[DarkSpade]

Figuring out what mobs are going to be a challenge for my players has thus far been a challenge for me.  The lack of levels for characters has been difficult for me to wrap my head around when it comes to picking out mobs since I can't just say "well, they're level 2 so I'll send some level 2s after them".  How do you figure out what's going to put up a good fight and not either bore or gore your players?

[martinchaen]

Professional Ratings are similar to levels, in a way. Starting Characters using the Standard character generation rules should be able to mop the floor with PR0 to PR2 mooks.

As for finding out how proficient your players are; start off small, have them encounter some low-life thugs or syndicate enforcers, then put them up against your basic low-level security guards.

Keep an eye on how the players react, though; if they kill everybody in the building, make sure they know that acting like this will get them noticed fast (Notoriety and Public Awareness). If they don't get the hint, have them encounter someone more professional, and play them smart; use cover, and set the players up with something they may not be equipped to handle, like gas or magic, or clever hackers. Make sure you emphasize that running IS an option, or you may end up with a party kill on your hands. I try to make sure my players don't get too cocky; knowing they can take on corp-security is good; thinking they can take on 15 platoons of Red Samurai; not so much.

All in all, this is going to be an experiment for you in some ways, because every table is different in many ways. My advice remains, though; start small. Don't throw the players into something their characters can't handle.

[Glyph]

It depends on what power level the PCs start out at, and how many of them are specialized in combat.  "Starting" characters can vary a lot, not just in how effective two combat characters are, but in whether they are built primarily for combat in the first place.  A street samurai might be able to fight several gangers at once, while a group consisting of a face, a decker, and a healing/detection focused mage might have trouble with three thugs - the lowliest of the grunts - at even odds.  I agree with martinchaen that it is better to start out small and escalate as needed.  Shadowrun is a very tactical game - it can make a big difference who is ambushing whom, who has the high ground or cover, and whether this happens when the group is together and loaded for bear, or separated and hitting the nightclubs in leisure clothing and light, concealed weapons.

[SirValeq]

I think it's not the humanoid NPCs that are the problem, but the creatures (which do not have a professional rating). They also function a bit differently and have different abilities than metahumans, so comparing dice pools may not be enough.
For example: would you say that a Force 3 Spirit is comparable to a Rating 1 ganger? Sure, their dice pools may be similar, but the Spirit brings so many other things to the table.

[DarkSpade]

One plays a bounty hunter and the other is an adept private investigator so they're able to handle themselves in combat. I have been ramping up the professional level of their enemies each game.  Last run they had a fight with 2 security guards, a guard lieutenant, and an organized crime guy(used to represent a gang running BTLs). If you ask them, they barely made it out with their lives so they seemed to think it was a challenge.  The truth is that they mopped the floor the NPCs.  Only one of the players got hit and it ended up as stun damage.

Tonight, I'm having them up against another runner team but I haven't decided what to use as other runners.  I had thought about using the sample runners from the book, but now I think that might be a bit much.  After all this isn't the big epic end fight.  It's much closer to a random encounter.   Next I thought about using the elite special forces grunts with a downgrade to their equipment but after comparing their core stats to one of my runners', I think that might be a death sentence.

[LionofPerth]

I'd add to the keep it small and build it up. Each time they mop the floor with the opposition, don't just look at the die pools, look at the situation. You should reward smart tactics, combat evasion and make it clear running away is a good idea.

The thing is in my mind isn't so much what you throw at them, but why you throw it at them. Sure, you're going to see many a corporate security guard be on the wrong end of a few hits, shots. On the same side, don't give them Red Samurai, special forces type because they can kill what are supposed to be doormen very easily. If you're sending special forces against them, why do they need to be facing special forces. Is it so that they're threatened in combat, you need a big hammer to use against them?

As said above, if they're too violent on their runs, then bring out the big guns. If they're too nosy into the business of a crime organisation, family, send teams, assassins after them. If they piss of really powerful people, they will be hunted, so it's not this group that gets them, it's the next one. Try leaving the country when every legal border has orders to arrest you on sight. Violence might be fun and easy for the pink mohawk crowd, most people. It's a good way in mind to cycle through a couple of characters in a campaign.

[emsquared]

Well, for 4E at least, there's no real mystery to it, IME, the "Rule of 3s" is generally a good guide. And I don't see why this would be any different really for 5th, until perhaps you get into the elevated Skill echelons (as armor generally doesn't have quite the up-scaling capabilities as skills). There's Limits to consider for 5, but that might play out as a "Rule of 1s"...?

Putting your PCs up against an equivalent number of NPCs (with equivalent capabilities, i.e. w/ a decker and magician) with relevant dice pools (attacking, defending, soaking) of ~3 fewer than your PCs, is probably going to result in them winning but having to expend some resources (generally in the form of recuperating damage/drain, etc.) at the end of it.

NPCs of ~6 fewer dice is going to result in them winning handily, probably not even having to expend much for resources.

9 fewer and so on down just gets exponentially more and more dis-balanced.

The caveat to the lower dice pools being that you probably want to keep initiatives (and damage soak) of the NPCs as competitive as is reasonable, to the PCs. Initiative is huge in balancing combat, but I would think not as polarizing as it was in 4E with the dropping of IPs. I would also say that you could add +50% NPCs, per -3 dice pool disparity to the NPC party to bring it up to an equivalent challenge. So, a -3 NPC group with 1.5 x the number of members as the PCs, should pan out in a more fair fight. 2x the number of PCs for -6 NPCs should be more fair (PCs should end up expending some resources), though this may be more logarithmic as when you're approaching -6 and weaker, your mook's shots are just gonna be bouncing off, more likely than not... Unequal capabilities can be very dis-balancing with this rule, especially when it comes to magic. If the capabilities are unequal, but you want the fight to be more equal, just add +1 or 2 mooks per lacking capability.

NPCs with approximately equivalent dice pools could go either way (may have a player or two go unconscious), depending on how rolls pan out, but as long as the PCs have even a slight edge in initiative and damage soak dice, they're gonna win (generally).

Equivalent numbers of NPCs with ~3 more dice than the PCs should present a serious challenge, requiring good tactics and smart use of resources to win (and you still may end up with someone unconcious - hopefully not dead, but it's a possibility).

6 more and so on up will be harder and harder, I've never put my PCs up against NPCs higher than +3, as I'm pretty sure they'd die.

Ya dig?

So you have to know your group pretty well, but if you have several "cookie-cutter" NPC templates (from joe-schmoes, to elite ops, and prime runners), this is a real easy way to make generally balanced combat encounters even on the fly. This is the "formula" I've used from the start in 4E and it's worked really really well. Receiving much positive feedback from my players (which includes past SR GMs) in my ability to balance encounters for Shadowrun.

{EDIT: SORRY I EDITED THIS A TON AS OTHER THOUGHTS CAME, IF YOU READ THIS BEFORE THE "LAST EDIT" TIME, MAY WANT TO RE-READ}

[DarkSpade]

Let me see if I'm reading this right.

If my 2 players are rolling 18 dice for there attacks, then putting them up against 2 NPCs rolling 15 dice to attack should challenge them, but they're still likely to come out okay.  If I put them up against 4 NPCs, then the NPCs should be rolling 12 dice.  For 6 NPCs, 9 dice.

Right?

[emsquared]

That would be the math I just described for an "approach" battle (not a "final fight", where you might want the "equivalency" math/numbers), yes. However, -9 NPCs could be getting into that exponential territory, where even with numbers they're unlikely to even effect your PCs much unless they role really unfortunately.

Worth noting though is that it was developed with 6 players in a group with the full-range of capabilities (melee, ranged, heavy weapons, hacking, magic, etc.), just 2 players with therefore limited capabilities could be more volatile. Still, I'd say it's a darn good starting point.

[Glyph]

Let me see if I'm reading this right.

If my 2 players are rolling 18 dice for there attacks, then putting them up against 2 NPCs rolling 15 dice to attack should challenge them, but they're still likely to come out okay.  If I put them up against 4 NPCs, then the NPCs should be rolling 12 dice.  For 6 NPCs, 9 dice.

Right?

I would disagree with that, myself.  Any time the group meets equally powerful (or even close to as powerfu) opposition, it means there is basically a 50/50 chance they will lose.  Even NPCs that are outclassed by them can still get lucky - with a fixed TN of 5, dice rolls go all over the place.  The PCs don't have to be badly wounded to feel threatened - if they barely manage to dodge something, or soak a wound down to just a box or two with a lucky roll, they will still consider it a challenging fight.  This is probably why you and your players felt so differently about the last NPC encounter - them feeling they escaped by the skin of their teeth, and you feeling they wiped the floor with the opposition.  When you are a player, you are much more aware of how fragile your PC is, and how one unlucky dice roll can ruin your day.

[emsquared]

Any time the group meets equally powerful (or even close to as powerfu) opposition, it means there is basically a 50/50 chance they will lose.

This would be true if the math was in a vacuum, but it's gonna play out that with everything "close to" equal, he who has initiative usually wins. Which is why I said that with NPCs of equivalent pools, you could suffer casualties but still win (a.k.a. not all die) if you have the edge in initiative and damage soak. Perhaps I didn't stress the importance of initiative enough in balancing battles. IME, the hierarchy of importance for enemy challenge-level goes; 1. Initiative, 2. Damage Defense/Soak, 3. Attack Pool. Do you disagree with that, Glyph? A group with a good Init. is going to be the biggest challenge, after that a group with better defense, after that is the most skilled shooters - especially with all else being equal. So you don't use just attack pool to try and balance fights, be aware of that hierarchy, DarkSpade.

Our best battles have been with ~2x the no. of adversaries with competitive initiative, and inferior defense and/or attacks. Adversaries with inferior initiative, but equal attack and defense still usually end up a pretty boring battle, because with 18 dice (and our two sammies are in that area), you're very capable of one-shoting just about anyone, and one-shoting includes anything that effectively takes them out of the battle (knockdowns, composure checks, -3 wound modifiers, all take NPCs out of a battle at my table as often as death/unconsciousness).

[Glyph]

I was assuming equal in every way, not just dice pools.  Yes, initiative matters.  Shadowrun is a game of the proverbial eggshells with hammers, so going first often means going last, because you have taken out your opponent.  This is also why ambushes are so deadly.

The one thing that should let shadowrunners pull out ahead is Edge, especially for humans; it lets them re-roll when the fickle luck of the dice turns against them.  NPCs have a shared Edge pool, so they shouldn't be using Edge as often.

[Reaver]

First off:

   The biggest problem for first time players (and GMs) that come from other games is the "bigger body count = more reward" mentality. In most other games, there is some reward for killing "badguys", either you get loot, or you get XP, or both.
   Not so in Shadowrun. Thanks to ownership laws/rules, looting is usually more hassle then reward, and Karma is awarded for objectives, not kills... in fact, combat usually costs you resources! (Cash for ammo, healthcare, lost time, etc)

Because of this, battles can be chaotic for players, especially if the "badguys" don't just line up to be shot... and instead actually used tactics (terrain,  covering fire, AoE, magic, etc)

I have seen experienced characters laid out by gangers, and wipe the floor with Red Samurai.... the situation really does matter.
That said, Squared does have a good mathmatical approach to combat, that shouldn't lead you too far astray.... but be prepared for a TPK if you don't keep your eye on the dice...