shouldn't a burst be more accurate than a single shot?

[Samored II]

There are rules for spraying an area.

[Library Ogre]

While you're putting more into the air, there's issues of barrel climb and the like.

My personal rules for multiple-round firing are as such.

Firing multiple rounds inflicts a -3 penalty on your attack roll (combined with your attack bonuses, so an accurate shooter may have a -2 or a +1, depending on their skill).

For each round after the first, you do 50% additional damage... so a 4D6 round will do 6D6 on a double-tap, 8D6 on a three-round burst, 10D6 if you spend 4 rounds, etc. You can go rock-n-roll and empty the clip, but you're going to eat ammo like candy.

[Jesterzzn]

I was thinking for 'sweep fire' damage equal to single shot (it's not concentrated but covers more area), +2 to strike, expend ammo equal to burst. single melee action.

Eh, that's actually less effective than the normal burst rules.

Normal short burst is +1 to hit with double damage and 20% ammo expended. Halving the damage for an extra +1 with the same ammo expendature is giving up half you potential damage output assuming five burst per clip, and all you gain is a 5% increase to hit.

Bursts are probably one of the few things I don't have much of a problem with. At least as far as I think they mostly work in creating the proper ratio of quicker damage accumulation versus per bullet efficiency.

[Killer Cyborg]

shouldn't a burst be more accurate than a single shot? In the sense that you're putting more lead/lasers/plasma/shooty bits in the air.

No.
A burst should be (and is) more accurate than an unaimed shot, but less accurate than an aimed shot.
There's a reason why snipers don't usually use burst weapons.

Are there any rules for sweeping fire with a rapid firing weapon? If not, anyone got house rules?

P. 34 of the original Rifts book.

[Balabanto]

Except where the rules say "Triple Pulse Burst" for laser weapons, with an appropriate additional bonus, the answer is, no, because weapons have recoil.

See, the reason why bursts were developed is so you can control the muzzle of the gun, not to make them more accurate. After every burst, you have to aim a gun. If you've ever fired an SMG, you know what I'm talking about.

If you haven't, and you're untrained, firing a few bursts without knowing how (Using your hip and your stance to cushion the blast properly for an SMG, properly aiming with a rifle) will make sure you never hit anything again if you don't properly aim. There are things like blowback vents and other unique recoil compensators (Weighted grips, mag-na-porting, etc) that can make it easier, but the more firepower you bring to the party, the less useful they become. Oh, and the weapon makes more noise.

[Killer Cyborg]

P. 34 of the original Rifts book.

unfortunately I only have RUE, and their guide on ranged combat does not mention sweeping fire.

That's because they nixed that rule.

[ZorValachan]

The problem is there are different uses for Burst fire.

1) Hit 1 guy many places and thus do more overall wounding in less time than to aim.
2) Suppressive fire. You keep firing to make the other guy not fire back.
3) 'Sweeping' maybe you can hit a lot of targets with 1-2 bullets each.
4) Throw enough lead in the air and hopefully 1 will hit your target.
5) 6) 7)+ things I can't think of off my head right now, but you all will

The main problem imo is that PB chooses one of the above (say #1). Player1 complains that bursting is #2. PB changes the rules in their next game/update/supplement. Player2 complains that #3 is bursting. PB changes the rule in their next game/update/supplement. Player 3 complains that #4 is bursting...

continue on and on. I tend to look at all the rules over the years and break them down into what situation is being described, best fits a circumstance. Then give them different 'sub-names'

'Suppressing Burst'
'Sweeping Burst'
'Unload on that guy Burst'

[Library Ogre]

Odd, my RUE says it's strike bonus reduced by 1/2.

As a general rule, I dislike reducing bonuses by half, or completely negating penalties; I prefer giving a flat penalty, which bonuses can then overcome. That's because reducing a bonus by half penalized the skilled more than the unskilled.

For example, if I have a +10 to dodge, and KC has a +2 to dodge (all that cybernetic armor adds weight), then if we're at half bonuses, I have a +5 to dodge and he has a +1... but I've taken a -5 penalty and he's only taken a -1.

[DhAkael]

GAH!
I'll just stick to the rules in the Rifts ORIGINAL rule-book thank you.
Yes, they may be unrealistic, yes they do NOT take into account the fact 80% of coherent-energy projector weapons have NO (censored for 30 minutes) RECOIL!! , but they've worked for me for over 15 years. I figure, why bugger up the woiks with the mis-guided hack-job done in the RUE (and other more recent PBooks titles), or trying to house-rule "realisim"?

It's a game, so it's supposed to be, y'know...FUN.
I Don't want to have my players require a doctorate in FIZZIKS or be long-arms certified gun nuts to enjoy a ripping good yarn.

However, as I've stated before on previous threads (and will continue to do so until the heat-death of the universe);
"All final rulings on game mechanics are the GM's call...period." Full-stop. End of line.
You want simple but unrealistic; use the original rulz.
You want to have a slide rule and scientific calculator? Knock yerselves out.
It's YOUR game(s).

[glitterboy2098]

bursts exist to increase damage, less so accuracy. the concept of "bullet sprays" are not only comical, but rather detrimental to the stated goal of improving accuracy. sure, you hypothetically increase the chance of hitting with one bullet, but you fired off so many your hit ratio is in the gutter. there is a reason "spray and pray" is common in the third world where ammo is cheap, and religion or training levels prevent the users from learning how to aim right.


the standard palladium burst rules, as of RUE, are now as follows.

3 round burst: 2x damage
5 round burst: 3x damage.

MG's are kinda nerfed atm, with just a generic burst damage, which basically boils down to firing 10 rounds and hitting with 3. i prefer to ignore those, and institute a "10 round burst = x5 damage, 20 round burst = x10 damage". the "10 rounds = 2x damage" and "20 rounds = 4x damage" i apply for when MG's are used to strafe a small group of targets. because most MG's fire at such high rates (the imagery we have in movies of dotted lines of bullets, dozens to the minute, is laughable. most MG's fire hundreds per minutes. a 20 round burst is less than a second of firing for most), the targets have to be pretty closely grouped to shoot at multiple targets in one burst.

[runebeo]

I remember reading that in Vietnam war only one out every 250 rounds hit, sure were talking about a jungle with lots of cover to take advantage of. With more advance military weapons of the future at the character's disposal you would think the chances of a burst have a much improved accuracy over that of modern firearms of today. Another thing what about the future of performance enhancement drugs? sure Juicers cover apart of that, yet I think the military will be coming up with all kinds of ways to give the front line grunts whatever kind of advantages they can.

[Killer Cyborg]

sure, you hypothetically increase the chance of hitting with one bullet

Right, greater accuracy than a single bullet.

Wrong.
Where you're missing people is that a burst is not accurate, even though it has a greater chance of hitting.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Accuracy&
ac⋅cu⋅ra⋅cy   [ak-yer-uh-see]
–noun, plural -cies.
1. the condition or quality of being true, correct, or exact; freedom from error or defect; precision or exactness; correctness.

A burst is not an exact means of hitting the target. It is prone to error and defect. It is not precise.
Accuracy is being able to aim at the target and hit it.
Bursts rely on sending enough rounds downrange that you're bound to hit something.

Accuracy would be being able to aim at a terrorist who is holding a hostage in front of him as a human shield, and reliably hit the terrorist in the forehead without hitting the hostage.
That is NOT likely with a burst.

Bursts are less accurate because each individual round has a much greater miss-chance than with a single shot, and you have less control over where exactly your shots land.

I'm being specific here because once we're all clear on the terminology, we can move on with the actual conversation instead of nit-picking the words.

We know what you mean, it's just not what you said, which is why some people are responding as they have been.

[glitterboy2098]

sure, you hypothetically increase the chance of hitting with one bullet

Right, greater accuracy than a single bullet.

actually, you get less accuracy when looking at that single bullet.

accuracy is defined by two things. groupings (trajectory variations), and shot-to-hit ratio. groups merely define how close together the projectiles will be. it's shot-to-hit ratios that are the big deal.

if you fire 10 rounds, and hit with 7, your accuracy is 70%
if you fire 1 round, and hit, your at 100%, if you miss, 0%.

"spraying" the target to minimally increase the chance of hitting it with some bullets is always going to be less accurate than taking careful aim and squeezing off a burst. in the spray, you might fire 10 rounds and hit with 3. with the careful aim, you could get all of the rounds on target.

besides,

I remember reading that in Vietnam war only one out every 250 rounds hit, sure were talking about a jungle with lots of cover to take advantage of.

If you added an extra zero (or two) you might be closer hahah. I've heard burst fire was implemented because of people panicking and wasting ammo on full auto in the jungle.

actually, the number was 87,000 rounds fired for a single confirmed kill for vietnam.
for iraq, the number has increased to 250,000 rounds for one confirmed kill.

however, the majority of this is used for covering fire where the sole goal is to keep the enemies head down. when they have a shot directly at the target, standard military doctrine in western militaries is to take careful aim and loose off a short burst for to increase the odds of inflicting lethal damage. (the small calibre, high velocity, rounds fired by modern military rifles have little stopping power, and tend to punch right through targets without inflicting immediately lethal damage. by firing 3 to 5 founds you increase the chance of hitting something vital.)
compare this to the islamic world, where taking life is against their religious laws. they rely on the "spray and pray" method, where they aim in the general direction and fire a "cloud" of bullets at it, with the idea that if god want's the target dead, he'll guide a bullet to it. as a result, their marksman training is non-existant, their accuracy sucks, and they can fire off a half dozen magazines without even getting close to a hit. but by your assumption that number of shots increase accuracy, they ought to be unstoppable.



selective fire modes are intended for rapid fire along the aiming point. put more bullets downrange on the same trajectory, for maximized damage. not increased chance of hitting.

[mellowmaveric]

personaly i think it all depends on the type of weapon. if it is a combustion weapon with bullets ie regular hand gun or rail gun has an ammount of kick to it and so will be increasingly inaccurate with each folowing shot at a spesfic target. lazer weapons would not have a kick and i dont imagine particle or ion weapons would either but plasma might so unloading on somone with the first two should be no problem. bursts though are more of a pray and spray method which is highly inaccurate and gives your opponents more of an oppertunity to dodge since you are going for an area instead of a spesfic target enhancing their ability to avoid being shot. with a single shot unless they see you they have no knowlidge of it coming but if you use a burst after the first shot they can scramble for cover and are aware of the situation and are no longer suprised by the attack or the directionality enabling them to avoid the folowing shots to some degree of accuracy.

[ZorValachan]

Here's an interesting FYI on burst fire:

Colt M-16: Set it for burst fire (5 rounds), pull the trigger, but release the trigger after shooting 3 rounds. The next time you pull the trigger, only 2 rounds will fire. They don't reset to 5 after each release of the trigger, only after 5 rounds have been fired.

H&K: Set it for 5 rounds, pull the trigger, but release the trigger after shooting 3 rounds. It resets. With the next pull you can have your full 5 rounds.

Things like this make 'realistic' universal burst rules difficult, and why GMs/Players should just pick which of many/various rules they like best/feel most comfortable with. Otherwise, you'd have to have each specific weapon (or manufacturer) have its own combat rules.

[ZorValachan]

Read my above above post. As I stated, there are various reasons to do bursts and different people have their own view of what a burst is and what it's purpose it. Thus many rules over the years as one or another person convinced KS their interpretation was correct. Wujick wrote N+SS also, so his view on bursts may have been different too.

A burst is not more accurate, just more likely for 1 (or a few) of the bullets to hit in a stressful situation.

If you're a mile away, hidden, or some other thing, you can do all your normal mental and physical 'exercises' and pull of a great '1 shot 1 kill'.

In a firefight, adrenaline and stress take over, a person loses their fine motor skills and relies on gross motor skills. Their training at targets on a range helps put more control than just 'spray and prey', but you won't get anything close to the calm collective fine motor skills a person has in a non-stressful situation.

And I know someone will come and say 'but that's not so, cause I was in the army, or knew some guy in the army.', or such.

But basically until someone who has better credentials than having been trained by the FBI, ATF, is a member of AFTE (awarded best lecturer), has taken various firearm manufactuers' armorer courses (including Colt's M-16, and Glocks), has been published in Firearm Journals (scientific, not casual reading), and works every day examining firearms, comes along and says otherwise, I'll stick to this way of thinking.

[Nekira Sudacne]

I was looking through Ninjas and Superspies the other day, their burst rules have +1 to hit.
I wonder why they decided to make bursts less accurate in Rifts? Sometimes it gets confusing for a Megaversal System to have... separate rules sets...

I've found N&SS to have the best and most comprehensive ruleset for hand to hand (wow, leaping and backflips make sense now with ranges!) and shooting, so will be using that.

Origionally N&SS and Rifts used exsactly the same ruleset. the Ultimate Edition changed pretty much everything.

[Colt47]

Depends on what the shooter is going for. If the shooter is trying to hit the target with multiple shots, the chance of hitting is going to be less. If the objective of firing multiple shots is to get at least one of those said shots to hit, the chance to hit the target is greater then with a single aimed shot. Then you got to include the distance from the target, as there is a drop off for automatic fire since the farther away a target is, the easier it is to hit it with a single shot rather then a burst.

[Killer Cyborg]

To qoute a famous military expert, "on full auto the first shot is on target, the second wings his helmet, and everything after that is an anti-aircraft gun."

Truth.


(though power armor, supernatural strength or robotic strength might help)

Energy weapons don't recoil, but they still muss up your aim with that big bright flash of light coming from the muzzle, or humming in your hands, or heating up and making you flinch, or any number of things.

All true of lasers.
Probably none of it's true of plasma weapons, though.
I'm not sure about ion weapons or particle beams (though the particle beams in Ghostbusters had quite a bit of kick).

[ZorValachan]

Well, my point was to actualy say that we'll come up with reasons why it is the way it is. It'll be gobldygook and contrived, but somewhat plausible. It's all camoflauge, though.

The out of character rationale about any of this is simple. We want to keep the rules to a minimum. Nobody wants to have seperate rules for each type of weapon system, missile guidance system, hand to hand combat styles, ect. Therefore we have a few odd things like lasers being similar to machine guns acording to the combat rules. It's never true in real life, but we have to get on with the game and not worry about it.

Exactly. Well summed up

[Shiva7]

Wrong.
Where you're missing people is that a burst is not accurate, even though it has a greater chance of hitting.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Accuracy&
ac⋅cu⋅ra⋅cy   [ak-yer-uh-see]
–noun, plural -cies.
1. the condition or quality of being true, correct, or exact; freedom from error or defect; precision or exactness; correctness.

A burst is not an exact means of hitting the target. It is prone to error and defect. It is not precise.
Accuracy is being able to aim at the target and hit it.
Bursts rely on sending enough rounds downrange that you're bound to hit something.

Accuracy would be being able to aim at a terrorist who is holding a hostage in front of him as a human shield, and reliably hit the terrorist in the forehead without hitting the hostage.
That is NOT likely with a burst.

Bursts are less accurate because each individual round has a much greater miss-chance than with a single shot, and you have less control over where exactly your shots land.

I'm being specific here because once we're all clear on the terminology, we can move on with the actual conversation instead of nit-picking the words.

We know what you mean, it's just not what you said, which is why some people are responding as they have been.

I am not necessarily disagreeing with KC, but to clarify things a bit better in regards to accuracy and other issues...

To start, accuracy and precision are to different things...

Accuracy could be viewed as how close to the bullseye is the shot, the closer the shot is to the intended target, the greater the accuracy.

Precision comes into play when there hasbeen more than one shot taken, either multiple single shots or a burst. Precision would refer to the grouping. so a tight grouping represents high precision.

So high accuracy low precision would mean a very spread out shot group, but the average of the shots would be very close to the bullseye.

Low accuracy high precision means that there is a tight shot group, but far from the bullseye.

High accuracy high precision means tight shot grouping and close to the bullseye.

high strike bonuses improves accuracy and precision because it makes it easier to consistantly get a high strike number (high strike for accuracy, consistancy for precision).

Bursts reduce both accuracy and precision.

Realistically, it is reasonable to say the first shot is accurate and subsequent shots become increasingly worse.

I forget which game had this type of rule, but they based burst damage off the difference between the strike roll and the "to hit number". Thus each additional bullet in the burst had a -1 or -2 to the strike roll until the respective bullet no longer beats the "to hit number". Damage is then determined by the number of bullets that hit. This allowed short bursts to hit with 100% accuracy

Palladium tries hard to keep rules simple and quick, thus a general burst strike modifier with a general damage multiplier keeps things quick and easy, but not realistic, thus it boils down to the type of game you want to run.

To qoute a famous military expert, "on full auto the first shot is on target, the second wings his helmet, and everything after that is an anti-aircraft gun."

This totally makes sense...

If you aim a burst, there is no point in firing a burst because anything after the first shot is likely to miss.

If you don't aim the burst, rather simply point the weapon in the direction of the target, the first shot isn't necessarily on target, thus the second, or third, etc. shot might hit the target. Thus a non-aimed burst increases the chance to hit over a a non-aimed single shot, but reduces accuracy compared to an aimed single shot.

thus the bonuses...
+3 to strike with aimed single shot
+1 to strike burst
... are more realistic than I used to think.

It's more a matter of the damage multiplier

I recently reconsidered how I view a damage multipliers...

I used to think that a x2 multiplier means 2 shots of the burst hit, likewise 3 shots hit for a x3; however...

I now view it based on the damage rolled. If one shot does 2D6, the damage range is 2 to 12, thus if the burst does less than 12 damage with a x2 multiplier, than the target might have only been hit with one shot, not necessarily 2.

Likewise, the target might get hit with more than 2 shots, they might just be all low damage hits.

The only problem I had with the old rules was the % of the clip used for the bursts. Since clip sizes varied to much, it is really the only thing that bothers me. Bursts sizes should be either specified for each weapons giving an opportunity to vary weapon quality/precision by using less shots for each burst size. On the other hand, the number of shots for each burst size should be static and defined as a general rule (ex: 5, 10, 20 shots).

[dhaerow]

If you aim a burst, there is no point in firing a burst because anything after the first shot is likely to miss.

If you don't aim the burst, rather simply point the weapon in the direction of the target, the first shot isn't necessarily on target, thus the second, or third, etc. shot might hit the target. Thus a non-aimed burst increases the chance to hit over a a non-aimed single shot, but reduces accuracy compared to an aimed single shot.

thus the bonuses...
+3 to strike with aimed single shot
+1 to strike burst
... are more realistic than I used to think.

It's more a matter of the damage multiplier

I recently reconsidered how I view a damage multipliers...

I used to think that a x2 multiplier means 2 shots of the burst hit, likewise 3 shots hit for a x3; however...

I now view it based on the damage rolled. If one shot does 2D6, the damage range is 2 to 12, thus if the burst does less than 12 damage with a x2 multiplier, than the target might have only been hit with one shot, not necessarily 2.

Likewise, the target might get hit with more than 2 shots, they might just be all low damage hits.

The only problem I had with the old rules was the % of the clip used for the bursts. Since clip sizes varied to much, it is really the only thing that bothers me. Bursts sizes should be either specified for each weapons giving an opportunity to vary weapon quality/precision by using less shots for each burst size. On the other hand, the number of shots for each burst size should be static and defined as a general rule (ex: 5, 10, 20 shots).[/quote]


This seems like the best argument so far. I've been wondering about this same thing since I got RUE. I absolutely agree that an Aimed shot should be more likely to hit a target then burst fire. And generally I agree with the weapon damages listed for useing 'burst mode' as opposed to single shot. The +3/+1 is great for ballistic weapons. WB14 The New West pg 172 has quite a bit to say about the weapons.
"1. All laser weapons from pistols to cannons have no 'kick,' unlike projectile weapons which always have some amount of recoil and sound. Likewise, heavy energy weapons (ion blasers, particle beams and plasma ejectors) also have some amount of recoice and/or reverbrate with energy, and make some sound.
2. Lasers are completely silent! etc....
3. Most laser weapons fire a short light beam or blast rather than....
4. Rapid-Fire 'pulse' lasers are the latest in laser technology and typically fire two or three super fast, high-powered laser beams in a matter of a half a second or less with each pull of the trigger. This quick, multi-blast often appears as one, and does greater damage than the more conventional single blast. Pulse lasers are limited to rifles and cannons.
5. Lasers have the longest range ...
6. Rail guns kick like a mule, sound like a machine gun(along with a high pitched whine the moment they are turned on) and weigh 5-10 times more than the average rifle. Some like the Glitter Boy's big, cannon-like gun make a booming or exploding sound each time they are fired.
7. Particle beam weapons, ion blasers and other types of energy weapons have slight recoil and make sounds when they fire. typically a high-pitched whistle or whine of energy through the air, or a low thrum, or a short crack of energy as it erupts from the weapon."

I think for myself this reads in 'house rules' Laser Rifles/Cannons can have aimed 'burst' but all other are as stated +3/+1. But obviously aimed is still 2 melee/attacks to get the +3 and burst is 1 melee/attack to get the plus 1. An aimed burst would be +3, but a regular burst for 1 melee/attack would be still +1. Just like an unaimed single-shot.

I still would like a definitive 'area-spray' rule for just hosing down a line of enemies. The reason trench warfare was such a colossal failure in WWI was because both sides got machine guns which they would use to just mow down lines of infantry. So if I have a swarm of xiticix, how can I just unload with my Q2-30 Rapid-Fire Heavy Laser or similary LMG/HMG styled weapons?

[Jefffar]

To wards the end of WW2 the British Army did some tests with a variety of weapons and found that against a moving, briefly visible target (ie the type most likely found on the battle field) a short burst from a fully automatic weapon was more likely to score a hit than rapid semi-automatic fire or single shots.

With that in mind, perhaps burst fire should reduce the penalty for shooting at a moving target, rather than grant an extra bonus to strike.

[Rockwolf66]

There was once a study to find out how effective fully automatic fire was for 80% of combat ranges(that would be only 100m). They found that fully automatic fire was superior to aimed semiautomatic fire for only the first 25m. After that out to 75m both aimed semi-automatic and fully automatic fire were about equally effective. After 75m and beyond semi-automatic fire was superior in effectivness that automatic gunfire.

I say effective as there is a big differance between just hitting something and hurting it. I could borrow a friends G-3A3 and simply crush a modern trauma plate. the same make an model trauma plate can stand up to full magazines from my friend's MP-5A2. With human's there is a big differance between say strafing a roadside bomber with an M-4 carbine and simply putting two aimed rounds in said terrorists head. The aimed shots to the head prevent the terrorist from having a chance to trigger his bomb.

[Colt47]

With Particle Beam weapons the kick happens more from the means by which the beam is formed then by the beam itself.

[Shadyslug]

Be it a burst or a single shot, you still have to actually be aiming in the right direction...

Not to mention when you spray and area, you're still "tossing" out bullets that are how big? You can still miss a man sized target if you empty an entire clip at them...think about a 1* difference between aimpoints...how many feet or separation does that equal at 50' away?

[Rockwolf66]

Shady,

it's a smaller spread than that if you are proficient in the weapon used. My Friend can put an entire 30 round magazine from his MP-5 into the area covered by a grapefruit at 50m. With his HK-21E on three round burst you can get groups that measure .75 inches in diameter. While those .75 inch groups are fired from a Bipod it does goe to show that Bursts can be very accurate. Heck, with a 7.62X51mm G-3A3 Battle Rifle (Said by some people to be uncontrolable) it is possible to evenly put seven rounds each into three different targets at 100m.

Still if you are just pointing in the direction of a target and spraying you will usually miss even if you are useing a fully automatic shotgun.

[Killer Cyborg]

To wards the end of WW2 the British Army did some tests with a variety of weapons and found that against a moving, briefly visible target (ie the type most likely found on the battle field) a short burst from a fully automatic weapon was more likely to score a hit than rapid semi-automatic fire or single shots.

With that in mind, perhaps burst fire should reduce the penalty for shooting at a moving target, rather than grant an extra bonus to strike.

This is an interesting point.

[Rockwolf66]

To wards the end of WW2 the British Army did some tests with a variety of weapons and found that against a moving, briefly visible target (ie the type most likely found on the battle field) a short burst from a fully automatic weapon was more likely to score a hit than rapid semi-automatic fire or single shots.

With that in mind, perhaps burst fire should reduce the penalty for shooting at a moving target, rather than grant an extra bonus to strike.

This is an interesting point.

If and i say IF, jeffer is talking about the research done in support of the Malay incident then he's not quite right.

Basically the Mayal Incident was full on heavy Jungle combat with encounter ranges of 25m or less. Your target could quite literally step to one side and vanish off the face of the earth. In order to fight more effectivly the British Army did a study on what sort of weapon in the British Supply line gave the best hit percentage. They found that for such limited range engagements with targets that simply vanished in a second or two that the Lee Enfield while it was simply wonderful for Desert combat was just about worthless. The Bren Gun with it's thirty round magazine and high rate of fire was nice but it was too long and heavy. The Sten gun was short light and it could hit the target rather well. To the surprize of those doing the testing they found that for the sort of close range Jungle combat they were doing the Browning A-5 Shotgun literally walked all over anything else when it came to hitting the target hard enough to get more than a blood trail.

It wasn't the size of the projectile used or anything like that it was simply the ability to saturate the target area with lead. Now with Automatic weapons you don't get as many projectiles in a target zone as with one shell from a shotgun.

[Jefffar]

If and i say IF, jeffer is talking about the research done in support of the Malay incident then he's not quite right.

Actually IIRC the study I am talking about was done towards the end of World War II, before the Malay Incident.

[Killer Cyborg]

I know from experience that the second shot from an AR-15 on Auto will go through the same hole as the first on a braced shot and hit near by unbraced. Obviously, other low caliber, well compensated modern weapons will perform similarly.

How are you defining "braced" here?

[Shadyslug]

My Friend can put an entire 30 round magazine from his MP-5 into the area covered by a grapefruit at 50m. With his HK-21E on three round burst you can get groups that measure .75 inches in diameter. While those .75 inch groups are fired from a Bipod it does goe to show that Bursts can be very accurate. Heck, with a 7.62X51mm G-3A3 Battle Rifle (Said by some people to be uncontrolable) it is possible to evenly put seven rounds each into three different targets at 100m.

Still if you are just pointing in the direction of a target and spraying you will usually miss even if you are useing a fully automatic shotgun.

I can put 10 shots rapid fire into a 12" group at 200 yards in 20 seconds...but that's with me strapped in with sling and shooting jacket.

But ask me to do that in a combat situation, you're going to see a much different "grouping" than what I can do in a controlled situation.

In a fire fight, very few people will be able to replicate what they can do when bullets and beams aren't flying past their heads...

[Jefffar]

Bursts give you more chances of hitting a targets as you're putting more lead into the air at once,as serval people have said already. But do to recoil after that first bullet each additional bullet going to be off the orginal target point by some degree. The more rounds you fire and the more recoil there is the harder it is to stay on target. You can compensate by learning to adjust your aim for the recoil or using recoil compensators of various types, or by just throwing out so much lead that you're bound to hit something.

To be more realistic you should be rolling for each shot fired with a negative modifier on each subsequent shot. But that'd get real tedious the more you shoot, so most game designers clump the rounds together into bursts. Unfortunetly Rifts clumps them all into one attack and it's all or nothing. Giving you a massive damage boost (in some cases) if you hit but if you miss you get nothing.

IIRC that's a fair bit like the old system Palladium used before the Robotech RPG and the "revised" editions came out. Basically you got a strike bonus on so many of the rounds you fired and rolled for each round.