Re: [GZG] FMAS: Combining Movement with Shooting

Is there a reason to maintain the ratio like that?  It makes sense to
me that in this kind of situation the best one should hope for would
be a suppression.  Especially if it's untrained rabble (qual d6 and
below) throwing lead hoping to keep heads down.

If you're talking about the skilled fighter (ala Seal team doing
tactical movement) I can see letting them half move and shoot at full
effect and providing a shift if they full move.

It's one of those things I gotta try in order to get a feel.

D.

On 7/2/10, Tom B <kaladorn@gmail.com> wrote:
> Re: Split shifts.
>
> I find in the game, because your highest die or dice matter, that
shifting
> down only one of the dice of die types still leaves efficacy of fire
as you
> can still heap up suppressions if your QD is even so so.
>
> FP DOWN shifts with a high QD ---> negligible chances to do actual
wounding,
> still a high suppression chance - you change the balance of
suppression vs.
> wounds.
>
> If you split out the shifts, you get a reduction in overall efficacy,
but
> you don't get as much of a change in the balance of suppression vs.
wounds.
>
> So, in one case, let's say you are rolling D10/D10 vs. a target of 5.
>
> Your odds of suppression are about 75% and your odds of wounding about
25%.
> That's about 3:1 suppression to wounds.
>
> If you DOWNshift 2 on FP:
>
> Your odds of suppression are about 35/60 (call it 60%) but your odds
of a
> wound drop to about 8%, so your ration here is about 7.5:1.
>
> If you split the shifts, you'd have
>
> D8/D8 vs. 5 === Suppression 39/64 = 60%, Wound = 14%	= 4.25:1  (not
as good
> as 3:1, but much better than 7.5:1)
>
> Splitting shifts maintians the proportionality of Suppression to
wounds
> better (I think). That's why I like the notion.
>
> Yes, it does seem like a new idea.
>
> T.
>
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l