Jul 13 09:13 1998

To: Dan

Copy to: Jerm
Copy to: Jert

From: Froccer

Subject: re:Initative and attacks

In message "Initative and attacks", Dan writes:

>
> I think that a person can not have more than two attacks during a combat phase.
>

Agreed.

> Designation of the combat phase is where I'm having a problem. It should be
> time based, i.e. 6 attacks in 15 seconds therefore you are looking at 2.5
> secs an attack. now the person with the higher init sets the standard.
>

I disagree. You should not need a calculator or an engineer handy just so that
you can calculate to three decimals of accuracy, the time index of everyone
that is in a gunfight. In fact, with the combat phase system, time is built in!
Guys with the high initiative will act SOONER in the combat round, and those
who have not yet even cleared their weapons from their holsters will act
LATER in the round. Therefore, there is a TIME DELAY for those who rolled
pourly on initiative (i.e. Huh? What's going on? Oh shit! I'm in a gunfight!
Who do I try to shoot at first?). Also, after your first action, your time is
evenly divided amongst your remaining actions.

Also remeber that initiative is at least partially based on awarness and not
solely based on reaction time or quickness. So even though you may be quick
(like a juicer), your opponent may be reacting to the situation quicker than
you. If we go to a time based system, this would assume that the speed at which
people perform their actions is widely variable from time to time.

> For example 3 guys are fighting, Guy A has 4 attacks, Guy B has 6 attacks
> and Guy C has 2 attacks.
>
> Scenario 1
>
> Init roles (respectively): 17,12,9
>
> Combat phase time: 3.75 sec
>
> the init rules apply.
>
> Guy A Guy B Guy C
> Phase 1 17 12
> Phase 2 11 10 9
> 8
> Phase 3 7 6 5
> 4
> Phase 4 3 2
>
> This works fine allowing a max of two attacks for Guy B per combat phase
>

Does this mean that A, B, and C act at the same time (phase) even though they
have different initiative values? I am still confused as to the system you are
proposing. It seems signaficantly more difficult than the basic system for
combat phases.

> Scenario 2
>
> Init roles:12,4,18
>
> Combat phase time 7.5 sec
>
> Guy A Guy B Guy C
> Phase 1 12 18
> Phase 2 9 9
> 6 4
> 3
>
>
> In this situation Guy A loses an attack (not an action) and Guy B looses
> four attacks, This seems really unfair but I look at it and say initative
> is everything, If your quick on your feet you'll fuck everyone else.
>

Still confused. Why does B get two attacks in Phase 2? Why would there be a
limit to the number of attacks based on the guy that reacted first?

> Scenario 3
>
> Init roles:18,18,9
>
> Combat phase time: 2.5 sec
>
> Guy A Guy B Guy C
> Phase 1 18 18
> Phase 2 15
> Phase 3 13 12
> Phase 4 9 9
> Phase 5 8 6
> Phase 6 3 3 5
>

Don't like it. So far, it seems pretty confusing and unrealistic (i.e. I lose a
bunch of actions not neccessarily because I'm slow, but because somebody else
reacted before me).

>
> In case of a tie, the person with the lowest combat phase time will set the
> standard.
>
> I think that this is a little better, granted you can get screwed hard if a
> guy with one attack gets a 26 initative but really, I think that this will
> allow weaker characters who are quick on their decisions do survive.
>
> Dan
>

Exactly! There is great possibility for guys to get screwed, hard!

What's wrong with just plain combat phases? Also, how does your system
incorporate dodges and things that use up extra attacks?

I think this system would cause more problems than it solves.

Froccer