Handling Long-Range Musketry

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Anthony

It's not really.

For pretty much any modern weapon, hit probability for a correctly aimed shot at 100 meters will be 100%. In the real world, shots at 100 meters do not hit anywhere near 100% of the time. This tells us that most shots are not in fact correctly aimed -- i.e. the issue is shooter error, not anything about the gun. GURPS skill is mostly about error rates.

A more realistic version of accuracy than what GURPS does would be an aim bonus that is completely determined by the ergonomics of the weapon, and then a maximum skill that is determined by the intrinsic accuracy of the gun.

It is important to note here that ergonomics in this case includes quality and condition of sighting mechanisms.

...If one were looking to make things more complicated than that, specifically addressing the ergonomics that are sighting-independent and the ones that aren't.

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Anthony

A more realistic version of accuracy than what GURPS does would be an aim bonus that is completely determined by the ergonomics of the weapon, and then a maximum skill that is determined by the intrinsic accuracy of the gun.

Isn't that what GURPS 4e does? The existing rules look a lot like that: pocket pistols have a lower Acc than full-sized ones (even though trick shooters like Bob Munden can hit man-sized targets at 200 yards with a revolver with a 2" barrel), anything with a stock has a higher Acc than a comparable weapon without, and the range of Acc scores was chosen to give plausible performance in combat (see the FAQ). The completely optional rules for maximum effective skill (Minute of Angle, Tactical Shooting p. 32) don't say anything more than that Acc is the most appropriate game stat for distinguishing weapons with different inherent accuracy.

The days when, say, lasers had amazing Accuracy scores because they hit what they are pointed at (whether or not it was easy to point them at it and keep them steady) were mostly 3e days.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

Isn't that what GURPS does? The existing rules look a lot like that: pocket pistols have a lower Acc than full-sized ones (even though trick shooters like Bob Munden can hit man-sized targets at 200 yards with a revolver with a 2" barrel), anything with a stock has a higher Acc than a comparable weapon without, and the range of Acc scores was chosen to give plausible performance in combat (see the FAQ). The completely optional rules for maximum effective skill (Minute of Angle, Tactical Shooting p. 32) don't say anything more than that Acc is the most appropriate game stat for distinguishing weapons with different inherent accuracy.

It does it to an extent, yes. However, a lot of high-Acc weapons appear to get their Acc due to inherent precision rather than ergonomics (beam weapons are a big winner here, but some of the "sniper" style weapons aren't ergonomically superior to their lower-Acc cousins, using a rifled rather than smooth bore gives increased Acc, and of course match-grade ammunition does nothing for ergonomics). Personally, I'd love to have a nuts-and-bolts system (so that weapons can be readily modified/designed in these regards) that includes basic handling ergonomics (skill penalties/bonuses; Bulk probably handles this alright as-is), ease-of-aiming ergonomics (using Douglas Cole's Take Aim article, this would give a bonus to your Aim roll, as well as to Sighted Shooting that isn't preceded by Aim), actual quality of Aiming (that is, what bonus you get for successfully Aiming), and an MoA-based skill cap. Call these Bulk, Erg, Acc, and MoA - Bulk penalizes you as normal (but it might be appropriate to have it give lesser penalties as range increases; a quick shot with a pistol at 3 yards is probably easier to manage than one with a heavy sniper rifle), Erg gives a bonus to Sighted Shooting and Aim maneuvers, Acc dictates the bonus you get for successfully Aiming, and MoA is your skill cap.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Varyon

It does it to an extent, yes. However, a lot of high-Acc weapons appear to get their Acc due to inherent precision rather than ergonomics (beam weapons are a big winner here, but some of the "sniper" style weapons aren't ergonomically superior to their lower-Acc cousins, using a rifled rather than smooth bore gives increased Acc, and of course match-grade ammunition does nothing for ergonomics). Personally, I'd love to have a nuts-and-bolts system (so that weapons can be readily modified/designed in these regards) that includes basic handling ergonomics (skill penalties/bonuses; Bulk probably handles this alright as-is), ease-of-aiming ergonomics (using Douglas Cole's Take Aim article, this would give a bonus to your Aim roll, as well as to Sighted Shooting that isn't preceded by Aim), actual quality of Aiming (that is, what bonus you get for successfully Aiming), and an MoA-based skill cap. Call these Bulk, Erg, Acc, and MoA - Bulk penalizes you as normal (but it might be appropriate to have it give lesser penalties as range increases; a quick shot with a pistol at 3 yards is probably easier to manage than one with a heavy sniper rifle), Erg gives a bonus to Sighted Shooting and Aim maneuvers, Acc dictates the bonus you get for successfully Aiming, and MoA is your skill cap.

Er, you realize Bulk only penalizes your shots in close combat or on a Move and Attack?

Weapons that are actually especially awkward to use get an outright penalty to Guns...the example currently coming to mind is the rigs for shooting around corners.

Originally Posted by Polydamas

The days when, say, lasers had amazing Accuracy scores because they hit what they are pointed at (whether or not it was easy to point them at it and keep them steady) were mostly 3e days.

Er, lasers certainly have amazing Accuracy scores in 4e. Are you just pointing out that the amazing scores are better for stocked weapons?

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Er, you realize Bulk only penalizes your shots in close combat or on a Move and Attack?

Sorry, that was written poorly, now that I reread it. What I meant was to extend the effect of Bulk, such that it gives a penalty outside of CC but only within a certain Range (but not as much of one as in CC, which is what I meant when I said a reduced penalty). Something like Bulk in CC or with full Move, +1 Bulk (thus a lesser penalty) at 1 yard, +2 Bulk at 2 yards, and +1 Bulk per Range step beyond this, to a maximum of Bulk 0, although I've no clue if that progression is actually appropriate. It essentially means a Bulk -6 rifle is a -6 in CC, -5 at 1 yard, and -4 from 2 yards up to 10 yards, and simply follows normal Range progression thereafter, while a Bulk -4 rifle would be -4 in CC, -3 at 1 yard, -2 from 2 yards up to 5 yards, and a Bulk -2 pistol is at -2 in CC, -1 at 1 yard, and +0 at 2 yards.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Weapons that are actually especially awkward to use get an outright penalty to Guns...the example currently coming to mind is the rigs for shooting around corners.

As such weapons are fairly rare (for obvious reasons), simply noting that they penalize Guns skill would be appropriate.

[swordtart]

I am glad to see people actually differentiating between precision and accuracy.

Lasers are precise, a laser with a decent sighting system (maybe a laser sight ;) would be accurate.

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Er, lasers certainly have amazing Accuracy scores in 4e. Are you just pointing out that the amazing scores are better for stocked weapons?

I have not seen any GURPS stats for lasers published within the past five years, so can't comment. As best as I can recall, the ones in G4e Ultra-Tech were stated according to the 3e philosophy, but a lot has changed since then, and I can't believe that ones published today would have stat lines in the same philosophy as ones published 20 years ago.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

Isn't that what GURPS 4e does?

No. Things like match grade ammunition do not improve weapon ergonomics.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

I have not seen any GURPS stats for lasers published within the past five years, so can't comment. As best as I can recall, the ones in G4e Ultra-Tech were stated according to the 3e philosophy, but a lot has changed since then, and I can't believe that ones published today would have stat lines in the same philosophy as ones published 20 years ago.

The Pyramid design article and Spaceships beam weapons are in line with Ultratech. I don't think it's realistic to expect GURPS 4th edition to repudiate Ultratech's decisions, for all that some of them are quite unfortunate.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

The Pyramid design article and Spaceships beam weapons are in line with Ultratech. I don't think it's realistic to expect GURPS 4th edition to repudiate Ultratech's decisions, for all that some of them are quite unfortunate.

There are a number of possible design benefits to laser aiming, but at short to moderate ranges they're indistinguishable from the benefits of a laser sight. The big one is that you can ignore time of flight calculations, which is a huge benefit on fast moving objects (the time of flight rules in Tactical Shooting are... not very good).