| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
 Posted: Sat May 21, 2011 4:02 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| garhkal wrote: | | And there are a number of threads both here and over on the holonet discussing whether a Gunner on a ship (freighter or fighter) SHOULD be penalized for his pilots erratic movement when dodging, especially full dodges. |
In our games the following apply:
Gunners aboard a evading starship have the highest of the following target numbers: According to range/modifiers, Targets evading roll, Own starships evading roll.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Sat May 21, 2011 4:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think a gunner SHOULD be penalized, but the RAW doesn't do so.
I think ZzaphoD's house rule is a reasonable idea, although I think the Pilot's maneuvering roll should be thrown into the mix as well. A ship doing lateral rolls, tight turns, and loops, is going to be a poor weapons' platform. Unfortunately, in game terms there is a difference in how maneuvering is handled based upon why the maneuver is being attempted. I.e. are you moving erratically to move erratically, or to dodge.
From the vantage point of the gunner, it probably doesn't make much difference why the ship is spinning like a top and doing a split-S. At least for puposes of hitting the target. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Sat May 21, 2011 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | I think a gunner SHOULD be penalized, but the RAW doesn't do so.
I think ZzaphoD's house rule is a reasonable idea, although I think the Pilot's maneuvering roll should be thrown into the mix as well. A ship doing lateral rolls, tight turns, and loops, is going to be a poor weapons' platform. Unfortunately, in game terms there is a difference in how maneuvering is handled based upon why the maneuver is being attempted. I.e. are you moving erratically to move erratically, or to dodge.
From the vantage point of the gunner, it probably doesn't make much difference why the ship is spinning like a top and doing a split-S. At least for puposes of hitting the target. |
Well, Ill add that right away. Above difficulty numbers apply or the difficulty of the pilots maneuver action (ie not the roll itself).
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Sat May 21, 2011 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: | In our games the following apply:
Gunners aboard a evading starship have the highest of the following target numbers: According to range/modifiers, Targets evading roll, Own starships evading roll. |
Yes. This is pretty close to what I was thinking. I was also wondering if it is actually harder for the gunner to target, much like when driving, sudden evasive movements (say to avoid a pothole or animal) are more disconcerting for the passengers than for the driver who has a split second to anticipate the outcome of his evasive action. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14359
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 2:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
That's an interesting rule Z.. Almost not worth it to have a high dodge if you wish to shoot back.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanir
Jedi
Joined: 11 May 2011
Posts: 793
|
| Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
There are combat records of things like Douglas SBD doing ridiculous aerobatics on airframe strength and the rear gunner just happily plugging away as if nothing was going on. One SBD downed three Zeroes this way at Coral Sea, one of those remarkable engagements but there you go.
Anyway on a Dogfights episode they talk about it and the pilot-vet is commenting, he says he must've been putting his gunner through about 4G turns and weaves and really tossing him around the back but he just kept plugging away at the Zeros, taking them down eventually, the last one the pilot clipped and that took it down.
I guess if they can do it, on a ship with inertial dampeners you should be okay. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vanir wrote: | There are combat records of things like Douglas SBD doing ridiculous aerobatics on airframe strength and the rear gunner just happily plugging away as if nothing was going on. One SBD downed three Zeroes this way at Coral Sea, one of those remarkable engagements but there you go.
Anyway on a Dogfights episode they talk about it and the pilot-vet is commenting, he says he must've been putting his gunner through about 4G turns and weaves and really tossing him around the back but he just kept plugging away at the Zeros, taking them down eventually, the last one the pilot clipped and that took it down.
I guess if they can do it, on a ship with inertial dampeners you should be okay. |
OR, the gunners simply had a higher skill level than the pilot... 
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14359
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LOL..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanir
Jedi
Joined: 11 May 2011
Posts: 793
|
| Posted: Mon May 23, 2011 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Okay so the gunner was operating at a -2D skill but trumped it. I get where you're coming from, sure, it sounds about right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Mon May 23, 2011 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vanir wrote: | | Okay so the gunner was operating at a -2D skill but trumped it. I get where you're coming from, sure, it sounds about right. |
Usually the gunners operate at a lower MAP penalty than the pilot in my games. Sure they can blast away multiple shots but that is their choice. Pilots usually are at a -1D MAP penalty minimum while in combat (flying, evading), and that is not counting keeping an eye on the sensors, firing his own weapons or anything. Also, a dedicated gunner only have to be able to gun... The pilot usually has to spread his skills around a bit as his caracter has to fill the generic 'piloting' slot and be able to run several systems..
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14359
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon May 23, 2011 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yup. Most i have ever seen a pilot under was
Dodging (first action)
Piloting -1d (maneuvering to get better shots lined up)
Shooting foward torp tube -1d
Sensors -1d
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanir
Jedi
Joined: 11 May 2011
Posts: 793
|
| Posted: Mon May 23, 2011 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 I was talking about an imposed penalty of being tossed around the gunner bay at 4G, he might've been at something like a -2D circumstantial penalty for a wildly manoeuvring gun platform but still had the skill to trump it. Or not. Whatevs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Mon May 23, 2011 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vanir wrote: | | I was talking about an imposed penalty of being tossed around the gunner bay at 4G, he might've been at something like a -2D circumstantial penalty for a wildly manoeuvring gun platform but still had the skill to trump it. Or not. Whatevs. |
The idea of insted taking the TN from the pilots evade roll is that wilder evading means harder to hit instead of a fixed number.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Mon May 23, 2011 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: | | vanir wrote: | | I was talking about an imposed penalty of being tossed around the gunner bay at 4G, he might've been at something like a -2D circumstantial penalty for a wildly manoeuvring gun platform but still had the skill to trump it. Or not. Whatevs. |
The idea of insted taking the TN from the pilots evade roll is that wilder evading means harder to hit instead of a fixed number. |
That's why I like that idea. It means that if you are a crappy gunner with a wildly evading ace pilot - good luck getting a shot off. However if you are a great gunner with a novice pilot evading, your superior skill allows you to compensate for the pilots wild maneuvers and still get a decent shot.
It doesn't really make sense to me that the target motion to evade only affects incoming fire rather than both incoming and outgoing fire. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmanski
Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: Kansas
|
| Posted: Mon May 23, 2011 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, it should affect both.
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
