Noam Izenberg wrote-
> I think a long range Needle with one die thoughout can be done, but
that'd be too
> expensive for Needles, but 3 Mass would be too cheap. You'd either have
Hmm, I worked out my ideas for the long range needle beam at twice the
cost/mass of a normal needle beam, but at close range gives you only a
single hit. Against this disadvantage you have to ballance the fact it only
requires one f.con and a longer range (twice). I think it probably is too
cheap or light, but 5 mass would be at a disadvantage at close range
compaired to 2 needle beams (same mass as 2 needle beams + 2 firecons,
but only half the dammage). The multi arc needle beams I was trying to balance
mass wize against the mass of having separate needle beams in each arc, vs the
disadvantage of losing a multi arc beam to threshold check. The long range
multi arc needle beam was just using the cl3 beam batt for the mass. The
focusable cl3 batt (the one that could fire as either a cl.3 or a needle beam)
was just a cl3 mass with a needle beam mass added. This would be at a
disadvantage (one needle beam attack vs 3 beam die) in the needle range, so I
think the player would have to only specify the type of attack he`s using
(needle or beam), and would be free to attack in any arc. Not sure if allowing
multi arc or specifing the arc the needle fires through at the start of the
turn would be better, but this is only a idea at the moment.
> From BIF:
> Hmm, I worked out my ideas for the long range needle beam at twice the
The first half of the sentence argues for a beam-style mechanic, the
second for a Pulser.
> Against this disadvantage you have to ballance the fact it only
In comparison to the Heavy Needle, a second firecon is needed only for the
long range attack. At short range it behaves exactly like 2 seperate needle
beams that must be fired at the same target (like anyone ever divides Needle
fire), requiring only one firecon.
> I think it probably is too
4 Mass (at 3pts/mass) for your Long Range Needle is arguably on the
expensive side. I'm still attempting to balance the Heavy Needle, as per
beth's question from last week sometime.
> The multi arc needle beams I was trying to balance
That balance favors multiple systems on larger ships ( more hits, but smaller
realtive loss per hit, and faster repair), single systems on smaller ships.
Needle beams are most likely on smaller faster ships (though the standard
version is only practical in game terms on dedicated Needle
cruisers that can mount 4-6 or more).
> The focusable cl3 batt (the one that could fire as either a cl.3 or a
I see nothing inherently wrong with the focusable battery, but I'm still
trying to think of any situation where 1 Needle die is preferable to 3 beam
dice. Even vs. ships with Screen 2, the beam dice are superior.
> From Charles:
> Multi-Arc Needle Beam
Sigh. No. My gut doesn't like the feel, but that's easily PSB'd away. Truth of
the matter is, multi arcs would go halfway to making the needle a usable
weapon. Expanding range capabilities to 24" would go the other half. I'd much
rather not have then "scalable" beyond 24", though (again, that's the gut
talking).
In message <6B3C0EEAB4FED3119F5F009027DC5E9EA9AE63@spacemsg3.jhuapl.edu>
> "Izenberg, Noam" <Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
> From Charles:
Truth
> of the matter is, multi arcs would go halfway to making the needle a
I'd
> much rather not have then "scalable" beyond 24", though (again, that's
Well, I originally came up with the 'classed' needle beam when I was
considering needle beam = laser, and was batting around the idea for an alien
race that exclusively used laser and optical technology (even was thinking
about giving them 'photonic' drives).
For normal use, Needle beams and heavy needle beams should suffice.