Rules Suggestions- Shooting

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol
Stray Shots I think has already been mentioned as a contentious rule.

Potentially rework of how prone fighters and cover interact.

Size modifiers (less of a fan of this but it's been mentioned.

Target priority role and terrifying interaction.

Changes to Ammo roles for weapons with multiple profiles and limited ammo.

Clarification if certain sights can work on weapons with multiple profiles (where one or more profiles disallow that sight type), in my opinion having one ammo avalible that rules the sight out shout mean it can't be fitted to that weapon.

Changes to templates and blasts not actually targeting fighters and thus getting around cover and other defences to an extent.(this would be a big change mind so.might be best left)

Better wording of twin guns blazing.

Clarification of how multiple hits from rapid fire are resolved, suggest simultaneously.

Theres probably more.
 

Kiro The Avenger

Gang Hero
Apr 4, 2018
1,224
1,588
128
Bristol, UK
Well;

Obviously the LoS and pre-measuring from the general principles section are highly relevant here.

I think prone fighters in light cover should treat it as full, and prone fighters in full cover should be untargetable (although obviously those shouldn't stack).

As a general rule I don't like how blasts and templates basically ignore a lot of rules.
For blasts it could simply be a -1 to hit if targeting the ground. Alternatively, you could use the strongest cover bonus of any fighter hit by the blast, from the perspective of the shooter. So shooting people out of cover is hard, out of the open is still easy.

Templates should require LoS to at least one target. I know blind firing them through smoke is feasible, but it's never actually blind, you know exactly where the enemy fighter is.

Stray shots, as mentioned previously, should hit on a 1-3 if the 'target' is in the open, 1-2 if they're in light cover, and 1 if they're in full cover or out of LoS.
 

JawRippa

Gang Hero
Mar 31, 2017
1,069
1,380
133
Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Allowing targetting ground with blasts was the biggest mistake by GW. Get rid of it and let blast weapons be affected by target priority. Also bring back requirement to be fully covered by a blast to be hit. Targets only partially under blast templates are hit on 4+.

Allow ground targetting only with thrown grenades (to give them niche role) and clarify that you can only target points on which you can put a token or a small coin without it falling down. That token or coin should at least be partially visible by your fighter.
 

JayTee

Ganger
Jun 14, 2015
142
267
63
Our solution to the Blast problem is that Blast Markers must be placed such that they cover the closest eligible target (So you can fanagle the template to avoid nuking your own dudes), or you must pass the normal Cool test to place them anywhere. So far it works decently though we're still nailing down how to handle CGC masks...

On simultaneous attacks, and this is probably more a Close Combat thing, but I'm here now (and I can't find the Close Combat thread... @Orngog) . I think we need to consider how to properly handle the resolution of hits so that effects like Sever don't result in a CGC Butcher causing 6+ Lasting Injury rolls. That's just god-awful non-fun.

Editted because Shred is not Sever. Duh.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TopsyKretts

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol
I'm personally a fan of a sort of hybrid between your two solutions for blasts

1) you can target the ground but its -1 to hit (like a small target penalty if that were to be introduced.
2) you are subject to target priority rules if there are closer targets (including if you target the floor).
3) I've never been a fan of partial hits, I'm happy with the if your touches by the template you take a hit.

Template weapons I'm more ok with as they stand rules wise as they are generally more expensive and short ranged anyway. I'm ok with Kiro's suggestion of that at least on target of the template has to be visable to the firer.

I'm fine with templates not actually targeting fighters (and circumventing cover and terrifying etc), but I could be open to a target priority test or you must ensure the closest visable target is touched by part of the template.

Be aware any too radical changes to blasts and templates up the stock of CGCs a lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TopsyKretts

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol
On simultaneous attacks, and this is probably more a Close Combat thing, but I'm here now (and I can't find the Close Combat thread... @Orngog) . I think we need to consider how to properly handle the resolution of hits so that effects like Shred don't result in a CGC Butcher causing 6+ Lasting Injury rolls. That's just god-awful non-fun.

Yes sever is just an aweful rule. I'd be tempted to change just cap the amount of times your ever allowed to roll on the lasting injury table. Our last campaign capped it at one but that was probably too much, 2 or three times feels more reasonable.
 

Kiro The Avenger

Gang Hero
Apr 4, 2018
1,224
1,588
128
Bristol, UK
I think a failed cool test on a template should result in them firing it directly at the closest model.
They don't take the time to compute the perfect firing solution, bad man must burn now!
 

JawRippa

Gang Hero
Mar 31, 2017
1,069
1,380
133
Saint-Petersburg, Russia
I think a failed cool test on a template should result in them firing it directly at the closest model.
They don't take the time to compute the perfect firing solution, bad man must burn now!
My group is curently running it like exactly this. What happens when you fail a priority test and there is no target in sight, or closest visible target is clearly out of range? It gets very wonky... After 2 months of playtesting and tweaking blasts I'm firm that no matter what you do, you either end up with a word salad or some gamey/weird loopholes. A lot simplier solution is to disallow targetting ground and be done with it.

Be aware any too radical changes to blasts and templates up the stock of CGCs a lot.
Don't worry about particular gang when rehashing basic rules. CGC needs a complete rewamp anyway - they are not fun to play as or against at the moment.

2) you are subject to target priority rules if there are closer targets (including if you target the floor).
3) I've never been a fan of partial hits, I'm happy with the if your touches by the template you take a hit.
#2 So we are (hopefully) leaving no-premeasuring rule, but we can fiddle with blasts until we get a perfect blast position that gets both the closest fighter and someone else? Nah.
#3 Partial hits should not be a thing, because scattering rules are ridiculously forgiving. That table in goonhammer article is taken without account that scatter will probably hit a nearby piece of terrain. So you can safely rise all of these probabilities by ~10-15%.
 
Last edited:

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol
If templates (which auto hit) are subject to target priority it should be clarified if easier 'to hit' targets are still a priority over physically closer targets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spenetrator

Kiro The Avenger

Gang Hero
Apr 4, 2018
1,224
1,588
128
Bristol, UK
Again I'll post here the editor's suggestions from the rules compilation on Discord, found here;
Document: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ocdfxcvb399ind7/NCR.pdf?dl=0
Discord: https://discord.gg/PfJgVD8
I've put my own comments in [square brackets] after each point.

Any Shoot actions taken after another action (except aiming) suffer a -1 to hit.
[I don't like this, it just makes standing still and shooting even more important. Whereas I like dynamic and fluid games]

Shooting a target that moved 10" or more this round incurs a -1 to hit
[I prefer double-moving granting a -1 to hit]

Small Targets: Targets less than 0.5" in both height and width are at -1 to hit.
[I like this, although it doesn't apply to anything based. So probably just loose traps and such. Would probably be better as a special rule applied where needed, like Giant Rats]

Large Targets: Targets that are 2" or greater in height or width are at +1 to hit.
[Again, I like the idea.]

Fighters completely hidden cannot be hit by template weapons.
[I'm unsure what this actually does? Perhaps it means fighters pinned and in cover can't be hit? Templates already get stopped by walls and such]

Blasts can be fired into Pitch Black, Smoke, and similar LoS restricting effects, but automatically scatter when they do so (unless the fighter has Wargear to ignore these like photogoggles)
[I like it, although I'd prefer to be harsher and just say no shooting whatsoever]

Templates can also be fired into Pitch Black, Smoke, and similar LoS restricting effects, but when they do so any fighters hit by the template avoid the hit on a 4+, to represent them actually being slightly not where the firer predicted.
[I like it, the free dodge is a nice idea. Although, again, I'd prefer to be harsher and just say no shooting something you can't see]
 
Last edited:

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol
#2 So we are (hopefully) leaving no-premeasuring rule, but we can fiddle with blasts until we get a perfect blast position that gets both the closest fighter and someone else? Nah.

I should probably clarify what I mean further.

Targeting the 'floor' is always at a -1 to hit (so you may be giving yourself a harder shot to tag multiple targets).

I think the spot your aiming for should be declared before placing the blast. (Thus your not able to adjust is after you've placed the dice or marker to indicate your target point).

Finally I wonder if regardless of whether the spot your aiming for is closer than the closest target you should have to take a target priority test to fire at the floor.

I think those are all compatible with no pre measuring.
 

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol
Any Shoot actions taken after another action (except aiming) suffer a -1 to hit.
[I don't like this, it just makes standing still and shooting even more important. Whereas I like dynamic and fluid games]

Agree this is a hard pass from me.

Shooting a target that moved 10" or more this round incurs a -1 to hit
[I prefer double-moving granting a -1 to hit]

Has potential, although I think @Jawripper mentioned trialing this and it resulting in too many negative modifiers to hit too often.

Small Targets: Targets less than 0.5" in both height and width are at -1 to hit.
[I like this, although it doesn't apply to anything based. So probably just loose traps and such. Would probably be better as a special rule applied where needed, like Giant Rats]

Large Targets: Targets that are 2" or greater in height or width are at +1 to hit.
[Again, I like the idea.]

I think these should be specific rules tied to specific models. I worry that all brutes for example getting a plus one to hit vs them makes them less appealing than they are now (particularly the close combat based ones).

Would any large or small target modifers be just as applicable to close combat, I'm less sold on that but if its target applications then if can see the use.

Blasts can be fired into Pitch Black, Smoke, and similar LoS restricting effects, but automatically scatter when they do so (unless the fighter has Wargear to ignore these like photogoggles)
[I like it, although I'd prefer to be harsher and just say no shooting whatsoever]

Templates can also be fired into Pitch Black, Smoke, and similar LoS restricting effects, but when they do so any fighters hit by the template avoid the hit on a 4+, to represent them actually being slightly not where the firer predicted.
[I like it, the free dodge is a nice idea. Although, again, I'd prefer to be harsher and just say no shooting something you can't see]

Reasonable ideas
 
  • Like
Reactions: trollmeat

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol
Lots to contribute here but first one would be - I'd suggest returning rapid fire to the old sustained fire rules; determine the number of shots fired, then assign them, starting with original target; then roll to hit for each.

I mean I love this idea. I think is a good one, but it's been a pet idea of mine for a while, but I worried it was more in my nostalgia soaked wishlist, so I didn't want to mention it.

It is a radical change to rapid fire weapons so.as much as I love it, it needs careful thought.
 

Petitioner's City

Gang Hero
Nov 15, 2017
914
1,517
133
Edinburgh, UK
I mean I love this idea. I think is a good one, but it's been a pet idea of mine for a while, but I worried it was more in my nostalgia soaked wishlist, so I didn't want to mention it.

It is a radical change to rapid fire weapons so.as much as I love it, it needs careful thought.

I'm testing it with my group this campaign (alongside target priority with blast and flame templates, using jawrippa's wonderful wp idea); I think in 3 campaigns I've seen such mean consequences of rapid fire being a one hit roll to hit up to three/six times. It's just always felt wrong that one dice decided all those hits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dabbk

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol
I'm testing it with my group this campaign (alongside target priority with blast and flame templates, using jawrippa's wonderful wp idea); I think in 3 campaigns I've seen such mean consequences of rapid fire being a one hit roll to hit up to three/six times. It's just always felt wrong that one dice decided all those hits.

I wonder if we go this way if for example the aim action might not be able to be combined with firing on full auto. But give rapid fire weapons the option for single shots.

I'm in favour of it flavour wise, and I prefer it mechanically but it definitely needs careful consideration, that it doesnt result in some of the already best weapons in the game being buffed.

I think I might actually look into the probability effects of this change. (Could be fun)
 

trollmeat

Hive Guilder
Yak Comp 2nd Place
Nov 5, 2014
3,058
4,947
138
I am not opposed to “spray n pray” proposals, when firing into a group, but would probably suggest this only be for weapons with multiple rapid fire dice.

For flamers I am perfectly happy for the template to be placed so it covers the most targets rather than any other targeting priority stuffs, also feel that partially covered should either be 4+ or Initiative. Actually the placement of templates / pre measuring stuff for any template weapon sounds fine to me,
 
  • Love
Reactions: JawRippa

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol
I think it's been mentioned before, but it feels too easy to shoot an engaged model right now.

Either there has to be more risk of hitting a friendly or a harsher penalty to hit.

I think someone suggested a characteristic test (either Cool or Willpower) to be able to even make the shot (in which could factor into the balance changes.

If shooting into combat is harder it makes disengaing a more appealing action, and if we couple it with allowing moving into engagement range through non charging means it makes combat fighters more able to tie up shooters.

Again lots of levers to potentially pull, I'm sure the right balance is in there somewhere