Issue with the movement modifier

[iggy42]

My issue is with the flat "-1 per 10m of movement" modifier in combat. See the table below to see how quickly moving targets become unhittable which I'm sure isn't the intention.

A target moving at 100km / ~60 mph gets -16 to be hit. You'd need some serious fire control to engage that. Least we'll all be safe at crusing speed in our air/rafts...

(Sorry - the table doesn't come out very well, my bad formatting)

mph, kmh, m/6 sec, -mod,
3.1, 05, 08, 0,
6.3, 10, 17, 1,
9.4, 15, 25, 2,
12.5, 20, 33, 3,
15.6, 25, 42, 4,
18.8, 30, 50, 5,
25.0, 40, 67, 6,
28.1, 45, 75, 7,
31.3, 50, 83, 8,
34.4, 55, 92, 9,
37.5, 60, 100, 10,
46.9, 75, 125, 12,
56.3, 90, 150, 15,
62.5, 100, 167, 16,
125.0, 200, 333, 33,
187.5, 300, 500, 50,
250.0, 400, 667, 66,
375.0, 600, 1000, 100,

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

For cinematic games, you probably don't want to use modifiers.

 

[Nerhesi]

I think this was being removed actually. We brought this up a month or two ago. We were discussing it would make more sense if the modifiers was for relative speed-band difference - not per 10 meters, which as youve indicated, isn't realistic or balanced.

 

[iggy42]

Thanks for the replies.

You can always choose what to include depending on your style of play, mechanistic or more cinematic, but whilst it's there I thought I'd bring it up. It's the sort of thing that bugs me (in a small way).

I agree a speed band approach makes more sense providing a more logarithmic scale for the mods.

You may have guessed I'm new to the beta programme...

 

[Nerhesi]

Thanks for the replies.

You can always choose what to include depending on your style of play, mechanistic or more cinematic, but whilst it's there I thought I'd bring it up. It's the sort of thing that bugs me (in a small way).

I agree a speed band approach makes more sense providing a more logarithmic scale for the mods.

You may have guessed I'm new to the beta programme...

No worries! The more people we have here the better. The more input, the more collaboration, the better the overall quality as very little gets missed.

As long as everyone understands that just because you provide input, doesn't mean you point of view will be adopted or accepted! And that its not personal

 

[iggy42]

Yeah no problem. Not saying I won't spit my dummy, but I won't do it publicly on the forum

I've checked through the revision notes and they seem fairly steady - has the Goose been good at taking up player suggestions & requests?

 

[Nerhesi]

Yeah no problem. Not saying I won't spit my dummy, but I won't do it publicly on the forum

I've checked through the revision notes and they seem fairly steady - has the Goose been good at taking up player suggestions & requests?

Ridiculously so. I would say the Goose has been exceptional in listening to logical, well thought-feedback , backed by empirical evidence/testing/examples.

The Goose has also made it clear when they want things to be this way or that, for any reason (aka, we're done talking about this, issue closed).

I think this is a great approach. Of course, at some points some people get upset because it is not in-line with their vision for how things should be (me included! , but hey - this is collaboration and compromise for you. We have a lot of constraints and opportunities and I think most posters here are doing their best to work within that paradigm

 

[iggy42]

Great thanks - I noticed the "directives" from Marc in the revision notes It is a really good approach overall.

 

[arcador]

An update on this thread - the personal combat is still using the -1 per 10 meters.

The vehicle combat, however, uses speed bands now.

 

[Merxiless]

I used to use the movement rules from Twilight 2000 2nd edition. written by mostly same guys.

Also, there is the idea of is the target crossing line of fire, or just running toward / away? Not saying to go into those intricacies, but those are real world factors, especially for vehicles. And the closer you are to a fast moving vehicle, the more you have to compensate or swing your weapon to so to speak "track" it.

It comes down to do you want a simulation or a narrative. I almost always go for Narrative.

 

[arcador]

Me too. 10 years earlier I was a "put everything you can do in rules" guy. I guess DnD 4e did that as well. But now I stay away from it.

Anyway, on your point - yes. I calculate this in the highest unfavourable condition. For example: - if it is moving towards, or from, you in direct line - no penalty.