This sounds like a task for "Watch the World Die", which I wrote originally to serve as "Session 0" of an AW campaign.  But it can also be played as a one-shot "party game" or used as a solo GM tool for structured brainstorming. 

The "APOCALYPSE TYPE" table in Phase 1 will add a few options to your list all by itself.

Looked in here?  http://apocalypse-world.com/forums/index.php?board=22.0

Awesome idea.  I'm now thinking about a hack of your hack in which the monsters aren't heroes (except to themselves), and the main enemy is the human world.  King Kong, or Cloverfield, for instance.  Players vs the MC's fronts (which are mostly human combatants) and someone's probably gonna get killed, or driven back to their lair to await the sequel.  (ETA: Or PvP - monsters vs humans - with the MC functioning as Referee.)

Cloverfield is a Lizard (nervous, territorial, amphibious), and the Parasites are a Swarm (speedy, spread out, toxic).  But they are not working together, their goals are entirely self-centered (at the beginning of the movie the big monster shakes off a bunch of parasites which had been burrowing into its skin, thus freeing them to ravage the city of New York, and after that scene they pay no attention to each other at all).

FYI: The first RPG I ever bought and GMd was "Monsters! Monsters!".  :-)

Can I ask, why Skype instead of a forum or a free web page, etc?

This sounds interesting.  In fact I'd be happy to come in.  Just wondering why Skype.

Nicely said, @Borogove.  It's difficult for me to imagine a situation where the fiction hasn't established one character already doing something that the other reacts to, or already having an advantage (whether positional, situational, emotional, tactical or psychological).  It would have to be uncallably close, and very specific circumstances for me to even feel a need to roll this.

Imagine character A with a holstered gun sneaks into character B's bedroom to steal the keys which are on the foot of the bed.  But the doorknob squeaks and character B is a light sleeper with a gun under the pillow.  Imagine that the players both say "I want to draw, aim and fire" at the exact same moment.  What should the MC do? 

I still don't feel I need an initiative roll.  First, I'd tell them "Okay, you both rapidly draw your weapons and point them at each other."  Then I'd ask them some questions to figure out what's really happening here.  The players are collaborating in this fiction too, dig?

"Character A, do you actually intend to shoot character B, or are you more interested in just getting the keys?"

"Character B, do you actually intend to shoot character A?  Or was that just a reflex and you're surprised to see who it is?  Or do you just want to make character A leave your room by threatening to shoot?"

It doesn't really matter which order you ask them in, because either way, the answer of the first player asked will tend to be echoed by the second.  (And if it isn't, then you've got some awesome players and powerful drama is coming your way!)  If it's anything other than "both say shoot", the next roll will probably be a Manipulate.

If they're both actually intending to shoot, then this is a Seize by Force and there will be an exchange of harm.  Which one is seizing?  I'd say the one coming in.  Why?  Because this is not a game of micromanagement over microseconds of positional combat scenarios.  There are other games for that.  I'm backing up.  I'm reading “seize something” broadly as the game instructs, and the thing character A is seizing is the keys.  For character A, that was the whole point of this scene in the first place.  This gives me ONE ROLL to determine the outcome, instead of getting all crunchy with stuff the system isn't designed to support anyway.

What makes you think other MCs aren't putting characters in odd places?  Isn't the whole game about putting characters someplace odd?  That's certainly the way I see it, regardless of your character class.  The whole frikkin world has gone odd!

But I want to speak about this in a more mechanical sense...

Making coffee doesn't require a roll.  Using that weapon probably does.  The Hocus generally speaking isn't going to be very good at it, so he's likely to fail, and that increases the chance of a Hard Move happening.

My AW players are not minmaxers (they're mostly still relative newbies), but they are smart enough to know that.  Every one of them has at least one gun, but the Hocus and Brainer rarely use them.  Why would they?  They have other talents.  Taking a bigger chance of tactical failure and a Hard Move doesn't seem like fun to them.  (Might be fun for ME, but that's another story.)

Already hashed.  The typical approach in a combat scene is simply saying "What do you do" to everyone all around the table, and then figure out the order based on speed, distance and drama.  The PC who says he's shooting a gun should probably happen faster than the PC who says he's running 50 yards across the field.

You're not gonna break anything by using dice instead, but you might end up with the first PC running 50 yards BEFORE the other PC gets a chance to fire his gun.

I'm running a game with a Brainer and a Hocus as well, they are definitely the outlier characters in the campaign.  My Brainer player is an RPG newbie.  It took 4 sessions to get the two of them to meet the other PCs.  It took 3 sessions to develop a backstory for her, because there are so many vagueries (where do Violation Gloves come from, what status do Brainers have in the world, etc).  But it's working out great, because they both keyed into the Maelstrom pretty quickly.  That allowed me to link them together in a way, even though they were physically separate, and I use their visions to drop clues about the major local NPCs that will eventually cause complex collisions to occur, one way or another.

To MCs: If you are in this situation, be patient and let the maelstrom guide you. :-)  One thing I found really helped in character detailing was asking the question: "How are Brainers viewed by the rest of society?"  This question, because it involves everybody's point of view, turned into a group discussion in which we collectively figured out the answers for our world.

I'm not gonna write your world for ya, but we established pretty easily that IF there was a class of people who could read peoples minds and even make them do things, they wouldn't be held in very favorable regard by the population at large.  So in our world, Brainers are like a very loosely-connected underground network of autonomous (and poorly-socialized) individuals who keep their talents a secret almost all of the time.  In some places they are persecuted in religious witchhunts.  In others they are dissected or experimented upon by curious Angels or Savvyheads.  You do NOT want to walk around wearing "I'M A BRAINER" on your T shirt.

While trying to think of an allegorical class of oppressed or distrusted people, we decided that openly being a Brainer (in our world) would be roughly like being an openly gay black Wiccan in the South in the 1950s.