Forum

I have been following this discussion but in the end I think what we all must do is actually play out a firefight using the new rules and see how it goes.

It will come down to feel - does the mechanic of using hit dice give the feeling of a firefight. In part we are conditioned by TV and Hollywood were you see the headshot and just know that the enemy is now rendered harmless, so you stop firing. In reality only the best operators can keep a bullet count during a firefight, and you only know if an enemy is down for the count when you are standing right beside them.

Plus rules are always an abstraction, you cannot account for every variable and still have a playable game. Also the game must flow so you are not spending an hour figuring out the results of every burst of gunfire.

In some ways this is a bad time of year for the Alpha Rules to drop as - at least in Oz - everyone is busy in the lead up to Christmas and New Year so getting people around a table to play is proving hard, and VTT would take a massive effort to step up for just a playtest.

So I am hoping that as more of us get an opportunity to use the rules in actual gameplay we get a better idea of how the ammo dice system holds up.

I agree. Here in the US getting around the tabletop at all remains a very very bad option... so I'm currently doing that massive effort to get a VTT up.

It just that while there are situations where control of ammo expenditure is far from perfect even for someone with skills and experience, there are also situations where it is close to it, and specific ones where it is absolute.

For the slow aim sniper shot, it makes sense to allow a single shot. In that case the player has paid a penalty (in time) to gain the efficiency in ammo expenditure. I suggest you would still roll an ammo die, though, for mishap and suppression. A single round can still have a suppressing effect.

The big problem I have with the combat rules is mishaps for weapons. These are too aggressive, & my limited playtesting has borne that out.

That's only allowed as an effect of the scope, which is the issue I think some people have. I agree; if you have the training to be a steely-eyed rocket man, you should get to use it. But I also very strongly think that almost no one else should.

Here is my big issue with the ammo dice as currently implemented: the only way to get a positive result from an ammo die also, by definition, expends 6 bullets.

Definitely one of the wonky bits, yeah.

The third one, to me, being that throwing more lead in the air doesn’t increase the probability of scoring the first hit, only that of scoring more hits.

If FL went ahead and fixed all three (first one being single shots), the system would likely be ideal.

The third one, to me, being that throwing more lead in the air doesn’t increase the probability of scoring the first hit, only that of scoring more hits.

Nothing in this mechanic suggests which of the bullets actually hits.

The third one, to me, being that throwing more lead in the air doesn’t increase the probability of scoring the first hit, only that of scoring more hits.

Nothing in this mechanic suggests which of the bullets actually hits.

Um ... well, no ... but ... of the bullets that do hit, the first one must be one that hits by the Base Dice.

Adding Ammo Dice — i.e., pumping out more bullets at the target — can only add more hits to that first one once it’s happened, not affect the probability of hitting the target in the first place.

Um ... well, no ... but ... of the bullets that do hit, the first one must be one that hits by the Base Dice.

Adding Ammo Dice can only add more hits to that first one once it’s happened, not affect the probability of hitting the target in the first place.

The base dice represent you accuracy with your ranged attack, the ammo dice represent extra hits to whatever you aimed for with your base dice because of more bullets being fire at your target(s). If you miss what you where aiming for because the target moved in a certain way or you just lost focus for a second (or some other narrative why you missed) why would the extra bullets fired at the same missed target(s) hit. I think that they still count as suppression fire is good. You missed your target(s) but only just.
You can see it as if you are good with weapons you have better control of the recoil of the weapon and more of the bullet will be at the target. If you would allow the ammo dice to count as a success on its own, you reward high ROF weapon before being good at it.

I wouldn't not like to have a system where you hit even though you missed. There was a really bad automatic fire rule in an old Swedish game that worked like that (Neotech).

There was a really bad automatic fire rule in an old Swedish game that worked like that (Neotech).

Fair point, mate! Just don’t let Ström & Sundelin &Co on to that you’ve said so...

But, yah.

If you would allow the ammo dice to count as a success on its own, you reward high ROF weapon before being good at it.

I understand your point, and I agree that it’s a finicky balancing act.
But I am sure you’ll agree that there is a significant difference in scoring a single hit on a target if I shoot a single slug from a shotgun or 00 buck with 16 pellets? And even more if I shoot birdshot with 30 pellets?
Automatic fire, which by its very nature will spread a bit randomly, sort of accomplishes the same thing, only the bullets come consecutively, not all at once.

So, to a degree, automatic fire is actually meant to compensate for less than stellar marksmanship in the person wielding the weapon, and/or for conditions that make accurate fire difficult.

It’s the same reason why the M61 with i 6,000 RPM cyclic ROF has been so popular in fighter aircraft, as well as in CIWS. In a dogfight with lots of rapid manoeuvring in all directions, or against a dodging and weaving missile — if you can send more projectiles at the target, then you increase the chance of at least some of them striking home.

How to balance this in a game ... I still think the idea I expressed earlier might be made to work with a bit of polishing, but I agree that it’s a bit tricky.

Fair point, mate! Just don’t let Ström & Sundelin &Co on to that you’ve said so...

Just in case someone is watching, I liked the game, even played it for several years (on and off). I just didn't like that rule.