Ultra Annoying Rules Change Request

[Onix]

I know the 4th edition beta is already out but I have a request. To me, the most inspired part of the rules is the close combat. It would be great to extend the system used there to ranged weapons. I imagine the reason for not using the close combat system was that if you make the wrong move you'd die quite quickly (could be wrong though). Let me offer a possible solution.

Instead of attack and defense moves only, there could be hybrid moves and check moves.

For example, Strafe usually is spraying ammo down range and would normally include running while doing so. The running is a partial protection and the spray is a partial attack. There's a chance that the strafer might hit something but it's not really likely, and not really based on skill (more just chance). I could work on more hybrid moves if this has any traction.

A check means that you're spending a move while in defense to see what the opponents are doing. If any of them are attacking, even if it's a hybrid attack, the character stays under cover for the move after the check. If no one is attacking, the player picks an attack that will go in the next slot. Since the check will slightly expose the character, only a move like Aim will pick them off when checking.

The idea here is to have a range of moves that counterbalance one another. Many moves are safe against most other moves but if you hit the wrong move at the wrong time, well then bad things happen. It just reduces the chance, having more moves means you get to openly attack at the end but possibly the last defense move of a character with lower skill stays in place until next round.

Perfectly happy to try and work out the kinks if Rob's interested.

Aim - good against moves like check and charge. Weak against strafe and other Aims.
Bluff- A wild series of shots to make checks moves fail and move to defence.
Strafe - Low chance of hitting any target down range. Running while strafing makes Aim moves ineffective.
Cover - jumping behind a sturdy object. Good against strafe and aim.
Charge - Good against the cover move. Aim or strafe hit a charging character
Run - Lower cost move Aim moves are ineffective.

It would be best to not have to refer to a chart on each move if it's all intuitive or moves can be classified in a few simple ways, then most of the time after getting the hang of things most players would know how to use the moves.

[J.K.Mosher]

Don't mind me . . . but I think for ranged combat you have to consdier the range and weapons being used before you come up with tactics.

Strafeing (which is in fact is a cover fire tactic to allow you move from one side of an area to another with almost no forward movement) only works as intended with automatic weapons (light machine guns), or weapons designed to cover semi open areas with fewer shots (like a shotgun).

Aiming is best with weapons designed not for rapid fire, but percision shot placement (like a Sharpes Rifle, or the Berrat 50cal). Aiming with an M60 is okay but the muzzla movement caused by burst/rapid fire knocks it off target.

So when designing Ranged Combat (and by this I'm assuming Firearms or Firearm like weapons) you will need to take the actual physical location of the comabt into consideration, such as types of cover, amount of cover, distances between cover and over all range between combatants.
Tactics then change as well when you look at also the types of weapons involved as each weapon has different rates of fire, effective ranges, and penatrating capabilities.

Example . . . Urban Combat setting / cinder block & mortar building / First floor ofiices with connecting hallways
In this environment strafing and cover would be effective if everyone is using say assualt weapons, and pistols. The guy lugging a sniper rifle wouldn't be effective as he has no range available to give him the time to place his shots.

Now say everyone is moving back and forth, using Strafe, and Blind fire, and hugging the walls and doorways for cover . . . a couple luck hits may happen but it's pretty static, no one is gaining an edge . . . when one of the bad guys unleashes and RPG. The RPG is designed for area of effect and massive penetration . . . even an off aim shot could litterally change the combat area, and possible remove a few of the heros.
Let's flip it someone spots the RPG and decides to do a "Pray & Spray" allowing his buddies to back out of the area while he is keeping the baddies heads down . . . so he opens up with a high rate of fire weapon (let's have some fun and go with "Painless" from the Predator Movie . . . a Pack fed minigun cappable of 2000 rounds per minute) . . . he opens up with that and no-one is going to even attempt to comefrom behind cover just do to the sheer volume of rounds he's putting down range . ..

I'm rambling but I think to make Ranged Combat rules/tactics effective means you'll have to consider variables that are not needed in hand to hand or close combat . . . such as rate of fire, pentration, and type of cover.

Just my 0.02 and in hind sight it may have nothing to do with what you asking or suggesting.

[Onix]

I think that falling back on some of the existing rules of Icar would handle some of the issues you mention. For example the rules that make hitting a target more likely the higher the fire rate is. Some weapons are more accurate according to the modifiers.

I'm sure there are some weapons that wouldn't handle strafing (like my 12 ga single shot) but I'm not sure they exist in the Icar universe. There should be some simple litmus tests that could be put in place to weed out inappropriate weapons.

RPGs (of the rocket propelled variety) would possibly circumvent these rules or you could have indirect fire moves. So yes, they'd have to be delt with but shouldn't be impossible.

[J.K.Mosher]

Indirect fire should also take into account grendas and grenade like weapons (molotov cocktails).

If Icar has rules on rate of fire/accuracy than much of the problems I brough up are probably handled, though running shouldn't preclude defened aaginst aiming; biggest part of aiming is predicting the location of your target in relation to wind shift, elevation, range, etc . . . much like in SFP . . . "the lead the target" skill . . . it was written with the idea that even if a target is moving effective aiming is judging where the bullet and traget will cross . . . so if I'm sniping and notice the next bit of cover is 20 feet infront of your character than I set my character to cover the middle spot so when yoour characetr moves I pull the trigger and you buddies watch you drop like a stone at the halfway point (that is considering all variables go in the sniper's favor and he's on the mark.)

So Running should (IMHO) should be changed to Evasive Movement . . . cover less distance, but make it harder to prodict where you'll be when the trigger is pulled (and it can include the ideals of zig zagging, dive rolls, belly crawling, etc . . . whatever is needed to make the target harder to hit.)

Again this is just me rambling . . . so take it for what it's worth . . . and use what is useable

[Onix]

I'm not super worried about the names of the moves, I'm just giving examples at the moment to give a idea of how.

Yes strafing or running normally doesn't make hitting the target impossible, but the neat thing about the hand to hand rules is that there is a simple delineating of what moves work against what. Of course now that I think of it if both attack it comes down to a roll, so maybe the player's Shift is used to reduce the chance they're hit?

[Rob Lang]

[Onix]

I readily agree that it would take some doing to get the actions and combos right. It's true that more options mean the need for more adaptability but it's the idea that the character has a certain style/technique for handling combat that's intriguing. In many cases a character would make a rough mental plan of how to attack or find cover and then be stuck with that plan even as it starts to go wrong.

True, current turns may be very fast, but you'd be combining the actions of several turns into each combo. So even if a combo took four and a half minutes, but four stages of the combo are resolved then it might actually be faster.

I don't think things like power armor would alter how the combos would be used. It would give protection but that doesn't matter to the combos. The only condition that would seem problematic would be the guys riding shotgun. Although you could simply give a minus in the chance to hit them since they're moving fast. The fact that they're traveling round and round the building is something I can't off hand offer a simple solution to. Given time and some mulling, I might though.

In the end, the combos aren't about the condition that the target or the attacker is in, what their armor is or how much damage is done, they're about each character's planned actions. Even the hand to hand rules handle splitting your attacks between opponents so that's not a barrier.

It would be a big change, but it would make for interesting choices and difficult to plan for situations. That sounds like interesting stories to me.

I guess I'd encourage you to maybe consider moving this element into other types of combat. I think it could be made to work.

[Rob Lang]

I still think it's really interesting to have a combo that stretches over a number of game turns (up to a minute perhaps?) but that might be quite annoying for the players. They would not be able to respond to the actions of the bad guys in the way they would in real life as they would be locked into a combo. It's fine in close combat because a combo lasts just 3 seconds and there is a lot to be said for muscle memory in fast paced combat.

Powered Armour (or annoying piece of equipment X) does change things a lot because it removes the intuitive counterbalance of A-counters-B. Cover may be great against Aim but not if the person aiming has terrain following missiles - those little gits will just go round your cover and go up your bum. Or the shooter has a pulse laser, which will happily go straight through the wall you're behind. A-counters-B pairings will have many caveats around them depending on technology.

This problem is not new to me. Technology has been the single biggest bane in my life in Icar. That is because a single, simple technological idea can make difficulty (and wonderful set pieces) break down. Which is irritating if your boss fight ends before it begins because someone using a mix of Hacking and Grenades to great affect. I applaud their ingenuity and quietly curse at their circumvention.

That aside, let's keep looking at the idea of using stance and counter in other combat spheres.

I'd imagine picking combos would be done as a team; players mustn't choose in a vacuum because that would put them at great disadvantage to the NPCs - who would be co-ordinated.

Where A-counter-B combos might also work quite well is in 20th Century air combat (particularly WW1 and WW2) where you have to commit to a certain stance and you can't get yourself out of it too quickly.

This also might work for submarine warfare, where you're committing yourself to a noise/depth profile that limits the weapons you're using but protects you.

Imagine there is a science fiction base to this too, where your velocity and heat dissipation are a factor and must be committed to.

[Evil Scientist]