Forum

One potential house-rule my group had been considering to allow automatic fire to increase your chances to hit (which is not a feature of the RAW but maybe should be):
If you fail to hit your target using your be dice ( or die of you're only rolling one) you can use any 6's you rolled on your RoF to add a +1 to one of the base die-rolls.
So, for example, you rolled a 3 and a 5 for on your attack roll (usually a miss) and a 3 and a 6 for your RoF dice. You can use the 6 to bump the 5 on your attack roll to a 6, turning it into a hit.

One potential house-rule my group had been considering to allow automatic fire to increase your chances to hit (which is not a feature of the RAW but maybe should be):
If you fail to hit your target using your be dice ( or die of you're only rolling one) you can use any 6's you rolled on your RoF to add a +1 to one of the base die-rolls.
So, for example, you rolled a 3 and a 5 for on your attack roll (usually a miss) and a 3 and a 6 for your RoF dice. You can use the 6 to bump the 5 on your attack roll to a 6, turning it into a hit.

This seems reasonable but I would try it out first because six ammo dice gives a pretty high chance of rolling a 6 (about 67% I think).

With automatic fire you have to ask the question, why do armies use it in the first place? As we all know, WWI saw the first widespread use of machineguns and it was a game changer. Generals before WWI didn't consider the machinegun to be that different to other support weapons, such as artillery, but they were proven wrong by the slaughter machineguns produced on the battlefield in major offensives and tactics had to radically change. By WWII everyone was much more versed in the value of machineguns, how to use them effectively, and how to defend against them.

For basic riflemen I think the original intention of the assault rifle was just to get more men to actually fire, as it had been shown in WWII that men with single-shot, bolt-action weapons often didn't even fire their weapon. This had the desired effect but post Vietnam it became clear that assault rifles were burning through ammo at a disproportionate rate to the increase in effectiveness. This led to the introduction of the 3-round burst mode as a kind of half-way house. This would imply then, that fully automatic fire from riflemen wasn't that desirable in terms of ammo usage and effectiveness, otherwise the 3-round burst mode would not have been invented.

For genuine machineguns their effectiveness is often dependent on how they are used. Ideally they should be used to fire at the flank of a group of enemy soldiers - enfilade fire - and from ground level - grazing fire - to cause maximum hits to the enemy. How you would portray that in the rules is anyone's guess! Whatever people come up with however, it should reflect that machineguns employed correctly are supposed to hit lots of enemy targets along their line of fire rather than single targets multiple times.

The three-round burst grew out of the concepts of Project SALVO, specifically shooting a short controlled burst at a high rate of fire to improve hit chances against a point target.

The original intent of the assault rifle was to replace the submachine gun with an improved capability for the same role, namely the assault phase of battle. Further theory suggests this improved capability might also allow the assault to enter service as the general purpose, negating the need for multiple weapons to be carried in the rifle squad. By the end of WWII, for example, the American rifle squad carried a mix of a couple of Thompsons and/or grease guns, a couple of BARs, an M1919, and the balance of the eleven men with M1 rifles and/or carbines. Compare to the modern (since the latter's adoption) mix of 7 assault rifles and 2 SAWs.

As for actually getting men to fire, a 98K vs. a StG44 in the assault should explain the whys of the difference in rate of employment: the former is simply much more difficult to use on the move or in the assault, where the Heer doctrine wanted to be. Engaging fleeting on targets on the Eastern Front becomes more likely when you have a better tool for doing so.

Guys,

The real question here was about firing in semi automatic firing mode ex. using double tap. Generally shooting in more controlled way as seen by spec ops forces not utilizing full auto spray and pray firing mode

Whit current rules I can`t declare two shoots to the chest of my enemy and single to the head from short distance as I need to use a random d6 shoots by using ammo dice and the effect isn’t certain as I’m firing random number of bullets with random effectiveness.

Such option was available with old T2000 as an alternative between firing one bullet and firring full auto.

To better explain what I meant:
https://youtu.be/DRTqQjvlPs4?t=151

And there is another question that follows. What if there are two targets? How to deal with that?

link to firring drill covering that issue:
https://youtu.be/DRTqQjvlPs4?t=294

Cheers
Peter

The real question here was about firing in semi automatic firing mode ex. using double tap. Generally shooting in more controlled way as seen by spec ops forces not utilizing full auto spray and pray firing mode...

Something as fancy as the Mozambique Drill isn't really possible with this system as turns are 5-10 seconds long and the focus is on general infantry combat rather than Call of Duty Spec Ops or whatever. I've seen it done in other systems like GURPS but even then it required a supplement. The best (and pretty poor) analogy in TK2 4e would be a -2 modifier called shot to the head with an ammo die rolled as well which might cause an additional random hit, most likely to the torso, or a few ammo dice to hopefully trigger hits to adjacent targets.

[EDIT]

I actually tried this out (all rolls were entirely random)...

AGL A, Ranged Combat A (Special Forces guy)

-2 called shot to head plus 3 ammo dice to hit adjacent targets...

Rolling as B, B = 2d10. Result 10, 8 = 3 successes - primary target suffers head shot with +2 damage
Ammo Dice: 6, 5, 3
Chooses to hit an adjacent target with the 6.
Random hit location: 6 = head. Secondary target suffers base damage to the head
Ammo expended: 14

Not exactly the classic Mozambique Drill but still pretty effective!

Yeah, you've got to get out of the literalist mindset and into a slightly bigger picture one. Once you've done that, the system actually produces pretty realistic results a majority of the time. And you have relatively free latitude to interpret those results and describe what happens.

Meanwhile, I'll die on the hill that any system that allows characters total, precise control over their ammo expenditure and so forth is inherently, absolutely unrealistic. Lots of people want to believe otherwise and play out a hero fantasy, and that's fine -- but it's out of place in a "realistic" game about firearms combat.

baldrick has it exactly right so far as the intent of the system goes: higher level of skill already does a great job of permitting more hits with less ammo usage. It's easy to interpret that as effective semi-auto snapshots. With the extra skill you also gain more viable options (like the called shot, like making shots without aiming, etc). It's a system that models crawl-walk-run (as a shooting concept, not literal movement) very well, and that's absolutely to its credit.

Of course I also agree that it's your game, and you can do whatever you want with it... but this particular system is one that's pretty core, so it's not wise to make what are actually major changes to it without really fully understanding what that's going to break.

The real question here was about firing in semi automatic firing mode ex. using double tap. Generally shooting in more controlled way as seen by spec ops forces not utilizing full auto spray and pray firing mode

Exactly. Because the system doesn't simulate "full-auto spray and pray". It simulates shooting until you hit or choose to stop shooting. You don't stop shooting in combat just because you miss. You pull trigger and repeat if necessary. If you want to simulate the one-shot one kill mentality then there needs to be some penalty to the attack to account for intentionally choosing not to use the full capability of the weapon employed. Basically, this:

Meanwhile, I'll die on the hill that any system that allows characters total, precise control over their ammo expenditure and so forth is inherently, absolutely unrealistic. Lots of people want to believe otherwise and play out a hero fantasy, and that's fine -- but it's out of place in a "realistic" game about firearms combat.

(Oh, and if an instructor ever talks about a double tap, RUN!!!!! Controlled pair is the technique to use, not a double tap. It's two shots, two sight pictures; not two shots, one sight picture.)

The real question here was about firing in semi automatic firing mode ex. using double tap. Generally shooting in more controlled way as seen by spec ops forces not utilizing full auto spray and pray firing mode...

Something as fancy as the Mozambique Drill isn't really possible with this system as turns are 5-10 seconds long and the focus is on general infantry combat rather than Call of Duty Spec Ops or whatever. I've seen it done in other systems like GURPS but even then it required a supplement. The best (and pretty poor) analogy in TK2 4e would be a -2 modifier called shot to the head with an ammo die rolled as well which might cause an additional random hit, most likely to the torso, or a few ammo dice to hopefully trigger hits to adjacent targets.

I don’t know if You are familiar with old T2000 ed 2.2? It was much more complex but it contain different firing modes including SA firing mode:

SA (Semiautomatic):This weapon will fire one shot with each squeeze of the trigger, and the weapon reloads itself for the next shot. There are several different types of semiautomatic weapon. Semiautomatic weapons use the force of each firing round to recock the weapon and pull another round into the firing chamber. They may fire up to five shots per fire action, and have the listing "SA" in the ROF column of the weapon data.
As a practical matter, no character may fire at more than three different targets in the same action due to restrictions in changing targets.

The recoil was a factor to be calculated:

Recoil is a measure of how much a weapon kicks when it is fired, which affects accuracy. Recoil affects only mall arms in the game, not heavy weapons. Each small arms weapon has a recoil value for a single shot. If it is capable of automatic fire, it also has a recoil value for firing a burst. Whenever a character fires a small arms weapon, total the amount of recoil the weapon generates that turn by multiplying the recoil of a single
shot or a burst by the number of single shots or bursts fired. Once you know how much recoil the
weapon generates in a turn, compare the total to the firing character's Strength. If the recoil is equal to or less than his or her Strength, fire is resolved normally. If it is greater than his or her Strength, reduce the hit number by the difference.

Pistol Recoil: Pistols may be steadied by using both hands and bracing oneself. This may only be done while stationary, and reduces the printed recoil by 1

So firing something more controllable like MP5 at a close target (up to 20 meters) you could fire 4 times into two different targets potentially hitting them botch in one round. Lets assume you are Spec Ops operator (Skill 16, Str 7) so you will be rolling d20 and to score hit you need to roll under 15 (As recoil will decrease your skill by 1) where 1-5 is critical hit for x2 damage or instant kill for minor NPC. It’s 75% of scoring hit witch each bullet and 25% for each bullet to be critical hit. So more than 90% to hit each target at least once.

With M16 this would be a bit trickier as it had SS Recoil of 3. But if you were truly Elite Spec Ops with Initiative score of 7+ you could act twice in one round. So firing 2 shots at full skill and another 2 shots in your second initiative pass will do the trick easily with even better odds, as you will be firing at your full skill of 16 and range would be up to 55 meters.

In old T2000 round was 5 seconds long.

So I’m wondering if it can be replicated somehow in this new and shiny Brand New T2000 without using those random Ammo Dices – concept that I understand but I’m not very fond of.

I actually tried this out (all rolls were entirely random)...
AGL A, Ranged Combat A (Special Forces guy)
-2 called shot to head plus 3 ammo dice to hit adjacent targets...
Rolling as B, B = 2d10. Result 10, 8 = 3 successes - primary target suffers head shot with +2 damage
Ammo Dice: 6, 5, 3
Chooses to hit an adjacent target with the 6.
Random hit location: 6 = head. Secondary target suffers base damage to the head
Ammo expended: 14
Not exactly the classic Mozambique Drill but still pretty effective!

2d10 chance of success is 75% (less to old T2000 from example above, similar with pushing as it gives 93%) but then it gets more random and problematic from my point of view. Random number of ammunition is used and effect is far from certain. In case of only 2 amo dices (using pistol) you could score second hit with only 31% chance. If pushing it is slightly better, as it gives you 52% hit chance. But at the same time it gives you 52% chance for misfire and some problems with your firearm.

I understand that this system is more fluid and gives more space for narration and story telling. But from my perspective it is unwieldy and it drives like an old Cadillac bad brakes and even worse suspension and terrible cornering abilities. I like more “clean and precise” solutions. I`m fan of GURPS as GM and as a player so I`m very familiar with that system

Cheers
Peter

I feel a lot of deja vu. All of these discussions about the ammo dice have already been had in previous threads. FL already listened to the feedback and introduced the "single shot" mechanic to cover any kind of edge cases, where it would seem odd eg. wanting to take a single shot but end up emptying out your bolt action rifle.

Points to consider

• The ammo dice do not mean "You pull the trigger and empty 6+4+3+5 = 18 rounds at the enemy in full auto.

• The ammo dice mean "During your turn, your character fired a total on 6+4+3+5 = 18 rounds at the enemy target is some or other controlled manner.

• As Omnipus very aptly put it - this mechanic is very integral to the whole system, changing anything here can and will affect other parts.

• As Baldric pointed out - the "controlled firing" is already factored in via the attribute and skill dice. More skilled characters can achieve better results with less ammo dice.

Yes the system is abstract, and that is the point. Once you "get it", it should be clear that it models what it is meant to model very well.

I don’t know if You are familiar with old T2000 ed 2.2? It was much more complex...

I remember looking at an older version once, not sure which (T2013?) and it was so complex I don't think I could get into it. I am not averse to complexity but I think we have to accept that in todays RPG market the trend is away from complexity and more towards simpler systems that get the job done to at least some degree without each turn taking an hour. I think FL have gone down this route and hey, it's their company. Their Alien RPG is also quite abstract and simple like T2K 4e (similar though not identical mechanics) and has won lots of awards and done very well, so you can't really fault them for trying to build on past successes. If a high degree of "crunch" is what you are after, this game is probably going to disappoint you.

[EDIT]

One last suggestion to try to help. Maybe for your game, dispense with the simple initiative card system in T2K and use a chit pull system that puts more chits in the cup for better characters so they get to act more than once. That might achieve what you are after. You'd have to come up with your own initiative system for this but it could be doable with some thought.