"You fire your gun at a human enemy 10 levels higher than you - headshot."

[Stiler]

Actually mere physical ability is a pretty minor factor in firearms use. Skill and practice with firearms, now those matter a LOT, why do you think even expert snipers are constantly honing their skills when not actually in a combat zone?

You can have all the training in the world, a bullet is still a bullet and it doesn't matter who fires it, if it hits you it's going to do the same dmg if it were fired by someone who was an expert or someone who never picked up one until that moment.

They might be able to fire more precise at more targets quickly, reload faster, etc, but they can't magically make the bullet do "more dmg" then anyone else that pulls the trigger (hitting the same point obviously).

 

[Suhiira]

You can have all the training in the world, a bullet is still a bullet and it doesn't matter who fires it, if it hits you it's going to do the same dmg if it were fired by someone who was an expert or someone who never picked up one until that moment.

They might be able to fire more precise at more targets quickly, reload faster, etc, but they can't magically make the bullet do "more dmg" then anyone else that pulls the trigger (hitting the same point obviously).

Bingo!
I've long been saying weapons in CP2077 should function exactly the same if picked up by a new character or a highly skilled one, the difference will be how often the skilled one is going to hit what they aim at and the probability of a malfunction. I find the level restrictions and increased damage by weapon 'B' over weapon 'A' because it's a "better quality weapon" (i.e. higher 'level') used in most video games to be laughable, at best. If you can find it, and afford it, you can use it ... not well perhaps ... but use it.

Now character skill requirements to get full use out of a weapon I can see. If you're underskilled for a particular weapon it may malfunction more frequently and perhaps have a reduced rate-of-fire. But what come out the barrel is totally independent of character "level" or skill.

 

[felixsylvaris]

One way to go: Part of character progression is via skills. The bigger part if via gear. The headshot could be from sling, or from top tier gun. CP is so nice that it is ingame to upgrade with new cybernetics.
Result may vary upon target. Common human will be dead. But if target have some helmet or is cyborg, could bounce smaller bullets.

 

[spla200]

I do agree with Stiler, Suhiira & felixsylvaris point of view that more focus on skill progression is necessary to use a weapon effectively. But we should also remember that enemies could have armour and enhancements in there skulls, like what we saw in the teaser trailer. So maybe it should depend on what round the weapon is using ranging from small fire arms, which require more then one head shot to kill (considering the skull enhancements), and sub machine guns, assault rifles and sniper rifles would give an instant kill, depending on range for the sub machine guns.

 

[Suhiira]

<clip>and sub machine guns, assault rifles and sniper rifles would give an instant kill, depending on range for the sub machine guns. [/B]

SMGs generally fire handgun type cartridges thus don't hit any harder then a handgun. Their advantage lays in that they are generally fully automatic thus have a higher probability of hitting in the first place (or possibly multiple hits at very close ranges).

 

[Cherokeedog]

I think the real question here is whether or not we would like a leveled loot and leveled enemies system, compared to a “realistic” character progression system.

Now, games using leveled loot systems have one really cool advantage: they always keep you interested in exploring and searching for new toys and they heavily exploit the joy of finding a little “treasure” every now and then. However, like it or not, I always end up feeling something is off when I experience the lack of balance generated by the level difference. It makes the game feel like an arcade, which in my book is the opposite of immersion.

So, I am leaning towards a “realistic” approach, especially in regard of this game, as its theme actually allows a wide variety of options for character progression and for imposing spatial limitations in a logical manner:

• A headshot’s result can be influenced by a lot of factors: whether or not the target is wearing protection, whether or not you hit the protection or an area not covered by it, whether or not you’re using a small or high caliber weapon, whether or not you’re using normal or armor piercing ammo, whether or not your target has some…bone strengthening implant (it IS cyberpunk).
• The character progression can follow various directions like training your body (strength, speed, combat moves, etc.), installing cybernetic enhancements and acquiring and improving a wide variety of tools and trinkets (for example – a tool that allows you to read your target’s enhancements).
• Areas and places can be locked behind logical stuff like factions, advanced hacking tools (or lock pick tools), infiltration skills, etc.

So yes, I think a headshot to a vital area of the head should be a kill at any time, but also there should a bunch of variables (as described above) that influence the success of reaching that vital area.

 

[PliersAndWrenches]

If human then Headshot=Dead
If Cyborg/robot/sim Headshot=Level

I can see a high level human having lots of goons and tech keeping them safe.
I can see a headless cyborg still operating because their functioning circutry is safe within their armored torso and their head is just an aesthetic.

I hate bullet sponges unless there is an in game reason for their existence. I also don't want my character to be superman. I want to fear a level one human enemy with a gun as well as a 2 story mech with a cannon. Let me pick my battles.

 

[exogenesis09]

I would rather see this game to have a RNG(Random Number Generator) similar to what they said. There is no point having an argument like this if it’s going to be an RNG game. It’s the game developers that maintain those probability. We don’t have that much info on combat yet aside it has Friday Night FireFight.

 

[Snowflakez]

I would rather see this game to have a RNG(Random Number Generator) similar to what they said. There is no point having an argument like this if it’s going to be an RNG game. It’s the game developers that maintain those probability. We don’t have that much info on combat yet aside it has Friday Night FireFight.

Where have we been told that it will use FNFF?

 

[exogenesis09]

Where have we been told that it will use FNFF?

Can I consider the FNFF as Tactical Mode? They said it will have a Tactical Mode and the similar system they can use for tactical mode will be based on FNFF or else it would not have any connection on PnP Cyberpunk 2020. That’s their goal on this game as I research on Reddit. It’s might be a speculation but they all makes sense.

 

[Snowflakez]

Can I consider the FNFF as Tactical Mode? They said it will have a Tactical Mode and the similar system they can use for tactical mode will be based on FNFF or else it would not have any connection on PnP Cyberpunk 2020. That’s their goal on this game as I research on Reddit. It’s might be a speculation but they all makes sense.

Yeah, Tactical Mode could really mean anything, unfortunately... Not set in stone one way or the other. I think if they meant for it to be based on FNFF, they probably would have said "Based on FNFF", since that's something many CP fans are already well acquainted with to some degree.

It's fine to speculate that it could be FNFF, though. And it would be cool if it was. I'd certainly enjoy the heck out of it.

The Reddit says "The game uses the FNFF system" specifically in reference to 2020, the tabletop, not 2077.

 

[Suhiira]

Where have we been told that it will use FNFF?

We haven't.
But if CDPR is going to use the CP2020 PnP as a basis for CP2077 it really only stands to reason they'd use CP2020's (advanced) combat system ... Friday Night Firefight.

Can I consider the FNFF as Tactical Mode? They said it will have a Tactical Mode and the similar system they can use for tactical mode will be based on FNFF or else it would not have any connection on PnP Cyberpunk 2020. That’s their goal on this game as I research on Reddit. It’s might be a speculation but they all makes sense.

FNFF isn't a "tactical" combat variant for CP2020, it's a fleshed out and filled in version of the basic combat system presented in CP2020. When you want to publish all the base rules for a PnP in one volume you have to leave things out (or not fleshed out) or it winds up being the size of a dictionary.

 

[Snowflakez]

We haven't.
But if CDPR is going to use the CP2020 PnP as a basis for CP2077 it really only stands to reason they'd use CP2020's (advanced) combat system ... Friday Night Firefight.


FNFF isn't a "tactical" combat variant for CP2020, it's a fleshed out and filled in version of the basic combat system presented in CP2020. When you want to publish all the base rules for a PnP in one volume you have to leave things out (or not fleshed out) or it winds up being the size of a dictionary.

Assuming 2077 is a FPS/TPS RPG, how do you propose they implement FNFF?

 

[Sardukhar]

Assuming 2077 is a FPS/TPS RPG, how do you propose they implement FNFF?

Well, that depends. It depends on whether they implement the spirit of FNFF - nasty fights based on FBI and crime stats - or try to replicate the system.

The Cyberpunk 2020 system itself is a dice-based system where luck plays approximately 1/3 of the factors needed to succeed. Stats range from 1 to 10, skills the same, and your luck is a value from 1 to 10. This formula (Skill + Stat + Luck vs Target Number) is modified by gear, environment, movement, wounds, range, etc.

This system applies to any skill checked, and Friday Night Firefight then adds in things like fast-draw, shock/stun, auto-fire, hand-to-hand, etc.

Damage is also random, within a range and modified by things like skill, strength (for melee and hand to hand), ammunition type, etc. Damage does have a fairly reliable average value and is reduced by your characters toughness. Not much, though. Basically, don't get shot, stabbed or punched hard. It hurts.

So you might either flip to a top-down/isometric real-time w/pause or turn-based mode where you move the cursor across your shoot/stab/steal/choke/lie-to target and see what your odds are based on your stat/skill/gear/condition OR

You might use a crosshair TPS/FPS system that reads out these odds to the player - damage would be easy to randomize. Unlike in many games, FNFF is pretty easy to hit your target at close range if you're not wounded and can see your target. Actually easier than in real life, in my experience. Possibly my IRL Pistol and Rifle skills suck though.

Mostly players would see crosshair jitter only when wounded or running...and forget side stepping. That's not a thing. Running and shooting period is a bad idea.

You could also do a VATS system, although I'd prefer bullet-time modified by your Initiative total.

 

[Snowflakez]

Well, that depends. It depends on whether they implement the spirit of FNFF - nasty fights based on FBI and crime stats.

This is what I'm expecting. Keeps the spirit of the tabletop's combat without needing to replicate it directly. I'm not against more faithful implementations, of course. The more accurate the better, to a degree.

Thanks for the well thought-out answer, though, I only understood the basics of FNFF (Just what was in the 2020 rulebook, never read the separate rules for it).

One thing I've suggested in the past is a method of replicating experience in the battlefield, as 2020 has. More fights you get in (probably easier to just tie it to a weapon handling skill) the tighter your aim, the less it'll wobble, better overall control you have over yourself and your weapons.

 

[Sardukhar]

This is what I'm expecting. Keeps the spirit of the tabletop's combat without needing to replicate it directly. I'm not against more faithful implementations, of course. The more accurate the better, to a degree.

Thanks for the well thought-out answer, though, I only understood the basics of FNFF (Just what was in the 2020 rulebook, never read the separate rules for it).

One thing I've suggested in the past is a method of replicating experience in the battlefield, as 2020 has. More fights you get in (probably easier to just tie it to a weapon handling skill) the tighter your aim, the less it'll wobble, better overall control you have over yourself and your weapons.

CPunk 2013 used to do this - you start at negatives ( modified by your COOL) and the more fights you survive, the sooner they go away. INteresting system, but mostly bookkeeping.

They dumped it in 2020 - I guess it seemed silly that anyone alive and a PC in 2020 would still be a newbie to scary dangerous combat. If so, well, the COOL stat is there for a reason.

 

[Suhiira]

So you might either flip to a top-down/isometric real-time w/pause or turn-based mode where you move the cursor across your shoot/stab/steal/choke/lie-to target and see what your odds are based on your stat/skill/gear/condition OR

You might use a crosshair TPS/FPS system that reads out these odds to the player - damage would be easy to randomize. Unlike in many games, FNFF is pretty easy to hit your target at close range if you're not wounded and can see your target. Actually easier than in real life, in my experience. Possibly my IRL Pistol and Rifle skills suck though.

Mostly players would see crosshair jitter only when wounded or running...and forget side stepping. That's not a thing. Running and shooting period is a bad idea.

You could also do a VATS system, although I'd prefer bullet-time modified by your Initiative total.

I rather doubt any sort of top-down/isometric option.
That said The idea of using drones to permit this sort of thing makes logical sense. As long as they're merely spotting drones it'd be easy enough to implement, just put the point-of-view where the drone is. But implementing armed drones would be very difficult. A game needs to be designed for either FPS/TPS or top-down/isometric combat as there are many programming factors which differ significantly between the two, i.e. they're essentially incompatible.

No reason an FPS/TPS system needs to give a player the odds, you don't get them in a pure FPS game, or in real-life.

Yeah, hitting what you shoot at is always the problem. One of the reasons I love FNFF is because as Sardukhar said it uses real-life FBI and crime stats so it has a basis in facts not "I think" or "it should".

 

[Sardukhar]

I rather doubt any sort of top-down/isometric option.
That said The idea of using drones to permit this sort of thing makes logical sense. As long as they're merely spotting drones

Or Net view, either of Real World or Cyberspace View...I mean, there are a billion surveillance devices in Night City. Drones are fine but they are very Now, whereas using Cyberspace to do tactical combat is pretty cool.

 

[Suhiira]

Or Net view, either of Real World or Cyberspace View...I mean, there are a billion surveillance devices in Night City. Drones are fine but they are very Now, whereas using Cyberspace to do tactical combat is pretty cool.

Google Maps?
Yeah, there are any number of ways to get a top-down view.

But as I said, as long as it's JUST a point-of-view it's not that hard to implement. But I really wouldn't expect armed drones, or rods from space, or any sort of ability to attack while in this view mode.

 

[Sardukhar]

Google Maps?
Yeah, there are any number of ways to get a top-down view.

But as I said, as long as it's JUST a point-of-view it's not that hard to implement. But I really wouldn't expect armed drones, or rods from space, or any sort of ability to attack while in this view mode.

Well, like the man said, what do you think Tactical Mode is going to be then? VATS?