Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-12-2016, 02:31 AM   #31
Polydamas
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
Default Re: Handling Long-Range Musketry

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
No. Things like match grade ammunition do not improve weapon ergonomics.
Well, Acc is a handwave to cover disparate things, but the parts which reflect ability to point the weapon where you want it (bonuses for the form of the weapon, the use of a stock or sling, and optics) are always in play and bigger than the bonuses for match-grade ammunition or weapon quality which bring the point of aim and the point of impact closer together (about +1 each on an Acc 4-5 rifle). I can't think of any other things which modify Acc which just affect ballistics. TS p. 41 even suggests giving a weapon with broken sights Acc 0. So I don't think that reworking Acc to be just about accuracy over the sights and ignore precision would produce a drastic change in stat lines.

On the other hand, I see that in Pulp Guns 2 Hans chose to give most of the rifles in .22 LR Acc 3 rather than 4 or 5. Rifle shooters can chime in, but that looks like it might have more to do with the ballistics of the round than ergonomics.
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper

Last edited by Polydamas; 05-12-2016 at 02:36 AM.
Polydamas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 03:37 AM   #32
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Handling Long-Range Musketry

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
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.
I'm not sure about this as some guns will make it easier to correctly aim at a target 100 yards away. I.e if I shoot a sniper rifle with a scope zeroed in for 100 yards it will be less forgiving of my user error than if I try and hit the same target with a derringer. I.e while my skill is obviously a factor so is the gun I'm using, as different guns will mitigate the effects of user error by different amounts.

Which to be fair is what you seem to be saying here (which makes me think I'm misreading what your saying above):

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
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.
This infers that user skill and gun accuracy are both sources of increased likelihood of hitting and potentially limiting factors for successful hitting (something I agree with).

As other have said this seem to be generally what GURPS currently does (Skill being both already, guns giving an Acc bonuses and MoA hard cap on skill)


However that said IME the MoA cap doesn't often come in for most shooters and most shots even an Acc 2 pistol is going to be Max skill 24. Which dos suggest that the user is more often the limiting factor than the gun. Which again I think I agree with (is this what you referring to in the first bit above?)


So I think if you're looking to adjust how GURPS works here a good way it to adjust when these different limiting factors kick in, which can be done in two ways I think:


1). Changing the basic MoA calculation e.g instead of 20+(2xAcc) maybe 17+(3xAcc)
2). Changing what Mods you factor in to that equation other than basic wepoan Acc.

An example of this last one might be say to model the issues of smooth bore shot have hastily loaded Smooth bore muskets have a-2 to Acc for MoA purpose for it max skill would be 20 +2x(2-2) = 20 which means skill would be capped at 20 making long range shots over 100 yards more down to luck then either skill or steps taken to improve accuracy.

Last edited by Tomsdad; 05-13-2016 at 01:19 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 03:48 AM   #33
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Handling Long-Range Musketry

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
No. Things like match grade ammunition do not improve weapon ergonomics.
I think the problem here is thinking that the only thing that increase weapons inherent precision is it's ergonomics when the projectile it fires is part of it as well. (Which is why match grade ammunition is a included mods in the MoA calculation)

Bench tests for different projectiles are designed specifically around this fact
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 03:58 AM   #34
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Handling Long-Range Musketry

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
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.
I thought the justification for very high laser Acc was the firing mechanism wouldn't disturb aim, zero travel time (effectively) and assumption of less physical effects* on the projectile on it way to the target?

Obviously the time to target rule now further favours them!

Now if those assumptions are changed than yeah I agree so should laser Acc listings.

*this instead seems to partly get referenced into adjusting range listings for different lasers in different mediums, which means it's an all or nothing effect of course!
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2016, 04:33 AM   #35
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Handling Long-Range Musketry

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
....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).
We touched on this a in the second half of a recent thread, I'd be interested in your views on that rule
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2016, 12:56 PM   #36
Varyon
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Default Re: Handling Long-Range Musketry

Yo, dawg, I heard you like spin-off threads, so I made a spin-off thread of this spin-off thread so you can read about the tangent of a tangent of that other thread.
(EDIT: As I failed to be clear here, the link is to a thread discussing the idea of redesigning the manner in which GURPS Acc behaves)

Last edited by Varyon; 05-13-2016 at 01:56 PM.
Varyon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2016, 01:06 PM   #37
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: Handling Long-Range Musketry

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
I think the problem here is thinking that the only thing that increase weapons inherent precision is it's ergonomics when the projectile it fires is part of it as well. (Which is why match grade ammunition is a included mods in the MoA calculation)
Misunderstanding my point. The inherent precision of a weapon is determined by features of the weapon and is essentially unrelated to skill. It's also not very relevant to most RPG-level combat, however. In a firefight, your hit probability with a 1 MoA weapon and a 10 MoA weapon will probably not change significantly, though the same is not true for sniping or hunting.
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2016, 08:45 AM   #38
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Handling Long-Range Musketry

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
Misunderstanding my point.
Your point seemed to be that weapon ergonomics is the overwhelming factor here?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
The inherent precision of a weapon is determined by features of the weapon and is essentially unrelated to skill. It's also not very relevant to most RPG-level combat, however. In a firefight, your hit probability with a 1 MoA weapon and a 10 MoA weapon will probably not change significantly, though the same is not true for sniping or hunting.

I think there's much more of a sliding scale between a fire fight and sniping and hunting in terms of how much of factor your gun's accuracy in terms of MoA. (and between hunting and sniping come to that)



However I think what your saying is ergonomics "pointabliity" is a separate thing from MoA (i.e. ballistic performance). And they are both separate from skill.

I can see that to an extent. And I agree most of hit mods in GURPS seem to relate to the latter than the former (examples of the former being a gun being fitted to user, collimater sight, Laser sight etc). Some are both of course longer barrels can improve ballistics and sighting.

Its an intersteing one in terms of applying it in GURPS (I think it's basully a situation where three limiting fctaors can apply/compete in different ways in different situations), maybe we should continue at Varyon's new thread

Last edited by Tomsdad; 05-16-2016 at 01:32 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
high tech, musketry, realism, tactical shooting

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.