Non Combat Movement

[Sean Waters]

I've been thinking that things in Hero with an absolute effect are difficult to model other than by the mechanical application of rules. For example, being prone gives you 1/2 DCV - potentially a different effect on every character - which is hard to model*.

 

One of those effects in NMC: what you can and can not do is a bit wooly and if you do try to attack then you are 0 OCV.

 

Strikes me we would be better off having an OCV penalty, perhaps -4 for traveling at non-combat speed, -2 for each additional level of NCM. That would mean that the most and least dextrous people are not equivalently rubbish when moving at NCM.

 

Of course we need to stop people using NCM as a matter of course, so a couple of additional rules might be in order:

 

1. when moving NCM, you use velocity based DCV (or, if you don't like VBDCV, take -4 on your DCV because your course is predictable, but you can add +2 per non-combat doubling after the first, so, moving at 8x NCM, you have your normal DCV)

 

2. you have to move in a straight line: you can not change direction part way through a move, ONLY at the start of a phase before moving, and you have to move the full declared distance.

 

3. the maximum contribution to damage: when calculating damage, use maximum damage for combat move + 2d6 per doubling (+1d6 for move by)

 

4. possibly an injunction against any attack other than a move through when moving at full NCM: you can only use other attacks when moving at at least 1 level less than your full NCM (which means for most people with movement having one level of NCM, the only NCM atack possible is a move through).

 

5. megascale movement is treated as 'full NCM' movement, even if you are not using it at full effect/scaled back, so no attacks other than a move through.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

 

*I'd rather see 'prone' as a straight minus to DCV, perhaps -2 or -4.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

The "straight line only" apply only if you're trying to NCM and Attack?

 

Otherwise you've got some serious issues that need fixing, last I checked you can still turn at velocity.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

The "straight line only" apply only if you're trying to NCM and Attack?

 

Otherwise you've got some serious issues that need fixing, last I checked you can still turn at velocity.

 

The straight line only thing would mean that you can only turn once per phase, and every movement mode would have a turn mode at non combat velocity. That's the idea at least.

 

I know Flash searches buildings at hyper velocity but there are other ways to build that then lots of running, aoe clairvoyance, for example.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

No, I mean, objects can turn at high speeds, out of combat.

 

NASCAR, for example. Airplanes. normal Cars. Superman.

 

Movement Powers already have Turn Modes at NCM.

 

It's a problematic restriction to place wholesale on NCM.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

The problem, as I see it, is that you're trying only to Balance the ideas Mechanically. Not model what's being represented.

 

Non Combat Movement is, as the book states, "moving all out at the expense of everything else" - you're nominally concetrating on doing nothing but moving as fast as possible.

 

This doesn't mean you can't turn, in fact, given the idea you're placing the majority of your attention to movement, turning should be entirely possible - Turn Mode represents turning correctly.

 

Now, I can understand if you want to Attack And Move Quickly, then "lining up the target" for a "run on them" could have a reasonble restriction of requiring a Straight Line in the Phase during which you Attack.

[DocMan]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

NCM doesn't enter into our games much. Are you having a particular problem with it?

 

Doc

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

You offer some good solutions Sean (esp. the DCV modifiers), but rather than penalize OCV of NCM, why not just rule NonCombat Move means No Combat so you simply can't attack when moving like that (I might make an exception for a movethrough on a large stationary object). I thought the whole point of NCM was to give characters the ability to reach high speeds to travel across the city or country in a timely fashion before Megascale was introduced (and it still provides a nice transition between Combat movement and Megascale movement), so its potential use in combat seems munchkiny to me.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

Hmm. Excellent thinking material:

 

ghost-angel: I AM balancing the mechanics - but I think you wind up with a more realistic balance than we have at present. Take NASCAR. First off I think they might have sloped corners (I'm not sure) which would have the effect of making a corner less sharp in practice - or even making it a straight-equivalent.

 

Formula One runs on a flat track and you will notice that the drivers - no matter how skilled - have to slow to get round corners, or they spin off. That would, under my suggestion, involve a velocity change and a turn - you need to judge how far it is to the corner so that you turn at the corner.

 

Doc - I don't NEED a problem to start looking for solutions - ask anyone I have had some issues making NCM make sense though, in the specific context and the context of modifiers generally.

 

Ockham's Spoon - I agree BUT (always a BUT ) you can run flat out and still lob a grenade at someone: you don't have to slow to half (or less) speed to do so.

 

We shouldn't be encouraging combat uses of NCM, heavens to betsy no, but at the same time if someone wants to do something deeply dangerous and stupid - and they are skilled or lucky enought o get away with it - I want a rule set robust enough to deal with it.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

But is the velocity change from using 10" at x4 NCM to using 6" at x4 NCM - NCM is a multiplier... you can theoretically use only 1" of Movement at NCM - or 2" Non-Combat (given a base x2 NCM).

 

There's nothing in the Rules that says I have to use all my Inches when travelling NCM - it's just that I'm concentrating solely on Moving, not Moving And Other Stuff.

 

I think, in this case, you have overbalanced in the opposite direction. For no reason at all, and broken versimilitude to boot.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

wait.... for sufficiently sloped tracks an oval becomes a straight line?

 

What about a jet going at MACH? I know for a fact they change direction...

 

How do you determine a "straight line" here? Now you're really complicating the issue....

[Sean Waters]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

wait.... for sufficiently sloped tracks an oval becomes a straight line?

 

What about a jet going at MACH? I know for a fact they change direction...

 

How do you determine a "straight line" here? Now you're really complicating the issue....

 

It's what I do

 

A sloped track is built that way so that you don't have to slow down. A jet is different as it doesn't have a surface to push off but the principle is the same - it banks to turn - but it is often less important up in the air - less to hit.

 

The idea of a single turn per phase is an abstraction - turns can obviously be gentle and protracted - I'm not suggesting a jet moving at MACH 2 can't change direction, I'm suggesting it can only do so every 1000", assuming a SPD 4 pilot and an open throttle.

 

The basic idea is you go fastest in a straight line.

 

Now as to 10" at 4xNCM and 6" at 4xNMC, well, yes you can change velocity but that is when acceleration and deceleration come in - and - if you can only change velocity when you make a turn i.e. at the start of your phase, you have to judge it right.

 

The idea is not to cripple high speed maneouvres, but to require a great deal of skill to pull them off.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

Currently, the Turn Mode is Total Distance Travled/5.

 

10" x4NCM maximum means you can travel 40" in a Phase, you can only turn 60 degrees once every 8" - furthermore you can't turn more than twice in a Phase while travelling at NCM.

 

Personally, I think this rule is already balanced.

 

Pulling a write-up from the book, an F-15 Eagle has 38"x8 if moving at maximum it can onlt Turn 60 deg once every 61", that's not a short distance. I don't see the balance problem?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

The only thing I see currently missing from the NCM rules is a defined method for allowing the pilot of the F-15 to have Combat Skill Levels that work when he's moving at NCM speeds.

 

(I'm pretty sure dogfights take place at speeds faster than 38" per Phase).

[DocMan]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

Wouldn't it be simpler to just use the Move Through velocity based OCV penalty to combat manuvers at NCM? What is that, - v/3?

 

Doc

[ghost-angel]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

Yes.

[Beast]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

you still need to slow down in a banked curve

not as much as in a flat curve but you do need to

try racing slot cars

hold down the throttle and try to take that Monza banked curve at full throttle and you will flip right off the track(you might stay on by riding the guard rail if you are on the outside track)

in nascar you start at the bottom of the curve but you will drift up as you go through the curve

there is still inertia you have to contend with when changing your vector hence the limited turn mode when at NCM already in the rules

 

you want to do damage using NCM

you grab your target and normal combat speeds

then accelerated to NCM velocities then let go of them and turn away from that mountian you where flying at

hopefully 60 degrees will be enough to miss the mountian

 

 

It's what I do

 

A sloped track is built that way so that you don't have to slow down. A jet is different as it doesn't have a surface to push off but the principle is the same - it banks to turn - but it is often less important up in the air - less to hit.

 

The idea of a single turn per phase is an abstraction - turns can obviously be gentle and protracted - I'm not suggesting a jet moving at MACH 2 can't change direction, I'm suggesting it can only do so every 1000", assuming a SPD 4 pilot and an open throttle.

 

The basic idea is you go fastest in a straight line.

 

Now as to 10" at 4xNCM and 6" at 4xNMC, well, yes you can change velocity but that is when acceleration and deceleration come in - and - if you can only change velocity when you make a turn i.e. at the start of your phase, you have to judge it right.

 

The idea is not to cripple high speed maneouvres, but to require a great deal of skill to pull them off.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

I should point out that a fixed penalty, while being easier to calculate, is still different for every character.

 

An sufficiently unhittable martial artist is still unhittable (i.e. you hit on a 3)

 

Somebody at just the right spot in the bell curve has his chance to be hit increased by 25% if a -2DCV penalty is applied. (a 9- increased to 11- goes from 3 hits in 8 to 5 hits in 8 attempts.)

 

A brick you can't miss except on an 18 is also unaffected by a -2 DCV penalty.

 

(unless you use an autofire attack)

[Sean Waters]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

Wouldn't it be simpler to just use the Move Through velocity based OCV penalty to combat manuvers at NCM? What is that, - v/3?

 

Doc

 

I never really did understand that penalty: why should it be that the faster you run at something the easier it is for it to get out of the way? I'd have thought it should be the other way around.

 

Anyway, -v/3 is worse than what we have at present: if a combat aircraft is doing, say 600mph, that is 2 miles a turn. Now I have no idea if combat takes place at that sort of speed, but if it does the pilot (assuming SPD 4) would be at a minus due to velocity of -133 OCV.

 

Call me old fashioned, but that doesn't seem right.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

I should point out that a fixed penalty, while being easier to calculate, is still different for every character.

 

An sufficiently unhittable martial artist is still unhittable (i.e. you hit on a 3)

 

Somebody at just the right spot in the bell curve has his chance to be hit increased by 25% if a -2DCV penalty is applied. (a 9- increased to 11- goes from 3 hits in 8 to 5 hits in 8 attempts.)

 

A brick you can't miss except on an 18 is also unaffected by a -2 DCV penalty.

 

(unless you use an autofire attack)

 

That is true but my ulterior motive is that I want to be able to model everything int he system, including 'world mechanics' as a power if necessary: a fixed penalty is far easier to model than something like 'OCV reduced to 1/2' (or 0).

 

Of course the other problem I see with something like '1/2 DCV' is that it fails to preserve the relative ratings of characters - in a difficult situation I'd expect skill and experience to compensate far more than blind beginers luck, whereas halving CV for both partes actually brings their relative skill levels much closer.

 

That seems unrealistic.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

That is true but my ulterior motive is that I want to be able to model everything int he system, including 'world mechanics' as a power if necessary: a fixed penalty is far easier to model than something like 'OCV reduced to 1/2' (or 0).

 

Of course the other problem I see with something like '1/2 DCV' is that it fails to preserve the relative ratings of characters - in a difficult situation I'd expect skill and experience to compensate far more than blind beginers luck, whereas halving CV for both partes actually brings their relative skill levels much closer.

 

That seems unrealistic.

 

If you feel that skill trumps talent when handling adverse conditions, then maybe the answer is to halve the stat contribution to CV (or skill rolls where applicable) while leaving levels or maneuver bonuses undiminished.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

If you feel that skill trumps talent when handling adverse conditions' date=' then maybe the answer is to halve the stat contribution to CV (or skill rolls where applicable) while leaving levels or maneuver bonuses undiminished.[/quote']

 

Sorry - being unclear - I meant ability - however derived - should beat blind luck - at least most of the time. At present moving non-combat reduces OCV to 0. So look at two characters, both SPD 4, run 6" but one has a DEX of 4 and one has a DEX of 30. When running at MORE than 6" per phase they both have the same chance to hit something. That seems like a rule that is there for game balance and nothing else, so it intrudes mechanically into the game world.

 

I'm suggesting that there are better ways to prevent people using non-combat movement routinely in combat than the ones we use at present, and that's what it is all about really.

[ideasmith]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

For what it's worth, my current ruling is that characters attacking while moving at noncombat are at 0 OCV, and limited to maneuvers with Fmove (such as Move Through and Move By).

[DocMan]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

I never really did understand that penalty: why should it be that the faster you run at something the easier it is for it to get out of the way? I'd have thought it should be the other way around.

 

I always interpreted it as greater velocity means you have to line up your shot from farther away and have less time to make small corrections as you approach your target, so the odds that you lined your shot up wrong and couldn't correct enough are greater. Ever tried to hit an apple on the side of the road with the tire of a speeding car? Much easier to do at slower speed.

 

Anyway, -v/3 is worse than what we have at present: if a combat aircraft is doing, say 600mph, that is 2 miles a turn. Now I have no idea if combat takes place at that sort of speed, but if it does the pilot (assuming SPD 4) would be at a minus due to velocity of -133 OCV.

 

Call me old fashioned, but that doesn't seem right.

 

Seems right on target to me. Fighter pilots rarely do move-throughs. Trying to hit a flying target at that kind of speed is REALLY hard. The only easy target is the ground, and most pilots try to avoid that one. So that leaves Move-Bys. Unguided missile weapons from fighter planes can be wildly inaccurate. Just look at WW2 era bombing and strafing runs. Need a lot of luck and skill to overcome the penalties of attacking at speed.

 

Modern fighters have all kinds of targeting aids built into the plane or the weapons themselves to compensate for pilot error. +x OCV (IIF). Or you could consider them to be PSLs. Either way you're boosting the character's OCV to overcome penalties. The most accurate systems are Homing All the Way types, which in game terms would have a really high SPD, and lower velocity per phase to hit the same target at the same real world velocity.

 

Doc

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Non Combat Movement

 

I freely admit that I have little knowledge of aerial combat in planes, but the key to the OCV penalty question in my mind is *relative* velocity. In a dogfight, the pilot tries to get behind his enemy and tail him so that even though they are both travelling at hundreds of miles an hour, relative to each other the difference isn't nearly so great. Likewise, divebombing was developed because it essentially allowed pilots to "aim" their bombs by diving directly toward the target so that their horizontal velocity relative to the target was minimal even if the vertical velocity was terrific.

 

So the real question is how to you easily track relative velocity in game terms? For simple geometries it is straight forward. But now let's say LaserGirl is trying to target BulletBoy who is travelling at high speed and will pass within a few hexes of her. Is it better to attack while BulletBoy is far away so that it seems to be coming almost straight at her because the angle is so shallow, or is it better to shoot him as he passes because he is so close even though his relative velocity is incredible? BulletBoy isn't changing speed, but as he gets closer to LaserGirl his horizontal velocity changes quite a bit. (Okay, that sounded a bit more lewd than I had intended). Of course if LaserGirl has a No Range Mod attack it becomes a no-brainer.

 

So is there an elegant solution or should this just be handwaved for the sake of easy gameplay?