP ammo (CSC page 107). This weapon does an average of 35 points of damage and ignores 20 points of armour when you use DSAP ammo. If you hit the target (very likely if you have a bit of skill, use good sights, and aim before shooting) you will drop the target with a single shot.
That is why I would use DS ammo. If I was going to use a Gauss Rifle to attack someone in Battle Dress it is the only ammo I would use.
Personally if I was going to try ambush someone wearing Battle Dress I'd use a TL 10 Anti-Materiel Rifle firing DSAP ammo (CSC page 107). This weapon does an average of 35 points of damage and ignores 20 points of armour when you use DSAP ammo. If you hit the target (very likely if you have a bit of skill, use good sights, and aim before shooting) you will drop the target with a single shot.
Using the system with house rules. First, I am not a fan of the current armour values. Seem too weak, and it looks like they were the values from the original playtest draft when weapon damage was effect times some multiplier. Much lower than the multiple dice used now. Also I noticed that the values look like they are direct from MegaTraveller and so, that's the system I use for armour and penetration, well sort of...
I also do the initiative every round, and keep the wound levels like classic with one zero is unconscious, two is seriously wounded and three is dead. And the first blood does not always go to endurance. Keeps things interesting...
I also do the initiative every round, and keep the wound levels like classic with one zero is unconscious, two is seriously wounded and three is dead. And the first blood does not always go to endurance. Keeps things interesting...
apoc527 said:
I think your post highlights my criticism pretty well. GURPS doesn't need the house rule you mention, I haven't seen that house rule myself and it isn't really that user friendly. If I have to master the system to understand how to fix it with a house rule than the system 'aint quite cutting it.
I'll try and find the time to consider the rule you posted, but MGT missed the mark for me. I read the core rules and they had promise. The combat left me wanting and the book on the shelf.
District268
Mongoose
justacaveman said:
Perhaps my question wasn’t clear. I wasn’t asking what the rules said but rather from a technical point of view, given how a gauss weapon is supposed to work, the use of DS rounds seams pointless. I wouldn’t have thought that there would be an increase in velocity and so no corresponding increase in penetration.
This dose raise the question that if my assumptions are correct, then the rules on this issue are wrong.
Hopefully, someone with more technical knowledge than myself can clarify this.
AKAmra said:
Well, to each his own. I used to own about 30 GURPS books, not including the entire GT collection. I sold it years ago because I found GURPS to be virtually unplayable. The game system is ridiculously complicated (don't get me started on Vehicles 2nd Edition), and the 1 second combat rounds are way too much detail (different damage for slash vs thrust is fine for computer games, but not for an RPG). Most importantly, GMing it was one of the most painful experiences I've ever had. So, while GURPS may model some things better, it's not nearly as useful to me as MGT.
And actually, the "house rule" is simpler than I stated it because the CSC already states that primitive armors protect less against projectiles and lasers. So all you have to do is double the Protection vs similar TL blades. Pretty simple and that's only if you care...I suspect most people don't.
justacaveman
Mongoose
While the rules say that DSAP ammo can be used with Gauss weapons, I don't take that literally. Instead, I translate DSAP into improved armour piercing ammo. You have standard Gauss weapon ammo, and ammo that penetrates armour better. There would be a number of ways to improve the penetration, but the game doesn't really need to go into exact details of the technology involved, just quantify the effects of the ammo on the target. Too much detail just invites nitpicking. Some detail for flavour is nice, but we shouldn't overdo it.
Yea, that's how I interpret gauss "DSAP" ammo. I use the rules in the text of CSC, rather than the information presented in the individual gun description, so that there is actually "Anti-Armor" AND DSAP ammo available. For gauss weapons, they don't have "anti-armor" because their basic rounds are dual purpose (hard center surrounded by hollowpoint of "lead").
I created a simple house rule to protect against domination of AP weapons:
If the weapon ignores double or more the target's total Protection, the weapon does half damage. This simulates complete overpenetration by rounds that just don't expand much. For the above stated reasons, standard gauss rounds, even though they are AP, do not overpenetrate (but "DSAP" rounds, which I interpret as hyperdense rounds, definitely DO).
I created a simple house rule to protect against domination of AP weapons:
If the weapon ignores double or more the target's total Protection, the weapon does half damage. This simulates complete overpenetration by rounds that just don't expand much. For the above stated reasons, standard gauss rounds, even though they are AP, do not overpenetrate (but "DSAP" rounds, which I interpret as hyperdense rounds, definitely DO).
I'm of the opinion that the armour ratings may need tweaking, but doubling them all is probably overkill. 36 point battledress? That would mean you'd be shrugging off plasma bolts.
One thing I'm *not* implementing are the stuff in CSC. I am quite dubious about a lot of the stuff in there and IMHO it adds a lot of un-needed complexity.
We already have the "only vs lasers" rating for ablat and reflec. I'd think it sensible to modify some armours' ratings to be "only vs melee" (which was used in previous editions) or "only vs projectile weapons". You could usefully copy GURPS's crushing/cutting/impaling concept as well if you want to get complex (I don't).
Another simple add would be to add hit locations and partial coverage. TNE had quite a neat way of doing this (which they basically copied from HERO). Personally, I prefer to stick to generic damage as otherwise you just get too many head shots and definite dead characters, and the way Trav deals with damage already has built in major/minor wound consequences you can roleplay from.
One thing I'm *not* implementing are the stuff in CSC. I am quite dubious about a lot of the stuff in there and IMHO it adds a lot of un-needed complexity.
We already have the "only vs lasers" rating for ablat and reflec. I'd think it sensible to modify some armours' ratings to be "only vs melee" (which was used in previous editions) or "only vs projectile weapons". You could usefully copy GURPS's crushing/cutting/impaling concept as well if you want to get complex (I don't).
Another simple add would be to add hit locations and partial coverage. TNE had quite a neat way of doing this (which they basically copied from HERO). Personally, I prefer to stick to generic damage as otherwise you just get too many head shots and definite dead characters, and the way Trav deals with damage already has built in major/minor wound consequences you can roleplay from.
justacaveman
Mongoose
I allow PC's to aim for a weak point in armour. This is an aimed shot at a -4 penalty to the roll that is limited to single shots only (no Bursts). This will halve the normal Armour Rating for for full armour, and bypass the protection of partial armour. This allow the PC's to defend themselves against more heavily equipped opponents, since I rarely allow them to run around heavily armed and armored.
Another house rule I use is that Battle Dress and vehicles are resistant to Armour-Piercing ammo (Reduce the AP value of all weapons except the ones that use the Heavy Weapons skill by half.). And I double the Armour Rating of primitive armour vs Melee weapons. This seems to do the trick for me without overcomplicating things.
Another house rule I use is that Battle Dress and vehicles are resistant to Armour-Piercing ammo (Reduce the AP value of all weapons except the ones that use the Heavy Weapons skill by half.). And I double the Armour Rating of primitive armour vs Melee weapons. This seems to do the trick for me without overcomplicating things.
Egil Skallagrimsson
Mongoose
rinku said:
Yeah, I have mixed feelings about CSC, tend to stick to the weapons in MT core book, with one or two additions. With many of the pistols and rifles in CSC I can see what they are getting at, but don't see the point of the over complication. We do use the AP rules, which work fine with small arms . The larger weapons seem over complicated and, in some cases, rather odd, perhaps more research was needed. AT rules work less well with larger weapons as well
So, I use CSC as a GM resource, but at no point are the characters going to, ever, be able to walk into Intestellar Arms and buy anything they want from the CSC.
On DSAP gauss ammo, hadn't really thought about it before, but can't see why not. perhaps should only be available at TL14. I don't have problems with this making battle dress equipped troopers more vulnerable, if there is an armour, someone will design a penetrator, given a bit of time. In any event, battle dress will still give an edge, but those wearing it will have to stop wandering around like king kong.
Egil
justacaveman
Mongoose
I don't have a problem with PC's running around in Battle Dress like King Kong. The circumstances in which the PC's can wear Battle Dress are few and far between, and the cheapest Battle Dress costs 2 Million Credits.
I don't think Battle Dress should be completely immune to small arms, but 2 Bursts from a Gauss Rifle shouldn't be a sure kill either (No matter what kind of ammo you use.). If you want to take out Battle Dress or armoured vehicles, Heavy Weapons should be mandatory.
I don't think Battle Dress should be completely immune to small arms, but 2 Bursts from a Gauss Rifle shouldn't be a sure kill either (No matter what kind of ammo you use.). If you want to take out Battle Dress or armoured vehicles, Heavy Weapons should be mandatory.
