AHL combat system for CT

[SgtHulka]

Yes, you're right Takei, the penetration is probably already factored into range, and just represented fairly realistically with the huge range bands. But take Striker's auto-shotgun loaded with slugs. It's penetration 3 out to 50 meters. Come on, loaded with slugs, couldn't that thing drop someone wearing Kevlar body armor fairly quickly within ten meters? As it stands, it would still receive a -2 DM to the would roll at point-blank range. I still think *certain* weapons require a point-blank range band.

Otherwise, your initial solution would be a good one, though I'd increase it to 2 squares instead of just one square.

Since the dimensions of all the weapons are given in Books 2, 4 and Snapshot, you could just come up with a matrix that factors length and mass and gives a "close comat" "to hit" modifier for the weapon. Length would effect the modifier negatively, since each gradation of movement cause the barrel to move in a much larger gradation, and mass would effect the modifier negatively since a heavier weapon would be more difficult to manipulate quickly.

This interesting discussion has caused me to really look closely at my FFE 005 tables, from Snapshot to Striker, and I'm beginning to think the Azhanti High Lightning weapon tables are kind of screwy. Maybe this is because many of the scenarios are depicting the Fourth Frontier War or earlier, and so the tech levels are low? Do most people use the AHL tables, or do they prefer the Striker tables? I'm currently leaning toward using the Striker tables, myself. It just seems a little a closer to snapshot.

 

[DaveShayne]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SgtHulka:
This interesting discussion has caused me to really look closely at my FFE 005 tables, from Snapshot to Striker, and I'm beginning to think the Azhanti High Lightning weapon tables are kind of screwy. Maybe this is because many of the scenarios are depicting the Fourth Frontier War or earlier, and so the tech levels are low? Do most people use the AHL tables, or do they prefer the Striker tables? I'm currently leaning toward using the Striker tables, myself. It just seems a little a closer to snapshot.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The AHL weapons, particularly energy weapons do a good deal less damage than their Striker counterparts. I suspect that the main reason for the difference is that at AHL ranges the PGs and FGs will do instant kill damage using the Striker rules. For example with Striker the PGMP-12 has a penetration of 20 at any range <= 250m (166 AHL hexes.) Combat armor at TL 12 has an AV of 10 so 20-10+2 (lowest possible damage roll) = 12. Cross referencing that with the wound table we get 12+ Death.

You could probably use the AHL and Striker stats together and assume that the AHL stats are for low power settings intended to minimize collateral damage in the shipboard environment.


------------------
I am increasingly of the opinion that RPGs are by the nature of their creation subjective phenomenon. due to the interaction between game designers, game masters, and game players all definitions, rules, settings, and adventures are mutable in acordance with the uncertainty principle as expounded by Heisenburg. This is of course merely my point of view.

David Shayne

[This message has been edited by DaveShayne (edited 11 April 2002).]

 

[Takei]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DaveShayne:
You could probably use the AHL and Striker stats together and assume that the AHL stats are for low power settings intended to minimize collateral damage in the shipboard environment.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I just assumed that as Striker came out later, that GDW had tweaked the values.
Personally, I use Striker as it includes various TL's for weapons and armour (Lasers, Combat Armour and Battle Dress).

SgtHulka: On the Range/Pen question you could always give the shotgun a +2 Pen at Point Blank range.

------------------
Paul

 

[Ranger]

Just some thougths about boarding actions. I think if you want a contemperary comparison, I would use the Hostage Resque operations by units like the British SAS. These units generally use 9mm submachineguns and pistols for two reasons: first, they are small and easy to use in confined spaces, and second, they have low penetration, and are less likely to go though a wall and wound hostages, or inflict friendly fire casualties, as most of these teams go in wearing full body armor.
Another arguement against energy weapons (at least lasers) in boarding actions is that it would be easy for the defenders to use anti-laser arisols in a grenade, like modern smoke grenades, in the confined space of a space ship to protect themselves. Anyone who has tried to clear a building when the defenders have used smoke can tell you what a pain it is, then add the potential that it will block weapons fire as well. (Actually, it does when using MILES gear for training)
Final thougth is about closing to close combat. That is where hand grenades come in. The primarry purpose of grenades are to stun the enemy so the attacker can close to contact. Most Hostage Rescue units use "stun" grenades, which are basically the same explosive charge as a fragmentation grenade without the fragmentation casing. The enclosed space of a ship would enhance the effect, just as a building does.

Just my two cents worth,

Rob Whiting

 

[SgtHulka]

Good comparisons, Ranger. However, a few comments:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ranger:
These units generally use 9mm submachineguns and pistols for two reasons: first, they are small and easy to use in confined spaces, and second, they have low penetration, and are less likely to go though a wall and wound hostages, or inflict friendly fire casualties, as most of these teams go in wearing full body armor.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A third possible reason: the high stopping power of pistol vs. rifle rounds. These guys want whatever they hit to go down immediately. They don't want some guy high on PCP with a couple of holes in him to be able to return fire. But yeah, this gets them in trouble in North Hollywood bank robberies when everyone's wearing Kevlar.

I don't have the rules in front of me, but if memory serves interior starship walls and bulkheads are a lot more damage-resistant than wood frame and plaster. Also, nobody's worried about a teflon-jacketed bullet travelling through several apartment buildings and hitting a sleeping baby half a block away. I think in most boarding situations (especially military ones) you can pretty much count on everyone aboard being your foe (at least once you break open the crate marked "humanitarian aid" and find it loaded with tac missiles).

But you're right in that AHL mentions the explosive nature of several ship's systems and the potential for spectacular collatoral damage.