Automatic Fire Decision: 2008

[Blitzen]

is pablo targeting Jongo and the empty seat on purpose?

Yes he is. But keep in mind, he has to hit the empty seat because Jongo is two finger angles away.

And yes, the size on thing was really a before-thought, before I knew what I was going to do with the whole thing. That should be taken out. Missed shots is your choice, too.

[IVhorseman]

Missed shots is your choice, too.

which means? just standard "enemy chooses where shots land depending on how badly they missed"? because if that's true then there's a bit of a problem. what's the "missed by" value? how about instead of 1d6 bullets land  an unknown number of inches away, a single bullet hits a target of the enemy's choice within 1d6 inches? 1d6 is a fairly large range, and i think that it's perfect to provide a good reason to use single shot attacks when you've got your own men (or women) in range.

[Almighty Benny]

I like your system a lot, Blitzen. It's simple and intuitive, and doesn't include too many die rolls.

Just to defend my system a little: I don't see why it matters that it requires skill to flick a pencil. I don't think you actually tried it, because if you did then you would have realized how mind-bogglingly easy it is. But at the same time, why is it even a problem that an army of minifigs is no better than the player controlling them? Saying that Brikwars takes no skill is like saying that chess takes no skill. Otherwise you might as well buy a new videogame and just watch a simulation of the computers playing each other.

On the other hand, I do understand why people wouldn't want to bring a pencil and paper into their Brikwars games, and that argument is one which I can't defend against.

[Sir Lancelot]

Perhaps because I am a dice fanatic, or maybe because it is just cool to see a hero blaze away, but I really actually like Rayhawk's method the best.

The more dice rolling, the more intimidation I guess.

[Tzan]

Saying that Brikwars takes no skill is like saying that chess takes no skill.

I think you are confusing mental skill, strategy with physical skill.
Games require strategy, ball games like baseball require physical skill.

Saying that someone who is uncoordinated should suck at Brikwars is wrong.

---
Back in my teens we played a game on paper with pencils similar to what you mentioned. We would draw small triangles to represent planes, no more than 1/4 inch. Then starting at the nose of the plane flick the pencil, then redraw the plane at the end for a move. Flick the pencil from the nose to fire at other planes, if you touch the other plane its hit.

[Blitzen]

Missed shots is your choice, too.

which means? just standard "enemy chooses where shots land depending on how badly they missed"? because if that's true then there's a bit of a problem. what's the "missed by" value? how about instead of 1d6 bullets land  an unknown number of inches away, a single bullet hits a target of the enemy's choice within 1d6 inches? 1d6 is a fairly large range, and i think that it's perfect to provide a good reason to use single shot attacks when you've got your own men (or women) in range.

Ah, no. I mistyped again. I meant that you [IVHorseman] can decide what to do about missed shots. I don't care what happens, and you didn't like the d6 thing, so you can do something with that.

[Houndis]

I voted for Billingsly's, just because - as many others, too - I can't stand Benny's. It takes more time than I want it to take and it would make me insane to use that paper-pencil thing every time I want to use Automatic Fire.

I went back and read Rayhawk's idea for AF, and I really liked that. And Blitzen's rules are simple enough, too. So now I'd change my vote and go with either Rayhawk or Blitzen.

And I'm not sure if this does mean anything, but we have used AF a bit simpler. No weapons with single and automatic fire modes, just either. Rifles have single fire while miniguns and machineguns have automatic fire. Minigun and mg have much higher UR, but they hit almost everything on their arc, depending on skill modifiers. You throw only one skill roll and compare it to everything on range. Those guns have great damage on close distance, but further the enemy, less damage it makes.

[*CRAZYHORSE*]

I think all those rules are getting way too big and long. if somebody just made something up that doesn't need A extra rule to calculate or use, it would just be way easier if it was more of the 2005 rules and not totally new rules. like what if a gun that had auto fire just could fire at multiple targets and each target would be handled with the 2005 rules for shooting someone.
the only thing somebody should come up with is how much targets a auto fire weapon can shoot and of course what affect auto fire will have on CP.

[Almighty Benny]

I like Billingsly's rule the best now, but for people who don't need a rule and wish that automatic fire could just be a built in weapon stat, I refer you to my original rule back before I started getting inventive:

Fire Type ------------- # of targets-------------- Skill ---------------- Damage
automatic ----------------- >1 **------------------ 1d6-x* -------------- 1d6-2
automatic ------------------- 1 --------------------- 1d6-1 --------------- 1d6+2
single ------------------------ 1 --------------------- 1d6 ------------------ 1d6

* where x is the number of targets
** use the Corna Cone to determine radial range

[IVhorseman]

I like Billingsly's rule the best now

why?

also, i've been meaning to ask mike to add in the option to vote for blitzen's ruleset, and probably take out benny's due to lack of popular demand.

Blitzen's ruleset i like because it's near identical to the billingsly method, but combines the two modes of fire very nicely into one method of fire. my only question is if that's a good thing, or if the two modes of fire are better off recognized as seperate (but equal).

[Almighty Benny]

I like Billingsly's rule the best now

why?

Because I know that I will never use an autofire rule and Billingsly is already ahead in the poll. I'm sure Blitzen's is at least as good but it's not an option.

[Rayhawk]

also, i've been meaning to ask mike to add in the option to vote for blitzen's ruleset, and probably take out benny's due to lack of popular demand.

I would, but I think most everyone has already cast their votes and they wouldn't be able to change them to the new options if they wanted to.  It'd be better to just start a new thread with a new poll.

[Almighty Benny]

probably take out benny's due to lack of popular demand.

Hey! Hey. My rule is beating the hell out of the option to combine other rules.

Also, as I recall you were calling this "our" rule until it became apparent that everyone hated it, and now all of a sudden it's just "Benny's Rule".

[Bonn-o-Tron]

Back in my teens we played a game on paper with pencils similar to what you mentioned. We would draw small triangles to represent planes, no more than 1/4 inch. Then starting at the nose of the plane flick the pencil, then redraw the plane at the end for a move. Flick the pencil from the nose to fire at other planes, if you touch the other plane its hit.

Jumping Jehovah's, that sounds awesome! (I'm serious)

[Tzan]

Heh, Try it.

This was way back before home computers, so this and throwing snowballs at cars were big.