Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Martin Steffens <BDI05626@***.RHIJ.NL>
Subject: Even more Cyber Eyes
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 1995 11:33:35 +0100
I have this house rule that alpha and beta cybereyes reduce the
penalty for partial light/ darkness/ etc. Alpha gets a -1 and beta
uses the natural low-light/thermo modifiers. I don't know if this is
logical (it sure looks that way to me :) but I think the penalties
for darkness/smoke are a bit on the steep side (especially when you
are only five meters from your target) and it's silly they don't take
distance into consideration (I use a penalty by distance).

Just my ramblings,



Martin Steffens
GeekCode v2.1
GO/SS d--(++) H- s+:+ !g p? !au a?(26) w+ v++(?) C+(++) P? E? !N>+
K- W+ M- !V -po+ Y+ t+@ !5>++ jx R++>+++ G''' tv+ b+++$ (sort
of) D++ B? e+$ (hah) u-(++) h f+ r n--- y+
Message no. 2
From: Andy Butcher <fiend@*********.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Even more Cyber Eyes
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 1995 13:18:15 +0100
Martin Steffans wrote:

>I have this house rule that alpha and beta cybereyes reduce the
>penalty for partial light/ darkness/ etc. Alpha gets a -1 and beta
>uses the natural low-light/thermo modifiers. I don't know if this is
>logical (it sure looks that way to me :) but I think the penalties
>for darkness/smoke are a bit on the steep side (especially when you
>are only five meters from your target) and it's silly they don't take
>distance into consideration (I use a penalty by distance).

Bear in mind that 'only 5 meters' is actually over 30 feet, which is a long
way if you're using pistols in a firefight. There have been various studies
published in a number of places concerning the statistics of American
Police/FBI/whatever firefights - Challenge magazine printed an interesting
one not too many months ago. What they all boil down to, though, is that 95%
of the situations occur at a lot less than 30 feet, and even in brightly lit
conditions most people miss an awful lot more than they hit.

Andy Butcher | "Whether you think you will succeed
PC Gamer Magazine | or not, you are right."
Fiend@*********.co.uk | Henry Ford
Message no. 3
From: P Ward <P.Ward@**.CF.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Even more Cyber Eyes
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 1995 14:38:27 BST
>Bear in mind that 'only 5 meters' is actually over 30 feet

erm.. 5 metres is 15 feet-ish. (1m = 1 yard-ish, 1y =- 3'3")
for the pedantic slots in the aduience, but yes those sort
of ranges are hard to hit in terms of a pistol fight, particularly
as most SR fights take place in darkened conditions with cover, etc.

Gee, it;s like reading Friday Night Fire fight for the first time
again... I read that article in challenge, MExico border guards
or something wasn't it? A study of all the fights they got into
over about 6 months and all the shots fired. It was interesting
enough, but I'm still not too sure just what point the author was
trying to make.

Phil (Renegade)
Message no. 4
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Even more Cyber Eyes
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 1995 19:38:11 GMT
> I have this house rule that alpha and beta cybereyes reduce the
> penalty for partial light/ darkness/ etc. Alpha gets a -1 and beta
> uses the natural low-light/thermo modifiers. I don't know if this is
> logical (it sure looks that way to me :) but I think the penalties
> for darkness/smoke are a bit on the steep side (especially when you
> are only five meters from your target) and it's silly they don't take
> distance into consideration (I use a penalty by distance).

The other point is that goggles should use "natural" mods - none of those
performance compromises to make the enhancers fit into an eye, these are
a lot bigger and more powerful. If you want them to look like mirrorshades,
naturally, the penalties go back on, but if you accept that they look like
what they are (bulky olive-drab equipment) they should be better than
surgical modifications.

--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 5
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Even more Cyber Eyes
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 1995 19:44:00 GMT
> Bear in mind that 'only 5 meters' is actually over 30 feet, which is a long
> way if you're using pistols in a firefight. There have been various studies
> published in a number of places concerning the statistics of American
> Police/FBI/whatever firefights - Challenge magazine printed an interesting
> one not too many months ago. What they all boil down to, though, is that 95%
> of the situations occur at a lot less than 30 feet, and even in brightly lit
> conditions most people miss an awful lot more than they hit.

Bear in mind most pistol-users are relatively unpracticed: the Army discourages
pistol training for safety reasons, you almost never fire the Browning 9mm.
You train in its safe handling, and *how* to fire it, but very rarely shoot
it. And drilling holes in paper at 25 metres is not representative.

I shoot Practical Pistol, which a US Marine (the legendary, the only, Jeff
Cooper) invented as a training tool: it's still not combat shooting, but it's
better. And one thing it teaches you is how to hit targets in more "real"
situations, fast: I'm no expert but you should see some of the pros.

I am personally enamoured of the after-action reports collected from the New
York Police Department, analysing who hit what: of something like 1,000
shots fired where the cops knew what they hit, 12% hit criminals or suspects.
18% hit innocent bystanders and 5% hit fellow officers! The list of the
items at the bottom was hilarious, too... five into lockers... three at dogs...
one at a beer can... one into own foot...

--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Even more Cyber Eyes, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!