| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Random Numbers
Commander
Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 454
Location: Gladsheim
|
 Posted: Fri May 20, 2011 10:04 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Bren wrote: |
On the other hand, I recently had the opportunity (thanks to my friend Random) to shoot a double barrelled 12-guage at pop up targets. We were firing birdshot, not buckshot, but at a range of 30-35 meters it was not difficult to identify, acquire, and hit the two bad guys and miss the good guy all within 3 seconds or less. At least when I remembered to unsafety the gun first.  And I have very little experience with fire arms and none with a shotgun. Metric tons of fun. Granted the targets didn't shoot back, but then I am not interested in experiencing that reality. |
You are an excellent marksman, but I think that you overestimate the distance we had to our targets. It was more like 20m or less. But that doesn't really make it much easier to hit with a shotgun.
_________________
Random is who random does... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Fri May 20, 2011 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Random Numbers wrote: | | You are an excellent marksman, but I think that you overestimate the distance we had to our targets. It was more like 20m or less. But that doesn't really make it much easier to hit with a shotgun. |
Could be. I know I paced it off. I'm used to pacing in yards, so I took a slightly longer stride to get meters.  I may be misrecalling whether it was 20-25 steps or 30-35 steps though. Someone did have a lot to drink afterwards you know. 
Just tried recalling the apparent size of the targets and repacing in the office at work. I think you are correct it was probably about 20m. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Fri May 20, 2011 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | atgxtg wrote: | | But go look at the official rates of fire for actual pistols, rifles and shotguns. |
And where might one find those? Any suggested links? |
Not offhand. I got some sourcebooks, and army manuals at home, but I will have to look for a good online source.
The thing to look for is something called "sustained rate of fire". This is how fast someone can operate the weapon over a period of time, as opposed to the cyclic rate, which measure how fast the weapon can cycle through it's ammo. The cyclic rate is not a very good gauge of determine rate of fire in combat, since it doesn't factor in for things like pointing the weapon at a target, or reloading, or mechanical failure. Few weapons can fire at their cyclic rate for very long.
| Quote: | | That could be difficult. From the airsoft web article, it doesn't appear that most airsofts are accurate out past about 75-100 feet. |
That is probably one reason why Fallon doesn't find recoil to be that big of a factor. When you are "up close" being a few degrees off target doesn't matter much. The target fills up a larger portion of your field of fire. But as the distance increases the target "gets smaller" and accruacy becomes more important.
| Quote: |
On the other hand, I recently had the opportunity (thanks to my friend Random) to shoot a double barrelled 12-guage at pop up targets. We were firing birdshot, not buckshot, but at a range of 30-35 meters it was not difficult to identify, acquire, and hit the two bad guys and miss the good guy all within 3 seconds or less. At least when I remembered to unsafety the gun first. And I have very little experience with fire arms and none with a shotgun. Metric tons of fun. Granted the targets didn't shoot back, but then I am not interested in experiencing that reality. |
I don7t doubtit, even if it were only 20m. 3 shots in 3 seconds is quite doable. My objection has been in using some very high ROF examples as the new standard for weapon ROF in the game. Sure, most people could empty the clip of manyfirearms in under one game round. But few people will be getting many hits that way, especially under combat condtions, or at any range, or over a prolonged period.
Heck for really high RPF with blasters, the Fast draw rules work reasonable well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Fri May 20, 2011 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | Quote: | | That could be difficult. From the airsoft web article, it doesn't appear that most airsofts are accurate out past about 75-100 feet. |
That is probably one reason why Fallon doesn't find recoil to be that big of a factor. When you are "up close" being a few degrees off target doesn't matter much. The target fills up a larger portion of your field of fire. But as the distance increases the target "gets smaller" and accruacy becomes more important. |
True regarding accuracy. But the angular distance increases as the range decreases. Therefore requiring a larger motion to switch targets. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallon Kell
Commodore
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA
|
| Posted: Fri May 20, 2011 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: |
it isn't insignificant. The time you are spending pumping the gun would be spent dealing with the recoil. And that would slow you down. Once again, I advise you to look at the performance figures for real weapons. Not some trick shooter doing something fancy, that is why it is a trick. But go look at the official rates of fire for actual pistols, rifles and shotguns...
...Because of the time and effort it would take for the recoil to play out and for you to "recover" from the recoil. With an airsoft nearly all the movement is controlled movement. With a real firearm, it isn't.
And of top of that, static targrts at 25 feet is fairly forgiving. Try moving targets at 100 feet and suddlenly a few degrees makes a big difference.
|
I'm a fairly big guy, and it only takes me about a 10th of a second tops to recover from the recoil of my dad's pump 12 gauge, at least to the point that I can start jacking a new shell into the chamber. Frankly, that's not enough time to interfere with my shooting.
I'd shoot at man-sized targets 100 feet away, but after about 60 feet, all but the finest airsoft rounds get distracted and decide to go view the scenery... Besides, a pop can at 25 feet is a smaller target than a man at 100.
| Quote: | Like most drills, it is only good under limited and specfic circumstances. In this case, that the guys shooting at you are nice enough to line up at close range, and stand there while you empty your shotgun...
...the drill shows that under nice, controlled conditions, a skileld shooter can pull off some neat tricks. It is like that trickshooter film posted eariler. |
C'mon, this guy is a respected military and SWAT firearms instructor, not a trick shooter. He's not going to design a drill that teaches you to shoot your target until he drops if you really can't use the training in a combat situation.
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier
Complete Starship Construction System |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Sat May 21, 2011 1:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | True regarding accuracy. But the angular distance increases as the range decreases. Therefore requiring a larger motion to switch targets. |
Yes, exactly. That is yet another reason why recoil would play less of a factor at close range.
In a nutshell, if someone was standing right in front of you, it is fairly easy to hit them, in fact you might have to work at it to miss them. But at they move farther away, accuracy becomes far more significant, and it becomes progressively harder to score a hit. But we all knew that.
One of the side effects of this that not all uf us might be aware of is that bullets will spread out over distance, resulting in fewer shots in a burst striking the target. This is true for shotgun blasts as well as automatic fire. The farther away the target is, the wider the diameter of the cone, and the fewer shots hit. But, a nice little perk is that the wider the cone, the greater the chance of getting at least one hit-up to a point. That is kinda the point behind shotguns, and to a lesser extent, machine guns. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Sat May 21, 2011 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fallon Kell wrote: |
I'm a fairly big guy, and it only takes me about a 10th of a second tops to recover from the recoil of my dad's pump 12 gauge, at least to the point that I can start jacking a new shell into the chamber. Frankly, that's not enough time to interfere with my shooting. |
Yes, it is. That is a 10th of a second more that the other guy() have to aim aim and shoot at you. Now, if you have to fire off 10 shots, it is a second, 20 shots, two seconds, and so on. And even then, you can't keep that rate of fire up for very long. And on top of that, try doing it with your life on the line.
Why do you think the sustained rates of fire for weapons are so much lower than thier cyclic rates?
| Quote: |
I'd shoot at man-sized targets 100 feet away, but after about 60 feet, all but the finest airsoft rounds get distracted and decide to go view the scenery... |
Yup. In part that is due to the restively low momentum of the airsoft round, it just doesn't have a lot of inertia. Also, the airsoft guns probably aren't very accurate in comparison to a firearm.
| Quote: |
Besides, a pop can at 25 feet is a smaller target than a man at 100. |
Probably not. Esepcially in a fight. The man is probably going to duck behind cover and present a much smaller target. THe can is just going to sit there and wait to get plugged.
| Quote: | | C'mon, this guy is a respected military and SWAT firearms instructor, not a trick shooter. He's not going to design a drill that teaches you to shoot your target until he drops if you really can't use the training in a combat situation. |
Of course he is. The whole point of such drills is to get people to hire him to train them. The whole drill exists for the "wow" factor. If he did something easy that anyone could pull off, then nobody would be impressed and he'd have to go out and get some other job. It's like a TV commercial.Not everyone who joins the U.S. Air Force ends up piloting a F-22, and not every girl who drinks is a hot babe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat May 21, 2011 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | and not every girl who drinks is a hot babe. |
They are if the guy is the one drinking.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallon Kell
Commodore
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA
|
| Posted: Sat May 21, 2011 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: |
Yes, it is. That is a 10th of a second more that the other guy() have to aim aim and shoot at you. Now, if you have to fire off 10 shots, it is a second, 20 shots, two seconds, and so on. And even then, you can't keep that rate of fire up for very long. And on top of that, try doing it with your life on the line.
|
That blatantly has nothing to do with accuracy. Now you're down to who shoots first. That is handled by other game mechanics.
| atgxtg wrote: |
Why do you think the sustained rates of fire for weapons are so much lower than thier cyclic rates?
|
Heat.
| atgxtg wrote: |
| Fallon Kell wrote: |
Besides, a pop can at 25 feet is a smaller target than a man at 100. |
Probably not. Esepcially in a fight. The man is probably going to duck behind cover and present a much smaller target. THe can is just going to sit there and wait to get plugged.
|
again, there are other mechanics to deal with dodging and cover.
| atgxtg wrote: |
| Quote: | | C'mon, this guy is a respected military and SWAT firearms instructor, not a trick shooter. He's not going to design a drill that teaches you to shoot your target until he drops if you really can't use the training in a combat situation. |
Of course he is. The whole point of such drills is to get people to hire him to train them. The whole drill exists for the "wow" factor.
|
SWAT teams, soldiers, and rednecks all over the U.S. disagree with you.
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier
Complete Starship Construction System |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Tue May 24, 2011 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | atgxtg wrote: | | and not every girl who drinks is a hot babe. |
They are if the guy is the one drinking. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Tue May 24, 2011 10:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fallon Kell wrote: |
That blatantly has nothing to do with accuracy. Now you're down to who shoots first. That is handled by other game mechanics. |
On the contrary, it has a lot to do with accuracy. Why do you thing guys who qualify for sharpshooter on the rifle range, don't hit as often in a real fight. Being shot at changes everything.
With airsoft it's different You know that no one is going to get killed or even hurt. Okay,maybe someone might have an accident, but overall it is pretty safe. Now in a real fight being shot at (not necessarily being hit) has serious psychological and physical effects on a person. Do a search on something called the "adrenaline dump"
THat is only a part of it. Other factors inlcude relaoding, the time it takes to acwquiare the target, time to move around the combat area, and time for pop in an out of cover, plus the effects of weather and the afore mentioned adrenaline dump..
| Fallon Kell wrote: |
again, there are other mechanics to deal with dodging and cover. |
But they apply to the difficulty of the shot, Your statement was that the can was a more difficult target It isn't. Neither in real life, nor in the game. In most cases, 100m and 25m will be in differernt range bands for a given weapon, and a man with 50% cover (+2D) will be one difficulty level harder to hit that a tin can (-2D due to small size). will be at the close range.
Now, to illustrate soem of he other factors that apply, even in a limited form, in game terms, the guy shooting at the can isn't worried about the can shooting back, nor will he spend an action dodging (and taking a -1D to hit shot). The shooter also can stand right where he is, not worry about getting cover.
| Quote: |
SWAT teams, soldiers, and rednecks all over the U.S. disagree with you. |
Really? Where are they? YOU disagree with me, but I don't think that you are qualified to speak for the rest. Not without presenting things in context.
Fact is, in real combat guys do go around fring off 4 shots a second from this pistlos and revolvers. Not most of them. The few that do fire off such a rate don't do it that often or for very long.
The average sustained rate of fire for a combat rifle is something like 12 rounds per minute. That works out to about 1 shot per combat round in the game. That includes weapons like the M-16, and the AKM. Now yes, you can empty the clip of an M-16 in under 1 game round. But soldiers don't do that in combat. Well, not good soldiers. There is no way that someone coukld aim and control the weapon and place all 20-30 shots on target.
And in combat, most "targets" don't just stand out in the open, waiting to be shot. Nor do they get nice and close.
Go take a look at actual police and military data rather than some cool drills and tricks designed to impress people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Tue May 24, 2011 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | Go take a look at actual police and military data rather than some cool drills and tricks designed to impress people. |
OK. It's been awhile, but my recollection from Street Survival , Tactics for Armed Encounters by Ronald J. Adams and from the Citizens Police Academy classes and training I took was that in armed confrontations it is not unusual for actual police officers to hit the target multiple times. Often emptying a 15 round clip and generating multiple hits. I don't really see anything there that supports a 1 shot per five seconds ROF for handguns.
This topic seems to just be bouncing back and forth. Personally I am pretty much OK with how the RAW works for ROF. Based on character skill levels, number of shots, and other actions taken most beginning-intermediate characters will not be shooting more than 1-4 times or less per round, unless they use a force point. Absent a force point, if they fire 5+ times they won't hit anything that isn't standing still at close range. That seems reasonable to me.
atgxtg, what sort of ROF do you think is reasonable, and how will it work in the game with movement, dodging, and ducking for cover (which is what I assume real people do when they aren't shooting to lower the actual ROF). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Tue May 24, 2011 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | [OK. It's been awhile, but my recollection from Street Survival , Tactics for Armed Encounters by Ronald J. Adams and from the Citizens Police Academy classes and training I took was that in armed confrontations it is not unusual for actual police officers to hit the target multiple times. Often emptying a 15 round clip and generating multiple hits. I don't really see anything there that supports a 1 shot per five seconds ROF for handguns. |
What 1 shot per 5 seconds ROF? I never claimed that. Nor does the RAW. The game does have a seasonly good rule for multiple shots in a round (the MAP), that I think holds up well in regard to what we see on screen and real weapon use. The 5 point difficulty range steps might be a bit too much (and probably why we need a 6D skiill to pass the army's rifle course in the RPG).
And for those who want a faster ROF, there is that hair trigger modfication in one of the supplements that allows for 2 shots per trigger pull. A modification that when combined with the orginal version of this rule gives me nightmares. Jango firing off 30 shots!?!!
And while, yes, cops have emptied a clip and gotten multiple hits, I dobut they hit with every round, unless they had the weapon pressed against the target. Most the data I7ve seen indicates that only about 20% of the shots fired in a firefight hit the intended target.
| Bren wrote: |
This topic seems to just be bouncing back and forth. |
No, Fallon Kell and I have been bouncing back and forth. Not the topic. In fact, Fallon and I should probably take out debate out of the forum and into PM land and let the topic do a little "bouncing".
It's not a bad topic, and not necessarily a bad idea. Just that two people have got a bit overzealous,. and kind of killed the debate on the topic. Sorry folks.
We'll at least no one got rude or resorted to name calling. 
| Bren wrote: |
Personally I am pretty much OK with how the RAW works for ROF. Based on character skill levels, number of shots, and other actions taken most beginning-intermediate characters will not be shooting more than 1-4 times or less per round, unless they use a force point. Absent a force point, if they fire 5+ times they won't hit anything that isn't standing still at close range. That seems reasonable to me. |
And with me, too. I don't have a problem with some form of rapid fire, or "double tapping" either. As long as it doesn't become the new standard in the RPG.
| Bren wrote: |
atgxtg, what sort of ROF do you think is reasonable, and how will it work in the game with movement, dodging, and ducking for cover (which is what I assume real people do when they aren't shooting to lower the actual ROF). |
I think the RAW if pretty reasonable in this regard. MAPs do a good job of keeping the rates down to a reasonable level. 3-4 shots a round seems about the right limit for most circumstances.
Now I could see some form of "fast firing". I suggested a couple of methods, including "combined fire" with oneself. Some sort of fast firing is okay with me as long as it doesn't get unreasonable, and it limited in some way so that people don't use it all the time. I think that if everyone starts making a half dozen or more "attacks" every round the effects will be detrimental to game play. Especially with the truncated movement rates in the RAW.
Now, I am perfectly conformable with higher ROFs for automatic weapons. But at some point it switches from placing each shot to placing one or more bursts of shots. I definitely don't want to stop the game for a hour to roll a couple of thousand individual attacks because somebody opened up with a Z-6. Not only would that be bad for the game, but it would be highly unrealistic. A guy firing a Z-6 has no idea where most of his shots ended up. He7s got a good idea of what he was shooting at, but even even able to correct his aim between shots. Not at that ROF. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Tue May 24, 2011 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | What 1 shot per 5 seconds ROF? I never claimed that... |
You did, although for rifles not semiautomatic pistols. See here from a prior post:
| atgxtg wrote: | | The average sustained rate of fire for a combat rifle is something like 12 rounds per minute. That works out to about 1 shot per combat round in the game. |
| Quote: | | And while, yes, cops have emptied a clip and gotten multiple hits, I dobut they hit with every round, unless they had the weapon pressed against the target. Most the data I7ve seen indicates that only about 20% of the shots fired in a firefight hit the intended target. |
But the 20% average includes both the winner (if any) and the loser(s). Average accuracy of all participants doesn't say much about individual accuracy of one participant. Be that as it may, I didn't say all the shots hit, just that emptying the clip often resulted in multiple hits. I concede that often the shooter will miss with some shots.
| Quote: | | I think the RAW if pretty reasonable in this regard. MAPs do a good job of keeping the rates down to a reasonable level. 3-4 shots a round seems about the right limit for most circumstances. |
Yay! We agree. 
| Quote: | | I think that if everyone starts making a half dozen or more "attacks" every round the effects will be detrimental to game play. Especially with the truncated movement rates in the RAW. |
I agree that modding the rules to allow too many shots per round short changes other actions such as movement. That should be avoided.
Possibly the only change to the RAW for shooting that I really see some need for is to increase the difficulty in shooting at multiple targets in the same round vs. shooting multiple shots at the same (escpecially a slow or unmoving) target. Since in our play the PCs are more often outnumbered than the NPCs, the RAW more often benefits the PCs, so I don't know that I see this change as urgent, just more realistic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Tue May 24, 2011 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | atgxtg wrote: | | What 1 shot per 5 seconds ROF? I never claimed that... |
You did, although for rifles not semiautomatic pistols. See here from a prior post:
| atgxtg wrote: | | The average sustained rate of fire for a combat rifle is something like 12 rounds per minute. That works out to about 1 shot per combat round in the game. |
|
Ah, I see your point. Fair cop.
I didn't actually mean that we need a 1 shot per round limit on weapon fire, just that the last thing we need to do it increase the average ROF in the game.
| Quote: | | But the 20% average includes both the winner (if any) and the loser(s). Average accuracy of all participants doesn't say much about individual accuracy of one participant. Be that as it may, I didn't say all the shots hit, just that emptying the clip often resulted in multiple hits. I concede that often the shooter will miss with some shots. |
No, it doesn't. But is is a good indication of what the average accruacy should be for all characters in a firefight. Didto for ROFs. The fact that most combatants are only fring one, two, or three shots during a 5 second "game round" should be significant. Plius we are modeling Star Wars. The fastest I think anyone fires a "non-repeating" blasterin Star Wars is Han Solo when he sees Vader on Bespin. And Solo doesn't shoot that fast very often in the films.
I don't think that you and I are too far offin our views here. At least not for "average" combat.
| Quote: | | I]I agree that modding the rules to allow too many shots per round short changes other actions such as movement. That should be avoided. |
Yeah, not that far apart. I don7t mind a "double tap" ruleor even an "empty your clip in the fact of the Wampa Ice creature beforeit eats you" rule. I just don't want to hear everybody repeating the the famous line from Dirty Harry about the number of shots the fired each turn, and mean it.
| Quote: |
Possibly the only change to the RAW for shooting that I really see some need for is to increase the difficulty in shooting at multiple targets in the same round vs. shooting multiple shots at the same (escpecially a slow or unmoving) target. Since in our play the PCs are more often outnumbered than the NPCs, the RAW more often benefits the PCs, so I don't know that I see this change as urgent, just more realistic. |
I can see your point here, too. One RPG I am very fond of doesn't apply a penalty to shots at the same target, but does apply it to swtiching targets. But that game doesgive weapons a ROF that they normally can't exceed.
You could certainly add another MAP for swtiching targets.
And, yeah, speed is pretty much inored in the RAW. I for one, don't buy into the idea that it is easier to hit a low flying X-Wing zipping by at Mach 1 than a running Wookiee. But that is another topic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
