Balancing Beam Batteries--
I think I've found a way to mathematically test to see if batteries are
balanced. I did an analysis of Adam Delafield's LR beams and disruptors
and found out for two-thirds of his batteries (the B's and C's) that if
you add up the amount of damage the weapon does in each six inch interval and
multiply that total by the number of weapons needed to equal six mass that
the resulting number is 18d6. Also, the standard B-bat from FT also
comes to 18d6. A lot of bats, of course, don't end up with 18d6 which explains
the
discrepancy between batteries (notice in particular the A-bats do more
damage than the others):
Weapon: Total Damage Times Number to = Total
Over Range ( x) equal 6 mass
LR C 3d6 x 6 = 18d6 LR B 6d6 x 3 = 18d6 LR A 12d6 x 2 = 24d6
Standard C 2d6 x 6 = 12d6 Standard B 6d6 x 3 = 18d6 Standard A 12d6 x 2 = 24d6
Disr. C 3d6 x 6 = 18d6 Disr. B 6d6 x 3 = 18d6 Disr. A 10d6 x 2 = 20d6
Taking 18d6 as standard, I fiddled with other beam battery combinations and
all the following are balanced along this 18d6 idea.
Weapon: Mass: 0-6" 6-12" 12-18" 18-24" 24-30" 30-36"
Gauss C 1 1d6 1d6 1d6
Gauss B 2 1d6 1d6 1d6 1d6 1d6 1d6
Gauss A 3 (1d6 out to 54")
Pulse Bat 2 1d6(x3) 1d6(x3) (Pulse bats get three shots)
B (standard) 2 2d6 2d6 1d6 1d6
Disr. C 1 2d6 1d6
Disr. B. 2 3d6 2d6 1d6
Disr. A. 3 3d6 3d6 2d6 1d6
a bat (lt. A) 3 3d6 2d6 2d6 1d6 1d6 A bat 4 3d6 3d6 2d6 2d6 1d6 1d6
AA bat 6 (3d6 to 18"; 2d6 to 36"; 1d6 to 54") (no burnout needed for balance)
I described Adam's LR beams as gauss cannon (mostly cause I like gauss cannons
and the Kra'vak railguns are too powerful) to explain the same 1d6 damage over
longer ranges. My PSBS explanation is that the larger gauss cannons fire the
same munitions at higher velocities to more reliably get hits on moving ships
at range. Shields effect them like other beams because instead of a large
shell hitting the ship's hull the gauss cannons fire proximity exploding
shells to increase their chances of getting a hit.
Theoretically, any mass 3 weapon is balanced if it does 9d6 over its total
range at six inch intervals and any mass 4 beam weapon is balanced if it does
12d6 over its total range at six inch intervals. I'm still working on a mass 6
"Capital ship disruptor."
The pulse bat comes from a long-term attempt to figure out a way
to replicate those cool rapid fire phasers they have mounted on the Defiant in
DS9. The pulse battery gets three short-range 1d6 pulses each turn.
Lastly, if you consider the C-bat's unique ability to operate as
a
PDAF as being worth a d6 of raw damage then the standard C-bat is also
balanced along this scheme.
Let me know what you think,
James
Date sent: 12-OCT-1996 09:39:53
> Balancing Beam Batteries--
> I think I've found a way to mathematically test to see if
Big snip.
> Theoretically, any mass 3 weapon is balanced if it does 9d6
Give me a weapon that does 9d6 out to only 6" any day. Provided the carrying
vessel is fast enough to get into range, and the beams have 'arcness'. The
maneuver advantage is always with the aggressor. The guy with the longer range
has two problems. First, he can't hope to go 'Knife Fighting' with a ship
armed like that. At close ranges, the shorter ranged weapons have MUCH more
firepower. Second, to gain advantage for the longer ranged weapons, you must,
on occasion, turn away from the aggressor, so you can't fire at him at all for
some of the time.
Simply put, I find the ability to roll lots of dice in one burst far more
advantageous than the ability to plink away at long range. It also helps keep
a logical progression in die gain over range. eg;
4d6,3d6,2d6,1d6 (my disruptors)
makes more sense than.
3d6,3d6,2d6,1d6 (your disruptors)
So it makes them a little more playable.
> The pulse bat comes from a long-term attempt to figure out a
I use AA, and keep the 'burnout' rule, as the Defiant's performance does seem
to be temperamental at best (some days it's invincible, others it just falls
apart round your ears). And the Defiant doesn't get damage control teams (but
gets to fit 75% systems rather than 50%).
> Lastly, if you consider the C-bat's unique ability to operate
I figured this too. I'd like to make the C bats statisticly more powerful than
A so that C,B or A becomes a choice, not a compromise.
> At 09:01 AM 10/12/96 +0000, you wrote:
> Give me a weapon that does 9d6 out to only 6" any day. Provided the
You've got a point. 9d6 out to only 6" would scare the hell out of me. On the
other hand, I personally would never deploy such a weapon. I mean what with
wave guns and missiles and fighters and such, I'd be scared of being cut down
before I ever got a chance to fight. But it would still be a frightening
weapon...
> Simply put, I find the ability to roll lots of dice in one burst far
You've got a good point here too. I would prefer the 4/3/2/1
progression but it makes the A disruptor more powerful than the 18d6 limit
that the other batteries (mostly) seem in line with. I know its a minor,
little, quibbling, tiny advantage but the players I've got tend to look for
just such things and then max them out on all their fleets. I wouldn't need
perfectly mathematically balanced weapons if players around here were willing
to design their fleets with their own personal preferences towards combat in
mind (you know, treating it like a game) instead of an exercise in accounting.
James
> On Sat, 12 Oct 1996, JAMES BUTLER wrote:
> You've got a point. 9d6 out to only 6" would scare the hell
I mean
> what with wave guns and missiles and fighters and such, I'd be scared
A mass 3 weapon firing 9D6 out to 6" - hm, why am I reminded of
Starfire's Plasma Guns...
Anyway; put one or two of these on a thrust 8 Destroyer. It'll live up to its
classification <vbg> Especially if you have a big enough table so
those speed 40+ manouvres are possible!
Later,