|
Post by WxMAN on Dec 20, 2019 15:19:05 GMT -6
Alright military folks, I've got some questions RE: combat in a modern setting and gun use - especially in regards to real life compared to TTRPG situations. Generally, from what I understand (and I am looking for the broad strokes here): - Pistols are primarily a close to sorta midrange weapon, used as backup.. examples: Walther CCP, Desert Eagle
- SMGs are primarily a close to midrange weapon with superior rate of fire to a pistol... examples: MP5, MAC 10
- Rifles are primarily a short to long range weapon, with good accuracy, stopping power, and rate of fire. Their size and bulk can be a liability in CQC... AK47, M16A2
- Shotguns are primarily a close to short range weapon that packs a punch and doesn't require precise aiming to hit a target... Benelli M3, Browning Auto-5
Is this a good way to categorize firearms? Are there categories I'm missing or are redundant? By and large, it seems as though combat takes place in TTRPG at most mid-range and mostly short to close range. I'm assuming that this is not the norm in real life which I suspect is primarily long range engagements that rarely get to close range except in special circumstances like building clearing. Situation 1:Let us take the common TTRPG situation (such as the one we had in NBA with the 2 "vampires" at the base: midrange engagement of hostiles followed by sweeping buildings of various sizes. Clearly a character cannot pack each type of firearm with them, so everyone kitted themselves out with rifles (one with a scope for sniping). Is there any particular reason we should have been choosing SMGs? Are there times when an SMG is a superior choice? Same for any other category that I've listed. I'm trying to come up with a natural way to give the 4 (unless there are more/less) types of firearms an easily understood pro/con that non-gun people can easily grasp in a TTRPG such that the choice as to which type of weapon they use for a given situation could mean the difference between winning or losing. In a way this could be considered something like class niche protection: for a "balanced" party you want a wizard, fighter, healer, and rouge as this maximizes the strengths of the party and minimizes the weaknesses in a general situation. Situation 2:Now let us look at melee and guns. From what I understand there is something police use as the 21 foot rule: with a gun in a holster, a person about 21ft away can go from a standing start to stabbing range about as quickly as the officer can pull the gun from the holster and put a shot on target. It seems like once in melee range (in real life), while not helpless, the person with the gun is at a distinct disadvantage. The gun can be used as a club or otherwise bludgeoning item, but the person with an actual melee weapon has a far superior weapon for the situation - given equal skill. Is this actually the case? Are there firearm types (eg pistols, smgs, shotguns, rifles) which are better for these situations than others? It seems to me that either TTRPGs do not handle someone with a melee oriented weapon having an advantage over a firearm user once they get into melee range or that this advantage is much smaller than I think it is and TTRPGs (eg GURPS) are modeling it properly. So, oh military and firearm experts... please grant me your knowledge...
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Dec 29, 2019 16:19:37 GMT -6
Generally, from what I understand (and I am looking for the broad strokes here): - Pistols are primarily a close to sorta midrange weapon, used as backup.. examples: Walther CCP, Desert Eagle
- SMGs are primarily a close to midrange weapon with superior rate of fire to a pistol... examples: MP5, MAC 10
- Rifles are primarily a short to long range weapon, with good accuracy, stopping power, and rate of fire. Their size and bulk can be a liability in CQC... AK47, M16A2
- Shotguns are primarily a close to short range weapon that packs a punch and doesn't require precise aiming to hit a target... Benelli M3, Browning Auto-5
Is this a good way to categorize firearms? Are there categories I'm missing or are redundant? A lot here depends on the granularity that you're going for. NBA simply has "Shooting" whereas GURPS would split those up into sub-skills under Guns (Grenade Launcher, Light Anti-Armor Weapon, Light Machine Gun, Musket, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Submachine Gun, Taser) and larger weapons that generally require motorization to move or stabilize into the Artillery skill (wherein it uses indirect fire to arc an explosive round into place) or the Gunner skill (e.g., a proper machine gun or a tank cannon.) I've seen other systems that split them up into "Smallarms" and "Longarms" where your top two fall into the first category and the latter two into the second. D6 Star Wars had "Blaster" (which was basically Shooting) but you could 'specialize' in the type of blaster (e.g., a pistol or a rifle). Not know how you're looking at doing firearms, I can't really answer your question regarding categorization or whether any are missing or redundant. I would say that you are both correct and incorrect at the same time. Real gunfights take place at any number of range, with the mid to close range being the most common simply due to visibility; you need specialize sights or scopes to handle long ranges properly ... but that doesn't seem to stop people from engaging outside of optimum range. The benefit of a SMG is size and weight. They're smaller and easier to maneuver with in close quarters. As a result, they're generally used by police SWATs or military special forces when engaging in close-quarters battle (CQB) such as your previously referenced "building clearing." An added benefit is that since they're using pistol calibers, you can generally use the same ammo as you would in your pistol. The drawback is stopping power: against someone where modern body armor, the SMG likely isn't going to penetrate whereas the larger, heavier assault rifles have larger calibers which will penetrate. Personally, I wonder if the SMG is not a dying breed - a lot of modern assault rifles have been reduced in size to render the SMG no longer as necessary. I suppose if you're worried about over-penetration (e.g., using a big ass 7.62mm round against a bunch of bad guys holding a day care hostage), you'd want to go with the smaller gun... As to the underlying question "when is X a superior choice to Y," that's almost an entirely subjective thing. It's like using a 9mm pistol instead of a .45ACP; those in the former like having more rounds at their disposal, while others insist that the knockdown power of the latter renders round count moot. Ultimately, it's a judgement call, I think outside of "long-range engagement calls for a rifle since none of the others have the range ... but if you don't have a proper scope, then taking that shot is a waste of ammo." Pistols are easiest to conceal, SMGs have pistol-level impact and range but ammo capacity and rate of fire of a rifle, shotguns have pistol-level impact but (depending on ammo loaded) can more easily clear a room, etc. I legit don't know how to answer this apart from it coming down to training and preference. I was exclusively taught how to handle a rifle in the Army, so regardless of the scenario, that'd probably be my default choice with pistol being my back-up since I carry and shoot one. Hardly any background with SMGs or Shotguns, so I'd be worried that I'd be more of a hindrance with either. Which is why you don't go into a potentially hostile situation with your sidearm holstered. And if you are that much of a dummy, you better start side-stepping... I can't properly answer that as I've not been trained in it, but I'd argue that "given equal skill," the guy with the pistol is going to win considering it doesn't exactly take much to get the pistol on target and fire. Heck, if the pistol ends up shoved up against the knife guy, that's generally okay. Doesn't take much to squeeze the trigger. But like I said, I can't properly answer that with any degree of certainty. Pistols, hands-down. You don't need both hands to maneuver it, deflecting it or parrying the weapon is much more difficult than if it were a longarm, and all you need is to orient the weapon properly. Considering most people aren't truly trained properly with melee-oriented weapons in this day age, I think that any such advantage is going to be really small. Someone comes at you with a baseball bat - when they swing it, in all likelihood, that swing is going take them way off center which requires an extra moment or two to recover. That's just my wild ass guess there - I could be wrong - but I honestly don't think there's that big of an advantage ... presuming the shooter is actually trained. And not an idiot (see before comments about going into a hostile situation with the weapon holstered...
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on Dec 30, 2019 22:18:43 GMT -6
A lot here depends on the granularity that you're going for. Currently, I was thinking of using the rough granularity of roughly pistols, shotguns, rifles, and maybe heavy weapons. This would be of course only covering firearms that can be operated without vehicular support. I can't properly answer that as I've not been trained in it, but I'd argue that "given equal skill," the guy with the pistol is going to win considering it doesn't exactly take much to get the pistol on target and fire. Interesting. I thought that being in a melee struggle it would be difficult to get a gun aimed on target as the other person is (presumably) actively attempting to block / cut your firearm hand(s) and is able to quickly maneuver around. To clarify, when I'm talking melee, I'm thinking active engagement - in the scrum, if you will - not like boxers circling each other at four or five feet looking for a weak spot to engage. Thanks for the rest of the input. Given some discussion everyone had on messenger I have been really absorbing all of the information y'all gave me... and tossing the idea around in my head of at dividing weapons more like Platform + Ammo... such as: Pistol: Small, Medium, Large Ammo Rifle: Small, Medium, Large Ammo Shotgun: Slug, Shot Ammo Small ammo gives you more shots, lighter weight, less penetration Large ammo gives you fewer shots, heavier weight, more penetration Medium is a balance Pistols are single handed, lighter weight and give some sort of aim bonus in shorter ranges Rifles are two-handed, heavier weight, and give some sort of aim bonus in longer ranges Shotguns are just awesome so long as you don't need to kill anything past 10ft. This seemed, from what I was understanding on the suggestions, to be a "better" way of modeling what the most important differentiation of firearms for use.... is this a good/bad idea?
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Dec 30, 2019 22:34:11 GMT -6
This seemed, from what I was understanding on the suggestions, to be a "better" way of modeling what the most important differentiation of firearms for use.... is this a good/bad idea? Nevermind all that. It's too easy to get data such as muzzle velocity, penetration, minute-of-angle, etc. Math it out, and let someone else decide what's good for what. (I've got an old RPG book that does this actual thing. Remind me and I'll bring it.) Don't ass-pull it. Science it.
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Dec 30, 2019 23:07:27 GMT -6
I can't properly answer that as I've not been trained in it, but I'd argue that "given equal skill," the guy with the pistol is going to win considering it doesn't exactly take much to get the pistol on target and fire. Interesting. I thought that being in a melee struggle it would be difficult to get a gun aimed on target as the other person is (presumably) actively attempting to block / cut your firearm hand(s) and is able to quickly maneuver around. To clarify, when I'm talking melee, I'm thinking active engagement - in the scrum, if you will - not like boxers circling each other at four or five feet looking for a weak spot to engage. It's not difficult to angle your wrist at your opponent to get the barrel pointed at them. And since a pistol doesn't require two hands, your other hand could be grappling with your foe's weapon arm with the knife. That's just me guessing though.
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on Dec 31, 2019 12:45:51 GMT -6
Nevermind all that. It's too easy to get data such as muzzle velocity, penetration, minute-of-angle, etc. Math it out, and let someone else decide what's good for what. I do agree that this is the way I'd normally approach such endeavors, however, in this case I have to continuously ask myself - to what end. Despite my reputation for loving all that is crunch, I do recognize the total number of people who would be interested in a full on crunch hard sci-fi system is likely on the order of the number of minutes Rigil would like to live on the north pole in winter. As such, the design goals I've kept high in priority is approachability, elegance, and modularity. I've tried to pay attention to what people complain about when playing or running and address those issues - one such example is doing math in game - I've noticed not many people enjoy it, a lot of people struggle to do it quickly, and even though I'm fairly good at math when the hours get late even I ground to a halt in the ability to quickly do basic arithmetic. This is at least part of the reason for using a percentile system as the base: done right, you can avoid a player ever needing to do mental arithmetic to see if the succeed - it becomes is the number rolled on the dice bigger or smaller than the number on my sheet. The quicker you can resolve rolls, the smoother the game plays, in general. To that end I want to maximize players making meaningful choices. I guess the rub comes when one tries to define "meaningful" - to an expert in M1911s, there may be a lot of meaningful choice between the civilian models - to a novice and probably in most firefights, is there really a meaningful difference in a M1911 vs Glock. With that in mind, and with the idea that most people can only handle a small amount of choices (typically 3-6) before succumbing to analysis paralysis. So there is a "sweet spot" I am looking to hit. Try and cover ~90% of the differences between firearms with a handful of choices, hence the idea of platform + ammo: this would get 8 tiered choices (as enumerated above). So first you get to choose between three platforms then the ammunition choice (which is either 3 or 2 choices depending on platform chosen). So while sciencing the shit out of everything is my standard go to, I just can't do that with everything - it would take too much time, there is just too much to model to that level of accuracy for me and Labrat to do. So instead we have to try and learn as much about a given topic quickly, get things modeled to be reasonably accurate to satisfy the neurotic people like me but give people who aren't pains in the ass interesting choices without having to understand much about the finer points as to why the wider target trigger, lowered and flared ejection port, and beveled top slide make the M1911 Gold Cup National Match pistol the one to have versus the regular series 80.
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Jan 2, 2020 17:45:43 GMT -6
Nevermind all that. It's too easy to get data such as muzzle velocity, penetration, minute-of-angle, etc. Math it out, and let someone else decide what's good for what. I do agree that this is the way I'd normally approach such endeavors, however, in this case I have to continuously ask myself - to what end. You misunderdstand me. Players should never see this math/science (unless they go digging for it). But you should have a firm grounding in reality, at least, and at best, be able to use real-world data to fill in the gaps. Doug Cole has been working for years on the Unified Beat-Down Theory, specifically for GURPS—basically just means figuring out the formulae that makes broadsword vs shotgun vs hurtling-asteroid damage actually representative of real-life instead of ass-pulled guesstimates. With RL "impact force" data, you could accurately determine damage numbers at whatever level of granularity is required. To what end?—a sound underlying structure.
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Jan 2, 2020 17:50:56 GMT -6
To that end I want to maximize players making meaningful choices. Too much choice is less meaningful. Case-in-point, my ATE game. I had all kinds of RL guns to choose from, and everyone stares blankly. But much depends on the level of granularity in the system. If a .45 and 9mm both do 1pt of damage, it doesn't matter which you choose. If 9mm and .38 special and .380 ACP perform differently, it might (but in RL, you'd never know the difference if you were shot by one).
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Jan 2, 2020 17:52:58 GMT -6
- Pistols are primarily a close to sorta midrange weapon, used as backup.. examples: Walther CCP, Desert Eagle
- SMGs are primarily a close to midrange weapon with superior rate of fire to a pistol... examples: MP5, MAC 10
- Rifles are primarily a short to long range weapon, with good accuracy, stopping power, and rate of fire. Their size and bulk can be a liability in CQC... AK47, M16A2
- Shotguns are primarily a close to short range weapon that packs a punch and doesn't require precise aiming to hit a target... Benelli M3, Browning Auto-5
How many gun skills are you actually going to have?
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on Jan 2, 2020 18:25:01 GMT -6
That is very cool. My interpretation was that I should look up tables of a boatload of firearm data and use that to determine categories, etc for the weapons. That would be fine, abstractly, if I wouldn't be required to do that for everything a player could come across - that is wayyy too much work for Labrat and I, especially when we could get ~90% of the accuracy with ~1% of the work by talking to subject matter experts.
Agreed. That is why I am aiming for the "sweet spot" where you boil down the weapons to only ones with mechanical differences.
Undetermined. At least two (likely "Pistol" & "Rifle") but possibly more (eg "Pistol", "Rifle", "Shotgun", "Heavy Weapons", etc). This is part of why I'm asking y'all to better understand weapons to see if there are natural break points - then prototype using different number of skills to see how it flows.
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Jan 2, 2020 18:35:25 GMT -6
My interpretation was that I should look up tables of a boatload of firearm data and use that to determine categories, etc for the weapons. No, that's not what I mean at all. What I mean is to determine " x joules of impact equals y points of damage," at which point, any RL weapon whose statistics are known can be properly and accurately gamified, just by plugging it into the formula (that no player ever need see). (And as I mentioned before: I have a book where someone has done this exact thing.) Same for cars, for example. I can easily get top speed, acceleration, Gs of downforce, cornering Gs, all of which could be turned into game stats. If one knows how to properly convert those numbers when needed, one never has to guess.
|
|