So, I've been trying to puzzle out why anyone would want to fire an automatic weapon in its full automatic mode. It lets you attack multiple enemies at once, I get that. But to do so, you have to expend all of its ammunition. And considering that most automatic weapons contain clips that have 40 shots in them or more, it just seems like an egregious waste of ammunition.
I dunno, am I missing something here?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like it may be a good way to get rid of several smaller, weaker foes on your way to the big bad. Reloading in between, of course.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It definitely isn't something to use on just a couple of enemies. It might be worth having the option just in case you run into a horde of space goblins.
So, I've been trying to puzzle out why anyone would want to fire an automatic weapon in its full automatic mode. It lets you attack multiple enemies at once, I get that. But to do so, you have to expend all of its ammunition. And considering that most automatic weapons contain clips that have 40 shots in them or more, it just seems like an egregious waste of ammunition.
I dunno, am I missing something here?
Nope. Autofire is pretty terrible. They should have 'short burst' and 'long burst' modes, for starters. They're essentially shorter range versions of other guns, and you just ignore the autofire ability entirely.
If you're swarmed by a bunch of lower CR stuff, there are better options.
There are also specific examples where they are really just garbage- the heavy lasers, for example, are using the damage rating of weapons 3-4 ilevels behind. Others you're paying extra for little reason. Take the light reaction vs squad machine gun. Same damage, lower range. Same damage. I'm not convinced a 20 shot magazine (because each shot is 2) is worth 4x the price.
In 2 rounds you could have 4 shots all at -4. Or you could full auto 3 shots, reload and fire again all without penalty getting in the same 4 shots without the -4 penalty and more of that damage is front loaded into round 1.
Sadly, this is incorrect.
p180, Automatic Property, last sentence:
"Attacks in automatic mode take the same penalties as other full attacks."
So you get the -4 (or -3 depending on class abilities) as well.
Plus you're at half range on already short range guns, and cone effects. You're just not going to get that many enemies.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, Spray 'n Pray stinks. Just like in real life.
I agree about short bursts, tho. Maybe treat it as an extra attack against the same target on a full attack and all attacks are an additional -2 or -4.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To mince a quote by Ordell Robbie, When you absolutely, positively got to shoot every ******** in the room, you use autofire. Against hordes of low powered enemies, it is useful to speed things up, but for the most part, as noted, not that good against real threats. Look at it this way, if they didn't have autofire in the game, people would complain. Now, all we have to deal with is the occasional person who says it should be better than it is -- like katanas. :)
If I understand it correctly you roll damage once but you effectively hit each target 2 times.
So if I have a clip with 10 rounds left, if the weapon uses 1 charge I can effectively target 5 people within auto range. But I only deal dame once to each target. So I shoot each person 2 but deal damage once. This seems so lacking. Might as well just focus fire on one baddie at a time an take him out faster.
The heavy weapon machine guns/x guns do good damage at least, comparable to the ones without the automatic fire option.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
SUPPRESSING FIRE!!!
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
{runs in serpentine pattern}
If I understand it correctly you roll damage once but you effectively hit each target 2 times.
You do not. You just use the ammo inefficiently. And then for some reason shoot the rest off. The former wouldn't be too much of a problem, but the latter is absurd.
As is the idea that you can't focus all the shots on one target (still inefficiently, but the idea that you can't just pour shots at someone is strange and gamey).
So if I have a clip with 10 rounds left, if the weapon uses 1 charge I can effectively target 5 people within auto range. But I only deal dame once to each target. So I shoot each person 2 but deal damage once. This seems so lacking.
It is lacking, but you aren't shooting them twice. You're spending twice as much ammo (which again is reasonable, if not generous).
And keep in mind that most of the automatic weapons also already have higher usage rates. The autobeam rife depletes 4 times faster than a normal laser anyway. At 8 (4x2) usage per autofire target, you only can shoot 5 people.
If it were 2-3 shots per target plus 2-3 shots per empty space you have to 'walk' the burst across and then you stop at the last target, I could see it. But emptying 100 shot magazines is just ridiculous.
Might as well just focus fire on one baddie at a time an take him out faster.
Yes. As always, area conditions are good, but damage should almost always be focus fire. It's just the way d20 with hit points systems work. Wounding means nothing, dropping a target to zero or inflicting a save or lose condition are the only things that matter.
The heavy weapon machine guns/x guns do good damage at least, comparable to the ones without the automatic fire option.
Sometimes. The level 1 cannon and level 2 machine gun have a 1560 credit difference though (and 30' range downgrade). You're paying a lot for a bigger magazine.
The next iteration, you've got a 2500 credit difference and 30' range problem. On the rifle side, autotarget rifles are a pretty hefty downgrade and 3x the cost.
It's even worse for lasers, as you are taking a damage downgrade, or buying a much more expensive piece with an ammo and range problem.
If I understand it correctly you roll damage once but you effectively hit each target 2 times.
You do not. You just use the ammo inefficiently. And then for some reason shoot the rest off. The former wouldn't be too much of a problem, but the latter is absurd.
As is the idea that you can't focus all the shots on one target (still inefficiently, but the idea that you can't just pour shots at someone is strange and gamey).
So if I have a clip with 10 rounds left, if the weapon uses 1 charge I can effectively target 5 people within auto range. But I only deal dame once to each target. So I shoot each person 2 but deal damage once. This seems so lacking.It is lacking, but you aren't shooting them twice. You're spending twice as much ammo (which again is reasonable, if not generous).
And keep in mind that most of the automatic weapons also already have higher usage rates. The autobeam rife depletes 4 times faster than a normal laser anyway. At 8 (4x2) usage per autofire target, you only can shoot 5 people.
If it were 2-3 shots per target plus 2-3 shots per empty space you have to 'walk' the burst across and then you stop at the last target, I could see it. But emptying 100 shot magazines is just ridiculous.
Might as well just focus fire on one baddie at a time an take him out faster.Yes. As always, area conditions are good, but damage should almost always be focus fire. It's just the way d20 with hit points systems work. Wounding means nothing, dropping a target to zero or inflicting a save or lose condition are the only things that matter.
The heavy weapon machine guns/x guns do good damage at least, comparable to the ones without the automatic fire option.Sometimes. The level 1 cannon and level 2 machine gun have a 1560 credit difference though (and 30' range downgrade). You're paying a lot for a bigger magazine.
The next iteration, you've got a 2500 credit difference and 30' range...
When I stated if I understand it correctly, I was referring to the actual ability and how it works. Not the actual concept. And for the concept I understand it. If you are hitting them with 2 bullets and the weapon only uses 1 charge per shot you are INDEED effectively shooting them twice but only applying damage once:
"Each attack against an individual creature in the cone uses up the same amount of ammunition or charges as taking two shots, and once you no longer have enough ammunition to attack another, you stop making attacks."
Inefficient yes. Then not only that you still take all the penalties for making a full round attack. I literally see no benefit to this. If I am effectively hitting him with 2 shots I should be able to do the damage twice. Also the whole you can't crit is a load of croc. When you spray and pray like so, there is an EVEN higher chance you may hit some one in a vital area. With lead flying like that WHO knows where it will land.
Also using automatic mode with projectile is a complete waste. The fact that you have to buy ammo. At least with a battery you can recharge it. Just buy several and then you can recharge them. Buy a back up generator, and you almost have unlimited ammo. I find that projectiles in SF are useless an not worth it compared to the not projectiles.
There should have been a single shot a 3-round burst and full auto. The three round should do significantly more damage but with some negatives to hit. The full auto could have been HANDLED better.
Most options you're given just aren't that good.
On the one hand, it's to encourage you to use different options in different situations; things which are generally terrible, but in the very specific right circumstance manage to rise to mediocre.
On the other hand... that means all you've got, at best, are mediocre options. That's pretty unsatisfying.
Automatic fire is pretty darn useful in time when you are out numbered. Even with opponents stronger then bottom of the food chain. You can have up to a whole party all use it. some tactical group would also help to maximise its effect.
Think of 3 or more people automatic firing into a large group. your then are layering multiple dice of damage.
Automatic fire is pretty darn useful in time when you are out numbered. Even with opponents stronger then bottom of the food chain. You can have up to a whole party all use it. some tactical group would also help to maximise its effect.
Think of 3 or more people automatic firing into a large group. your then are layering multiple dice of damage.
That is not even remotely true. The damage output you could put out for just taking the normal attacks greatly out weights this.
So there are 4 PC's and 10 baddies. If I choose to take a full round and hit on one quicker than the rest of the party follows suit this would be more beneficial than auto fire. If we all auto fire we may hit the same enemy for 4 times. And then next turn we have to reload. An just wasted ammo. I would rather still focus fire with out auto. I will have to disagree with you completely. Again playing this out is different than on reading or talking about. In theory this is crap an not useful.
That is not even remotely true.
I was thinking more like if there are 30 or more baddies.
Will your 4 shots per round single fire, keep up with the their potential 8.75+ shots per round per player?
Are all the enemies stacked up in convenient cones that the party can overlap autofire from different squares? Probably not.
Either way, 30+ enemies are either so low in CR that they can't really harm the party, or relevant CR and a straight up fight is a near-auto TPK. The system just doesn't handle that kind of fight well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That is not even remotely true.I was thinking more like if there are 30 or more baddies.
Will your 4 shots per round single fire, keep up with the their potential 8.75+ shots per round per player?
30+ baddies are an individual CR+10 encounter. That means that Level 11 PCs would face of against 30 Level 1 hostiles. At that stage, grenades are probably the better options by a pretty big margin.
Yeah, Spray 'n Pray stinks. Just like in real life.
I agree about short bursts, tho. Maybe treat it as an extra attack against the same target on a full attack and all attacks are an additional -2 or -4.
Indeed. Fully automatic weapons are mostly used for suppressing fire. And go through ammunition real quick.
In general, yes they are mechanically worse than other options. I'm okay with that though, but if they weren't then everyone would use them instead of single shot guns.
It's about having options. Automatic weapons are nice if you need to take out a lot of weak enemies at once, without invalidating the existence of other weapons.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Play a kasatha with four of them. Combat may well be over before you expend the last one. :-D
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
So this is an interesting question: what’s the break-even point with automatic weapons? I.e., how many targets do there need to be in your cone of fire in order for automatic fire with an automatic weapon to do more expected damage than full attacking with an equal tier non-automatic weapon?
EXAMPLE 1. First let’s try a low-level example, a level 2 soldier with a choice between two tier-2 longarms: (a) the Tactical Acid Dart Rifle vs (b) the Autotarget Rifle.
To make the comparison fair, we’re going to want to make sure we take criticals into account (since automatic firing can’t crit) and time spend reloading (since automatic firing expends all ammo).
Both weapons target KAC, and I’ll assume our PC has a 50% chance to hit KAC with a full attack. (And a 70% chance to hit with a standard attack.)
(a) Tactical Acid Dart Rifle:
--The expected damage of a full attack is: ((4.5)(.45) + (9)(.05)) x 2 = 4.95
--The expected damage of a std attack (on the round you need to reload) is: ((4.5)(.65) + (9)(.05)) = 3.375
--It has 10 rounds, and so needs to reload after 5 rounds of fire. So the expected damage over 6 rounds is 4.95*5 + 3.375 = 28.125, for an average of 4.688 per round, including crit chances and reloading time.
(b) Autotarget Rifle (can target up to 5 targets in a 30’ cone):
--The expected damage of automatic fire on N targets is: ((3.5)(.5)) x N = 1.75*N
--The expected damage of a std attack (on the round you need to reload) is: ((3.5)(.65) + (7)(.05)) = 2.625
--It needs to reload every other round (if using automatic fire as much as possible). So the expected damage over 2 rounds is 1.75*N + 2.625, for an average of 0.875*N + 1.313 per round, including reloading time.
So if N=4+ -- i.e., there are 4 or more targets in a 30’ cone -- then the expected damage of using automatic fire with the Autotarget Rifle is greater than that of full attacks with the Tactical Acid Dart Rifle.
(The max expected damage for this weapon, for N=5, is 5.688/round.)
EXAMPLE 2. Next let’s try a high-level example, a level 20 soldier with a choice between two tier-20 heavy weapons: (a) the Paragon Reaction Cannon vs (b) the Paragon X-Gen Gun.
Again both weapons target KAC, and I’ll assume our PC has a 50% chance to hit KAC with a full attack. (And a 70% chance to hit with a standard attack, and a 40% chance to hit if the soldier fires 3 times with Onslaught, which they will.) I’ll take Weapon Specialization into account, but no other damage boosters (since I can’t think of any off the top of my head; but more static damage bumps would make the automatic firing option more attractive).
(a) Paragon Reaction Cannon:
--The expected damage of a onslaught full attack is: ((86)(.35) + (172)(.05)) x 3 = 116.1
--The expected damage of a std attack (on the round you need to reload) is: ((86)(.65) + (172)(.05)) = 64.5
--It has 6 rounds, and so needs to reload after 2 rounds of fire. So the expected damage over 3 rounds is 116.1*2 + 64.5 = 296.7, for an average of 98.9 per round, including crit chances and reloading time.
(b) Paragon X-Gen Gun (can target up to 25 targets in a 60’ cone):
--The expected damage of automatic fire on N targets is: ((78.5)(.5)) x N = 39.25*N
--The expected damage of a std attack (on the round you need to reload) is: ((78.5)(.65) + (157)(.05)) = 58.875
--It needs to reload every other round (if using automatic fire as much as possible). So the expected damage over 2 rounds is 39.25*N + 58.875, for an average of 19.625*N + 29.438 per round, including reloading time.
So if N=4+ -- i.e., there are 4 or more targets in a 60’ cone -- then the expected damage of using automatic fire with the Paragon X-Gen Gun is greater than that of full attacks with the Paragon Reaction Cannon.
(The max expected damage for this weapon, for N=25, is 520.06/round.)
TLDR: As a rule of thumb, it looks like it’s worth using automatic fire with an automatic weapon, instead of a full attack with an equivalent non-automatic weapons, when there are 4+ targets in the automatic fire cone. (And if there are enough targets, then automatic fire with an automatic weapon can pump out a lot more expected damage than an equal-tier non-automatic weapon.)
TLDR: As a rule of thumb, it looks like it’s worth using automatic fire with an automatic weapon, instead of a full attack with an equivalent non-automatic weapons, when there are 4+ targets in the automatic fire cone. (And if there are enough targets, then automatic fire with an automatic weapon can pump out a lot more expected damage than an equal-tier non-automatic weapon.)
Good breakdown.
As mentioned above, you don't have to use automatic fire. You can make a normal full attack against less than 4 targets (i.e., a "short burst") and probably do decent damage (not the highest possible out of the available weapons appropriate for your level, but not that far off either).
Three other things about the X-gen guns:
1) They are among the longest ranged weapons (120 ft range increment)
2) They have a lot of rounds (capacity 80 or 100) and are actually fairly efficient for autofire weapons (usage 2; which is better than several single shot weapons)
3) Adding fusions that grant critical effects (bane, bleeding, burst*, deafening, dispelling, etc.) are a straight up increase when not using autofire.
*- in conjunction with corrosive, flaming, frost, or shock fusions
Doesn't weapon specialization factor in as well?
Doesn't weapon specialization factor in as well?Porridge counted that already.
Kewl, thanks!
Also don't forget about the significant enemy rule. Do 30 lvl 1 baddies truly pose a threat to 4-6 lvl 4-7 PCs. More an likely not. So this would be a complete an utter waste of time.
The problem I have with all of that math is that is assuming that you hit and you don't have to move to not provoke or anything. That in my eyes is a perfect for the good guys scenario. How often with this PERFECT scenario truly play out? I still believe the focus fire option is by FAR THE BEST option. If you focus all damage on one target and take him out then that is less return fire coming your way. Now if automatic actually did damage 2x because you are effectively hitting twice then it would totally be worth it.
Well, it's essentially a direct fire weapon with an area of effect setting. It's a versatile option. Definitely subpar compared to focused weapons, but it means you carry one weapon instead of two.
Addinging in the +6 damage Deadmanwalking mentioned
(a) Paragon Reaction Cannon:
--The expected damage of a onslaught full attack is: ((92)(.35) + (184)(.05)) x 3 = 124.2
--The expected damage of a std attack (on the round you need to reload) is: ((92)(.65) + (184)(.05)) = 69
--It has 6 rounds, and so needs to reload after 2 rounds of fire. So the expected damage over 3 rounds is 116.1*2 + 64.5 = 317.4, for an average of 105.8 per round, including crit chances and reloading time.
(b) Paragon X-Gen Gun (can target up to 25 targets in a 60’ cone):
--The expected damage of automatic fire on N targets is: ((84.5)(.5)) x N = 42.25*N
--The expected damage of a std attack (on the round you need to reload) is: ((84.5)(.65) + (169)(.05)) = 63.375
--It needs to reload every other round (if using automatic fire as much as possible). So the expected damage over 2 rounds is 42.25*N + 63.375, for an average of 21.125*N + 31.6875 per round, including reloading time.
Still want 4+ targets for auto-fire.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
i would really have liked to see automatic do more of "reduce the penalties for multiple attacks by 1 at the cost of double ammo cost or reduce penalties by 2 against a single target for triple cost" but that ship has sailed and we are stuck with it as is. There might be something there though if you get multiple PCs to overlap their fields of fire and mag dump into the same targets? Most enemies seem to have enough HP to soak up 5 or 6 shots pretty easily for the early game so you would need everyone to buy in or stack up things that add bonus damage dice into your attack to make it work.
My favorite Borderlands quote "You don't need to be a better shot, you just need to fire more bullets"
|
IMHO, the big difference is is IRL is that people do not want to get shot vs is some RPG's getting shot is almost the same as getting cut with a knife.
In real life, people tend not to want to get stabbed with a knife, either. A gunshot is usually a bit more severe, yeah, but both are pretty bad, and potentially lethal.
I personally try to avoid both.
well I have been stabbed before. So I'm not at 100% success with that one.
I don't remember ever being shot at least. Not with a gun anyways.
Ha! mine involved drunk people to.
English lesson people. With few exceptions, most WW2 era, automatic and semi-automatic weapons use magazines or belts, not clips. If the spring is in the ammo container it's a magazine.
The other interesting question to consider with automatic weapons is how they compare to blast weapons. How does the expected damage using automatic fire with an automatic weapon compare to that of using a blast weapon?
EXAMPLE 1. For the first example, we again consider a level 2 soldier with a choice between two tier-2 longarms: (a) the Tactical Arc Emitter vs (b) the Autotarget Rifle. (The other choice for a comparison blast weapon is the tier 1 utility scattergun which you could full attack with; but it turns out to have a lower expected damage.)
As before, to make the comparison fair, we’re going to want to make sure we take criticals into account (since automatic firing can’t crit, but blast fire can), and time spend reloading (since automatic firing expends all ammo).
The Tactical Arc Emitter targets EAC; I’ll assume that the EAC of our target is 2 lower than its KAC; this cancels out the -2 penalty to hitting that blast fire adds. Finally, as before, I’ll assume that our PC has a 50% chance to hit KAC with a full attack.
(a) Tactical Arc Emitter (any number of targets in a 15’ cone):
--The expected damage of a standard (unwieldy) attack is: ((2.5)(.65) + (5)(.05))*N = 1.875*N, where N is the number of targets in the 15’ cone.
--We don’t need to worry about reloading since the Tactical Arc Emitter is an unwieldly weapon that can only be fired once/round. That makes reloading a non-issue, since you always have a free move act to reload with. So its expected damage is 1.875*N per round.
(b) Autotarget Rifle (can target up to 5 targets in a 30’ cone):
--From above, we saw that the expected damage of the Autotarget rifle is 0.875*N + 1.313 per round, including reloading time, where N is the number of targets in a 30’ cone.
So as a rule of thumb, if N=3+ -- i.e., there are at least 3 targets in a 15’ cone -- then the expected damage of blast fire with the Tactical Arc Emitter is greater.
But the Autotarget Rifle can hit creatures in a 30’ cone, and if you can hit enough additional targets (roughly, if you can more than double the number of targets by hitting a 30’ cone instead of a 15’ cone) then the Autotarget Rifle can still be better. On the other hand, the Autotarget Rifle has a limit of 5 targets max... So if there are 3+ targets in a 15’ cone, you’re still going to be better off with the Tactical Arc Emitter.
EXAMPLE 2. Next let’s again try a high-level example, a level 20 soldier with a choice between two tier-20 heavy weapons. Now, unfortunately, there aren’t any tier 20 heavy weapons with blast. But there is a tier 18 one -- the Phoenix-class Flamethrower -- which roughly follows the damage progression of the Solarian’s weapon, and the Solarian’s weapon damage increases by 2d6 from levels 18 to 20. So as an approximation, I’ll assume that a tier 20 version of the Phoenix-class Flamethrower (I’ll call it the “Super-Phoenix-class Flamethrower”) does 2d6 more damage (from 9d6 to 11d6) than the tier 18 version.
So are two weapons are: (a) the Super-Phoenix-class Flamethrower vs (b) the Paragon X-Gen Gun.
Again the Flamethrower targets EAC, and I’ll assume that the EAC of our target is 2 lower than its KAC; this cancels out the -2 penalty to hitting that blast fire adds. Finally, as before, I’ll assume that our PC has a 50% chance to hit KAC with a full attack. I’ll take Weapon Specialization into account, but no other damage boosters.
(a) Super-Phoenix-class Flamethrower (any number of targets in a 30’ cone):
--The expected damage of a standard attack is: ((58.5)(.65) + (107)(.05))*N = 43.875*N, where N is the number of targets in a 30’ cone.
--We don’t need to worry about reloading since the Super-Phoenix-class Flamethrower is an unwieldly weapon that can only be fired once/round, which makes reloading a non-issue, since you always have a free move act to reload with. So its expected damage is 43.875*N per round.
(b) Paragon X-Gen Gun (can target up to 25 targets in a 60’ cone):
--From above, we saw that the expected damage of the Paragon X-Gen Gun is 19.625*N + 29.438 per round, including reloading time, where N is the number of targets in a 60’ cone.
So as a rule of thumb, if N=2+ -- i.e., there are at least 2 targets in a 30’ cone -- then the expected damage of the Super-Phoenix-class Flamethrower is greater.
But the Paragon X-Gen Gun can hit creatures in a 60’ cone, and if you can hit enough additional targets (very roughly, if you can more than double the number of targets by hitting a 60’ cone instead of a 30’ cone) then the Paragon X-Gen Gun can still be better.
TLDR:
I. In cases in which automatic fire with an automatic weapon does more expected damage than just full attacking would do with a non-automatic weapon (N=4+), a comparable blast weapon will do more damage. So you’re generally better off using a comparable blast weapon (assuming these targets are all in range!).
II. Since non-automatic/non-blast weapons do more damage when making full attacks or standard attacks against a single target in cases in which the number of targets in a cone would be less than 4 (N<4) you’re generally better of full attacking with a non-automatic/non-blast weapon.
So for the most part the automatic weapon is suboptimal -- when (N<4) you're better off full attacking with a comparable non-automatic weapon, and when (N >/= 4) you're better off using a comparable blast weapon.
So why get an automatic weapon?
(1) Getting a top-notch non-automatic/non-blast weapon *and* a top-notch blast weapon is about twice as expensive as getting a top-notch automatic weapon.
(2) In cases in which many targets are spread out over a wider area, targets you’d need to use a long cone to reach, automatic fire can yield more expected damage than comparable blast fire weapons, since they tend to have twice the range. So in some cases, the AOE attack of an automatic weapon is still better than that of a comparable blast fire weapon.
blast being confused with burst?
(2) In cases in which many targets are spread out over a wider area, targets you’d need to use a long cone to reach, automatic fire can yield more expected damage than comparable burst fire weapons, since they tend to have twice the range. So in some cases, the AOE attack of an automatic weapon is still better than that of a comparable burst fire weapon.
Don't forget that Automatic does a cone only 1/2 the Range, so an Automatic weapon would need to have 4x the range for Automatic to cover double the range in cone.
blast being confused with burst?
Yep! Should be fixed now.