Sight shooting and point shooting groupings

[Yung]

@LHS, I think this might be up your alley.

[Nakkach]

Thank you for all the replies! Every single was helpful.

First off, I'm sorry please explain what RPG stands for.



I really do not know anyone who point shoots at any reasonable distance. A skilled practitioner can draw and hit a small target while very close to the target without verifying a sight picture because they have developed a skill. A skill learned over time from repetitive aimed fire. A skilled shooter knows that at distance X seeing their front sight anywhere in the rear notch is good enough. They can accept the imparted angular deviation and still make the shot. As they perfect their presentation, learn what level of sight alignment is required, and what they consistently achieve they could get away with point shooting at bad breath distances. Conversely the skilled shooter knows at what distance the sight alignment needs to be refined to make the shot. That shooter is not likely to just stick the gun out there and hope for the best.

Some will argue that the distance from which point shooting can be utilized can increased with practice/skill. Those who have acquired the ability to point shoot from any respectable distance have learned a circus trick. A trick that can only be learned by constant and continual practice and 10's of thousands of rounds. We are not talking about a viable tactic that can or should be used on anything but an inanimate object under controlled conditions.

Regarding data. I don't see any reason why data would exist. Aimed fire and point shooting are not comparable they are apples & oranges.

As stated above, I work on mechanics of Role Playing (board) Game. In a nutshell: people sit around the table, every player has a role (a character) and acts, talks acording to character's psyche. You can think of it as interactive literature combined with impromptu acting. There is also an element of dice rolling to add a little bit of unpredictability to the story. And yeah, one example is Dungeons and Dragons, but you can go well beyond fantasy in constructing RPGs.

It’s kind of an interesting question how you’d model the hit probability for gaming purposes though, and I’d be interested in how people have done it, and why. I think it’s got to be very tempting to just say “unsighted fire has a 30% chance to hit inside 25 yards” in my game, because I said so. I’m kind of impressed at the idea, and a bit sorry that I don’t have that kind of data to share.

I thought about an approach that both satisfies me and is not overly complicated - a normal distribution.
Let's say that a character usually scores 5” group at 50 yards. A viable assumption is that's a 95% of the distribution. 95% of the distribution equal four standard deviations. 5”/4 = 1,25”. Two standard deviations give us 68% of the aquired data points (gunshots, in this case). So, if you roll under 68 on the d100, your shot lies in the 2,5” circle in the distance of 50 yards. 68 to 95 - lies within 5”.

And groupings scale (angular measurments) - you can assume 5” at 50 yd equal 10” at 100 yd.

You can also expand the idea by using a cheat-sheet with other aproximations and even get an exact position on the X-Y axis, but it depend on what you consider too much.

[That Guy]

Doesn't the game you wish to make already exist?

[LHS]

@LHS, I think this might be up your alley.

I think there's been a lot of good stuff already said here. I'll reiterate some of those points:

1. There are a lot of different definitions of what constitutes 'point shooting'. Some of it is garbage (the old hip-firing that you see in classic Westerns). Some of it is a relic of the days before we had decent sights on handguns. That kind of thing can be used in very close quarters, in the dark, etc, which is exactly what you see with the old Fairbairn stuff. When you're in a dark alley in Hong Kong at 3am with a pistol whose sights are vestigial at best and no way to illuminate your target, point shooting makes sense. Some of it's still very relevant today, such as the Shivworks thumb-pectoral index for entangled shooting.

2. There's often a confusion between true 'point shooting' and what Cooper called a 'flash sight picture'. There's a continuum between a solid, precise sight picture and not using the sights at all, and 'correct' is generally determined by the context in which you find yourself. Look at the Shivworks material here again, for instance. If you have the necessary distance, then by all means bring those sights up and use them. If not, compress to an appropriate distance and 'point shoot'. But the key is using the context of the situation and your own education and experience to make the correct choice.

For an RPG, honestly, I wouldn't get into the difference directly. I would simply assume that the character uses the appropriate technique for the situation. In d20 terms (be it 3.0/3.5, Pathfinder, d20 Modern, etc), I might make some grappling-specific rules about close-quarters gun use. A feat that prevents AoOs when drawing or firing within an opponent's threatened square, for instance, or ruling that attempting to draw a weapon in a threatened square (and especially in a grapple) provokes a free disarm attempt unless your opponent is pinned or otherwise controlled.

[JDD]

Thank you for all the replies! Every single was helpful.




As stated above, I work on mechanics of Role Playing (board) Game. In a nutshell: people sit around the table, every player has a role (a character) and acts, talks acording to character's psyche. You can think of it as interactive literature combined with impromptu acting. There is also an element of dice rolling to add a little bit of unpredictability to the story. And yeah, one example is Dungeons and Dragons, but you can go well beyond fantasy in constructing RPGs.




I thought about an approach that both satisfies me and is not overly complicated - a normal distribution.
Let's say that a character usually scores 5” group at 50 yards. A viable assumption is that's a 95% of the distribution. 95% of the distribution equal four standard deviations. 5”/4 = 1,25”. Two standard deviations give us 68% of the aquired data points (gunshots, in this case). So, if you roll under 68 on the d100, your shot lies in the 2,5” circle in the distance of 50 yards. 68 to 95 - lies within 5”.

And groupings scale (angular measurments) - you can assume 5” at 50 yd equal 10” at 100 yd.

You can also expand the idea by using a cheat-sheet with other aproximations and even get an exact position on the X-Y axis, but it depend on what you consider too much.

I like the approach you are taking to developing mechanics based on real world data, but I think that you might be coming at the issue from the wrong side.

For fighting/competition, folks try to balance speed against effective accuracy. Definitions vary, but that is usually hits within a 6-8" circle - as fast as you can manage. Larger groups could include ineffective hits that don't stop the threat (or score max points) and smaller groupings are nice, but can take an undesirable amount of time to make. You don't want to get hit first yourself because you took an extra second to get the first round to be within 1" of the the target center.

The factor you should adjust against range is time. For example, I can relatively reliably perform 2 hits in an 8" circle in 2 seconds on command at short range (say 3 yards). At 25 yards, I take around 5 seconds to get those same two hits. I don't personally do point shooting, but I spend a lot less time getting a clear sight picture over the target at super short range. (I am not particularly fast or skilled by either of those two measures).

If I was building a gun-fighting mechanic, I would break shots down by time necessary as a function of range, with your standard deviation rolls adjusting for skill and as a way to add a randomizing element.

USPSA and IPSC both factor hits against time by calculating what is called a "hit factor". Basically, they divide the number of points (hits) in a stage, by the number of seconds that it takes a competitor to make those hits; competitors are then ranked by hit factor. There is a lot of material there, but this also creates a whole body of data that might be interesting to you, because USPSA then classifies shooters into skill categories based on the hit factor they earn on standardized stages called classifiers that are set up exactly the same every time. (https://uspsa.org/classifiers)

[Joe in PNG]

I've pondered the idea of a game mechanic, and will throw these quick thoughts out. I'd break it down to 1) Experience 2) Skill & training 3) Familiarity with the weapons used

1) Experience. A total novice might freeze up or panic under a shooting situation but a veteran will probably be cool and collected. A total novice may not notice a bad situation until late where a veteran will be 'ahead of the curve'. I'd put it as Novice (-2); Basic Experience (+1); Medium Experience (+2); Veteran (+4)

2) Skill and training. Practice, training, practice, and practice can provide a positive edge during a gunfight. A well trained person will be more likely to have more tools available- more accuracy, faster draw, faster reloads, and so on. I'd go with Novice (-2); Basic Training (+1); Combat Training (+2); Elite Force Training (+4)

3) Familiarity with weapons. While not as important as the first two, it's a factor. A novice might not know how to get a strange gun running, and even a person familiar with guns in general may be less accurate and fast with a gun they've never shot before. So, I'd go with Unfamiliar (-2); General knowledge (0); Familiarized (+1); Similar to personal weapon (+2); Personal weapon (+3)

[Nakkach]

If I was building a gun-fighting mechanic, I would break shots down by time necessary as a function of range, with your standard deviation rolls adjusting for skill and as a way to add a randomizing element.

USPSA and IPSC both factor hits against time by calculating what is called a "hit factor". Basically, they divide the number of points (hits) in a stage, by the number of seconds that it takes a competitor to make those hits; competitors are then ranked by hit factor. There is a lot of material there, but this also creates a whole body of data that might be interesting to you, because USPSA then classifies shooters into skill categories based on the hit factor they earn on standardized stages called classifiers that are set up exactly the same every time. (https://uspsa.org/classifiers)

Thanks! That will certainly come in handy

[MistWolf]

What advantage a character gain with point shooting over aimed fire? Speed at close range. To keep it simple, figure out what the range of the weapon is- short, medium, long. Then, determine what the penalties are for each range. For example, Battletech uses (if I recall correctly) 0 for short, 2 for medium and 4 for long.

Then, determine what each range band is. For a service pistol, short could be 0-15 meters, medium could be 15-25 meters and long could be 25-50 meters. This is when the character uses sighted combat fire. If the character wishes to trade precision for accuracy, divide three numbers by 5. Short is now 0-3 meters, medium is 3-5 meters and long is 5-10 meters.

This keeps the characters from using point shooting at longer ranges, but still gives them a chance to succeed at short ranges where getting off the first shot could make a difference.

But none of this matters if there isn't a mechanic in place that gives each method their own distinct advantage & disadvantage.

I can tell you from experience, if the game mechanic is not quick and simple to use, your players will hate it, no master how realistic it is. So forget all that figuring out group size and mean radius bullshit and make combat fast and easy.

(Penalties ranges and number of range bands were arbitrarily generated.)

[0ddl0t]

What advantage a character gain with point shooting over aimed fire? Speed at close range.

I think speed is the least convincing reason to point shoot - you gain almost nothing in time and lose quite a bit in accuracy. But point shooting can be advantageous when working around concealment, cover, or obstacles. Examples:

Discreetly aiming a pistol while it is still in your pocket.

Aiming/shooting with the gun under the table.

Aiming/shooting around a corner -- bonus carnival trick-shot points if you use the corner mirror behind you to locate the target

[LittleLebowski]