Hi everyone!
Last night I was watching Tropic Thunder (excellent movie, by the way) and the scene were *SPOILER* Osiris is disguised as a farmer and suddenly draws two M16 and starts shooting like a madman made me think of Only War and supressing fire. Again.
That scene is a good example of how a big gun pointed towards you will supress you immediately, no matter were are you shooting at (or what are you shooting).
In Only War, as a GM I've always been concerned about overusing supressing fire: I think it's a little bit overpowered, and can make a couple of gretchins to pin a full squad of guardsman for a bunch of (long) combat rounds.
It's too easy to supress ( automatic success ) and it's very beneficial. Most of the enemies will be pinned almost automatically for at least one round .
To go even further, I think that the combat rules are not reallistic at all, with regard to pinning : is there any psychological difference for the victim to be shot directly (burst) or to be supressed (random burst)? Would you be less scared of a full burst directed towards you?
Even more, wouldn't it be scary to be shot directly? I think that a single shot that hits your shoulder would be scarier than a random burst...
I think that the solution to this is to ignore the "supressing fire action" and to give normal shooting ations a chance to pin the target. Maybe something like:
- full auto: pin test (0)
- semi auto burst: pin test (+10)
- single shot: pin test (+20)
If the target is behind cover, the pinning test isn't necessary.
If the target is behind cover but is hit, the pinning test applies
If the target is not behind cover and is hit, add a -10 difficulty to the pinning test.
This rule gives more "bite" to full auto weapons and makes fighters to use cover more efficiently and try to develop strategies to bring enemies out of cover. I wil be tweaking the difficulties of the pinning tests until I find something balanced.
Edited by whoseyes