Range penalties fix

[cmdicely]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

BUT my point Dx is consided the Minum reqirments

Kromm has said that DX 10 is average for young adult suitable for military service, not the average in the population. So, I'd say the average recruit is probably the average suitable for military service. I don't think military training increases DX (it may increase HT and/or ST and/or give Fit).

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by cmdicely

The weapon in question actually has a x1.5 scope, I believe, even if the GURPS stats don't mention it. And a x1.5 scope is a +1; x2 is +2.

And that's exactly how Telescopic Vision works.

Telescopic vision gives a +2 to vision, vs range penalties, if you aim. It also gives a +1 to aim. Thus +2 range (which is about x2 distance) -> +1 aim bonus.

Also, having used the Steyr AUG, and the M16A1, along with numerous other rifles, scoped and non-scoped. I would not give the AUG a +1 scope bonus. It's not noticeably more accurate than an M16 in aimed fire, and the scope doesn't take long enough to aquire to deserve the penalty of having to aim to use it (unless the firer, like me, just doesn't fit the weapon well).

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Ack

The carrying handle in a Steyr rifle includes a 1.5 power scope, adjustable to the individual user (so would that itself be another +1?)

It's NOT a carrying handle. Calling it that in the hearing of an NCO would get you a lot of pushups and a nice energising run. It's not adjustable, either. You can more the aimpoint about a bit, just as you can with any scope (or good iron sight), but that's it - nothing special.

Personally, I think scopes should be used to divide the effective range by the power of the scope. The way range increments go up, and the way scopes bring it down again, there's an imbalance.

Let's say you're shooting at a target 100 yards away. That's -10 due to range. You have a 10x scope on the rifle. By the rules, that drops to 8x, and thus reduces the penalty to -7, so you're effectively working at a range of 30 yards. If you instead divide the effective range by the power of the scope, you're shooting at something you're looking at like it's 10 yards away, which is -4 to range penalty. Sounds fairer to me (and means you don't have to fiddle to get to the next 2x benchmark with your scope to achieve a higher result).

That's basically just a rounding issue. However, with 4e's halved weapon accuracy stats, you need to be halving the bonus anyway.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Polaris

Taliesin,

IIRC in 3E, GURPS High-Tech had modifers for the things you were talking about (Buck Fever is the one I remember off hand).

-Polaris

IMO those rules sucked. They were arbitary in both their penalties and their application.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by cmdicely

Ranged weapons got deliberately nerfed to more accurately represent combat rather than range performance. Really, the effect is pretty much the same as the various 3E optional rules that corrected the overgenerous range penalty, but with less complexity. Of course, whats missing is explicit compensating modifiers to represent unstressed performance -- for which I'd just, as noted above, double the various aim-related modifiers.

Another thing I'd consider is allowing a few more +1 bonuses for long periods of aim - perhaps one at 5 seconds and another at 10, though you'd need some sort of roll to get the last one, because eye-strain, loss of focus, and over-aiming are common if you take too long - especially if you're not very experienced and are stressed.

[HANS]

>Telescopic vision gives a +2 to vision, vs range penalties, if you aim. It also gives a +1 to aim. Thus +2 range (which is about x2 distance) -> +1 aim bonus.

Correct. A 1.5x scope does NOT give any bonus whatsoever. The steps are 2x =
+1, 4x = +2, 8x = +3, etc -- just like in Third Edition.

Cheers

HANS

[Luther]

Well with a bit of fudging, common sense and missed rules, I think the figures aren't bad...

Originally Posted by Jim Bob

Range 220 yards, -13 (pB550)

220 yards is really close to 200. *I* would use -12 instead

Originally Posted by Jim Bob

Target size 6", -6 (pB550)

Circular target +2 (B550)

Originally Posted by Jim Bob

Weapon Accuracy of Steyr, +5 (pB281)
Scope x1.5, +1 (pB289)
Braced, +1
Aim, +2

All-Out-Attack (Determined) +1
Easy Task +5

Originally Posted by Jim Bob

All this adds up to -19 + 9 = -10.
[...easy task...]So, -10 + 5 = -5.

Nope.

-12-6+2+5+1+1+2+1+5 = -1

Considering that +1 DX is roughly +1.3 SD:

Normal Population
DX 8 - 2.5% -- don't pass military training
DX 9 - 22.5% -- don't pass military training
DX 10 - 50%
DX 11 - 22.5%
DX 12 - 2.5%

Military recruits
DX 10 - 66%
DX 11 - 30%
DX 12 - 3%
DX 13+ - 1%

After 1 point training
66% - Gun (Rifle) - 10 [1]
30% - Gun (Rifle) - 11 [1]
03% - Gun (Rifle) - 12 [1]
01% - Gun (Rifle) - 13 [1]

The weighted skill of the average recruits is:

10*.66 + 11*.30 + 12*.03 + 13*.01 = 10.39

The effective skill of the average recruits is:

10.39 -1 (above penalty) = 9.39

Extrapolating from the 3d6 bell curve an effective skill of 9.39 is about 42% (instead of 50%).
That's not bad at all for game!

[roguebfl]

Luther, Thank you, that exactly what I ment about the shifting of the average 8). Though because I was going of the cuff and didn't bother to check numbers I grossly over estimated the ammount

[lwcamp]

Originally Posted by Rupert

Another thing I'd consider is allowing a few more +1 bonuses for long periods of aim - perhaps one at 5 seconds and another at 10, though you'd need some sort of roll to get the last one, because eye-strain, loss of focus, and over-aiming are common if you take too long - especially if you're not very experienced and are stressed.

One thing I've though of is that if you are aiming, and you don't blow your to hit roll too badly (say failure by 3 or less) you don't have to actually shoot. You see that your crosshairs are not on the target, so you don't pull the trigger. Next round, you get to check to hit again with all the accumulated aiming benefits. This makes it seem like aiming for a long time really helps, because when you finally do shoot, you are more likely to hit. Everyone just ignores the detail that you "missed" the last five seconds you've been aiming.

Luke

[lwcamp]

Originally Posted by Rupert

Personally, I think scopes should be used to divide the effective range by the power of the scope. The way range increments go up, and the way scopes bring it down again, there's an imbalance.

I'm no expert with military rifles, but I've played around with scoped hunting rifles and pellet guns a bit, and have done a lot of work with actual scopes (you know, big honkin' things you point up at the sky to see stars with). My experience is that while the magnification makes the target look closer, the aimpoint is still jittering around from muscle tremmors, pulse, gusts of wind, and so on. Since the target takes up a smaller solid angle and the scope does not correct for jitter, you are still more likely to miss at longer ranges even if the magnification gives you the same perceived solid angle of the target.

Now, if you had a stabilized mount in combination with a scope, you could just divide the range by the magnification for beam weapons. For projectile weapons, you would still have more difficulty hitting at longer ranges because of projecile drop due to gravity, wind blowing the projectile around, the need to lead your target due to finite speed of the projectile, and so on. Incidentally, this is how I justify lasers having such phenominal accuracy. They need high tech adaptive optics and rubber mirrors to focus their beams down to a tiny point at their target at an arbitrary range, correct for atmospheric abberations and thermal blooming, and so on. With all of this, it is trivial to add in anti-jitter algorithms to the optics of the laser to computer correct for minor motions of the laser itself (we already have these today for camcorders and such). This makes it much easier to hold the weapon steady while aiming. Plus, of course, you don't have beam drop, windage corrections, and don't have to lead your target.

Luke