The basic premise is that Semi automatic fire is more controllable than Full automatic fire.

Semi then becomes one hit for each degree and +10 to hit.

Full automatic becomes one hit for each degree and +20 to hit.

Has anyone tried this? I've seen this idea knocking around a few times. I'm concerned it might be too much of a kick for Heavy Bolters (I have two devastators in my group).

Am I missing something? Isn't this the same as the existing rules?

Gah, Should have been the following

Semi then becomes one hit for each degree and +10 to hit.

Full automatic becomes one hit for each two degree s and +20 to hit.

Several folks on the forums have tried it, and I've seen no reports of anyone having broken games as a result. You'll definitely bump down full auto capabilities, but that's not difficult to anticipate or deal with as a GM.

I'm fine with the current rules for hits.

What I find hard to believe is the guy shooting off full-auto rounds at a target 600 meters around and hitting better than he would with a single shot.

Hard to control a gun on rapid fire... almost impossible to hit something at range on rapid fire (unless its mounted to something sturdy)

So I had gave it some thought and the following came to me:

At short or closer ranges the normal rules apply. But for full-auto for every range band beyond short the shooter gets a -20 (or -10?) penalty in addition to all the normal penalties for range. Thus at normal range the shooter is at +0 for rapid fire, -30 for long range, and -50 for extreme. Semi-auto would only get a -10 range for every range band past normal, as its easier to control a shorter burst. -10 for long range and -40 for extreme. Single shots left alone.

As for heavier weapons like the oft used heavy bolter, If the character actually braces it on something (must be braced, no bulging or suspensors) the weapon fires out to maximum range with no penalties.

Of course special attacks, such as supressing fire, would opperate as normal. Since the shooter isn't actually "trying" to hit anything specific.

I think this would add a lot more interesting role-play and combat circumstances to the game, other than everyone just going around rapid-firing everything to death at extreme ranges. But then again thats just me... I can't quite believe a guy can empty a 1/4 of his clip at someone 500 yards away, who appears about the size of the shooters thumb, and hit with every bullet leaving his barrel.

herichimo said:

I'd be a bit heartbroken if I couldn't put 4 rounds down accurately in 6 seconds with a decent firearm!

Siranui said:

If the guy was right in front of you? Sure. If the target was barely visible as it appears no larget than your pinky cause hes standing 500 yards away? Even good shooters firing single shots would have a hard time hitting a target like that. Never mind their gun bucking like a wild bull while trying to keep it lined up on such a miniscule target.

To demonstrate this, here is the typical military training target. Take one of these targets (about 1.5-2ft. tall) and walk 25 meters downrange and set them up. Now imagine how small the 300m targets would be. FYI, the tests these targets are used in are always single-shot.

And for clarity, the penalties I gave as examples above were to include the ones I was offering as well as the normal range penalties. Seems I don't do math very good when I'm tired, some of the numbers are a bit off.

You're maybe underestimating how easy it is to shoot someone! According to Hollywood, anyone who can hit a target 200 yards away is some kind of sniper. In reality it takes some kind of coughing fit or blisteringly bad shooting to miss a man-sided target at 200m. Rifles don't kick like a mule, either!

I'm sure that there are other people here with experience of rifles who can confirm that 500m isn't really a hard shot at all, given a rifle accurate to that range (which most assault rifles these days aren't, or barely scrape).

As a qualified expert military marksman, I can say its not as easy as you claim. At 100 yards if your trigger pull is too hard, you take a breath at the wrong time, or something barely knocks you you will miss. At half a kilometer its even worse. If your gun barrel moves more than a mm while shooting something at 100 yards, you'll miss. Shooting at things beyond 300 yards in combat is usually done by your squads designated marksman, the guy with the best shooting ability and (usually) the specialized rifle designed or calibrated for long range shooting. Sure anyone can shoot a gun, but like everything else out there, to shoot a gun well requires training.

Seriously? You could miss a target from prone at 100m and have an accurate range of 300m? What are they making you shoot with?!

Our infantry need to qualify at 100,200,300 and 400m with service rifles. Or only out to 300m for non-infantry.

And i think we're missing the point that Astartes have super-human strength and co-ordination so are more than capable of tracking a target 500m away and keeping their arm rigid enough to effectively aim a full-auto weapon.

On a side note though i do think that semi-auto should give additional hits per DoS the same as auto fire:
Autofire 1 per DoS because of rapidity of fire and, Semi-auto 1 per DoS because 2 seconds (6 per round = 3 shots) is more than enough time for an experienced shooter to aim and squeeze a round off.

I tried leave the rate of extra hits where they were and swapped the BS bonus, that makes Semi-auto more accurate overall while full-auto racks up more hits on easy shots.

I think the OPs idea is the best way to solve the issue. Semi auto and full auto are comparable for the first two hits this way, close to each other for the first three hits as well. So semi is the way to go, to conserve amunition and land up to three hits, whereas full auto has the potential to cause some real pain, but it is rather easy to use it fully.

You could reverse the modifiers, so -10 for Semi-Auto and -20 for Full Auto, but then roll a number of shots up to the full RoF. This way there's a trade of accuracy for volume of fire.

herichimo said:

in my military times every mechanised infantry team was having LMG and marksman rifle in every squad, i was unlucky guy with SVD. I have rather good experience in shooting targets, golden marksman chevron is kind of great brag topic when i drink beer with guys. From my humble experience: hiting moving target at 500 meters is very, very hard. Hiting fast moving target in camo in less than ideal conditions (weather, fatigue, visibility , ammo quality, PSO calibration state, temperature, position, and so on...) is even harder. Standard infantryman is trained to shoot controlled bursts at such targets, to rise hit probability.

Problem in DW is different, one bullet rarely kills (even bolt round that hit marine head without helmet) so if u want to kill u must shoot from bigger gun or shoot much more bullets.

boruta666 said:

Ah... that partially explains it: AKs aren't really made for hitting anything very far away! We teach that infantry should never fire on the fully automatic setting, except at very close quarters or when equipped with LGM/HMG. The difference in doctorine is displayed by the configuration of the safety catch: Yours goes: Safe>Auto>Single, whereas we go Safe>Single>Auto (and then get repeatedly told never to use 'auto'...)

I completely agree that hitting a fast moving target at those ranges is more luck than judgement and that hitting one moving cross-range is difficult, but we were talking about static targets at the time, and in DW those moving target modifiers are reflected by Dodge checks, which then decrease the chance of hitting a moving target after you've 'already hit'.

I think you were the *lucky* guy with the SVD, because you had a chance of hitting a barn door at 200m! Out of curiousity (as I've never fired one); what would you consider to be it's practical maximum range in the field, and are all those markings on the sight picture of any use, or more trouble than they're worth?!

Siranui said:

I'm pretty sure that's not true, game-design-wise - Ballistic Skill checks already have a lot of stuff factored in. That's why you get +30 to hit an unaware target (and note that "unaware" just means "not actively trying to get out of the way" not "stationary"). Dodge checks are over and above that.

Siranui said:

bit off topic.

lucky? heavier, much more delicate, constant dove tail rail problems with PSO, reserve barel and reserve pso, different ammo quality and type, not to mention that by statistics PK team die first, with u having 2nd place in that glorious ranking...

And about AK accuracy as battle rifle, by my experience it varies to great degree, depends where it was made tbh. Best AK i was able to test were made in poland by "lucznik" (archer), high quality materials, high quality production and results were also of high quality, worst are old chinese export versions.

About training shield, looks solid, every target dead or out of combat. I asume its for range training with medium scope? And about practical max range in the field, by book its 800m, but i would personally set it at 600m (with 7n14 ammo subtype, fresh barrel and good optic calibration it would be 900m, and i would like to remind that svd isn't sniper rifle its "only" marksman rifle)

back to topic

nice idea: Dodge may also reflect that target is moving, not actualy dodge in standard throw away from LoF way.

Chastity said:

Also see the Run action, ranged attacks made at you are -20 (though, for some unknown reason, hitting a running target in melee is easier, giving them a +20 bonus)

Charmander said:

I suspect that's because ranged attacks assume your opponent is moving, but at normal speed, so you get a penalty for shooting something that's moving faster, while in melee, attacks assume that your opponent is actively defending themselves, so shooting somebody who is just running and not trying to evade your blows is much much easier.

If you imagine somebody running full pelt across your field of fire, shooting them is going to be pretty hard, whereas whacking them with a stick *as they run past* is going to be fairly straightforward.

Chastity said:

Fair enough