OK, I actually decided to write this up pretty-like.
Railguns
The To-Hit dice are cored in the same manner as Pulse Torpedoes
Range 0-6, 2+ hits
Range 6-12, 3+ hits
Range 12-18, 4+ hits
Range 18-24, 5+ hits
Range 24-30, 6+ hits
For each hit, roll another die for damage. Add the class of the Railgun to the
roll. Subtract the target's Armour Level (Kra'Vak type, not human). Any roll
lower than 1 is treated as a 1.
Roll 1-4, damage = RG class
Roll 5-6, damage = 2 x RG class
That's it.
Now for the number crunchers
Average damage at range
Range RG1 RG2 RG3
0-6 1.25 2.78 4.58
6-12 1 2.22 3.67
12-18 .75 1.67 2.75
18-24 .5 1.11 1.83
24.30.25.556.917
That would allow us to balance as
Class 1 Railgun, 1 MASS, 2-arc
Class 2 Railgun, 2 MASS, 1-arc
Class 3 Railgun, 4 MASS, 1 arc POINT COST = MASS x 4(?)
> Railguns
Any
> roll lower than 1 is treated as a 1.
...and the damage/MASS calculations that everyone has become so fond of:
Range RG1 RG2 RG3
0-6 1.25 1.39 1.15
6-12 1.0 1.11 0.92
12-18 0.75 0.84 0.69
18-24 0.5 0.55 0.46
24-30 0.25 0.27 0.23
> ...and the damage/MASS calculations that everyone has become
Don't these and other figures show that massed class 1's are still
significantly better than 1 class 3? Except perhaps against integral armor
which is the less common case.
> ...and the damage/MASS calculations that everyone has become
No. Just as for Beam weapons, Class 2s are the "best buy." As shown above, per
MASS, a class 2 outperforms a class 1 slightly. In other words, 2 Class
1 RGs are slightly worse than 1 Class 2 RG. Class 3+ RGs, though capable
of doing alot of damage in one strike, have a slightly lower efficiency.
If I don't divide for mass above, 2 Class 1s are 2.5, but 1 Class 2 is
2.78.
3 Class 1s are 3.75, and a Class 3 is 3.45
It mirrors Beams fairly well.
I couldn't stay out if the disscussion;) My quick thoughts.
> Schoon Wrote:
I worked out all the numbers like I did before and they seemed just a bit off.
So then I thought about modifying the damage roll to:
1-5, damage = RG class
6, damge = 2xRG class
This makes RG2's at an unarmored target do 2 pts on a 1-3 and 4 pts on
4-6.
It also allows a RG4 to do 4 pts on a 1 and 8 pts on roll of 2-6.
Then number crunching away we get:
Ave Dmg Mult 2+ 3+ 4+ 5+ 6
RG1 1 1.111 0.889 0.667 0.444 0.222 RG2 2 2.500 2.000 1.500 1.000 0.500 RG3 3
4.167 3.333 2.500 1.667 0.833 RG4 4 6.111 4.889 3.667 2.444 1.222 Pulse Torp
2.917 2.333 1.750 1.167 0.583
Dmg / Mass Mass
RG1 1 1.111 0.889 0.667 0.444 0.222 RG2 2 1.250 1.000 0.750 0.500 0.250 RG3 4
1.042 0.833 0.625 0.417 0.208 RG4 6 1.019 0.815 0.611 0.407 0.204 Pulse Torp 4
0.729 0.583 0.438 0.292 0.146
Dmg / Cost Cost
RG1 5 0.222 0.178 0.133 0.089 0.044 RG2 10 0.250 0.200 0.150 0.100 0.050 RG3
20 0.208 0.167 0.125 0.083 0.042 RG4 30 0.204 0.163 0.122 0.081 0.041 Pulse
Torp 12 0.243 0.194 0.146 0.097 0.049
I did a cost of 5 per mass and everything seemed to work out well. I'm happy
with version of K'V Railguns.
> On Mon, 7 Dec 1998 10:34:19 -0600, "Dean Gundberg" writes:
O.k., just to see if I understand:
Damage dice is roll a die and add the RG class, subtract the armor
level, and compare to the chart, correct? After the + and -'s, if the
roll is <=5 it does Class damage, if >=6 it does Classx2 damage.
> >> For each hit, roll another die for damage. Add the class of
Yup, that is how I understand it (using my variation to Schoons original
mechanic). It also gives the RG a bit of the reroll feel that on a modified
damage roll of 6, damage is doubled, but in the end the weapon is balanced
with the non-reroll Pulse Torpedo.
> Then number crunching away we get:
4 class 1's will do 4.444 compared to 1 class 3 4.167 Aren't class 1's still
more cost effective? and they have 2 arcs. Why not up the mass of class 1?
> RG4 30 0.204 0.163 0.122 0.081 0.041
Aren't PTorps too cost effective now?
> 3 Class 1s are 3.75, and a Class 3 is 3.45
Class 1 Railgun, 1 MASS, 2-arc
Class 2 Railgun, 2 MASS, 1-arc
Class 3 Railgun, 4 MASS, 1 arc
You get 4:1 class 1's to a class 3
Range RG1 RG2 RG3
0-6 1.25 2.78 4.58
4 class 1's are 5.0 and a class 3 is 4.58 plus the class 1's are 2 arc and
less prone to threshold rolls. I know what I'd use in 'wheenie mode'.
I suggest raising the mass of class 1 to 2.
> On Mon, 7 Dec 1998, Dean Gundberg wrote:
> I couldn't stay out if the disscussion ;) My quick thoughts.
<some big snips above>
Dean,
If I read this correctly, your verison of the 'K' railguns drops in power from
there FTMT counterparts. In FTMT we see that they Rainguns did damage
on 1-4 class rating, and 5-6 Double class rating. Yours shows 1-5
standard, and 6 double. I don't think I like the idea of making the Kra'Vaks
any weaker.
Lets look at in a new light, take the most powerfull Human weapons, and scale
the Class3 or 4 railgun to that level and see what happens..
Just a thought..
> On Mon, 7 Dec 1998, Tim Jones wrote:
<snip>
> 4 class 1's are 5.0 and a class 3 is 4.58
Here we go again.. We can never stop 'wheenie mode' so lets stop trying..We
are just trying to move the Kra'Vaks into the Fleet Book..
Lets start seeing some more Alien approaches, to the 'K' railgun rules..
Bouncing in for just a quick minute!:)
> I couldn't stay out if the disscussion ;) My quick thoughts.
How does this make them weaker? I mean, if you look at the details of what
Dean wrote up, I don't think it makes them weaker at all. Also,
it gives a differentiation between the Class-1s and the Class-3s; the
Class-3s are more prone to doing double damage than the Class-1s.
Whether this is a good thing or not...welll... ;-)
Formula: Damage = Die Roll + Weapon Class - K'Armor Rating
Thus:
Two K'Guns are fired, a Class-1 and a Class-3, at the same target (a
human ship). Both guns hit. Damage roll time. For both guns, a '4' is rolled.
For the Class-1, this means: 4+1-0 = 5. In Dean's system, anything <6 is
Class-damage, so the Class-1 does 1 pt. The Class-3, on the other hand,
does: 4+3-0 = 7, which is greater than 5, which means double damage,
which means 6 pts (ow).
Now, unless I'm missing something ('cause I haven't the time to number crunch
like Oerjan does;), it seems like a reasonable variation. If not for the
Kra'Vak, then someone else.
Okay, returning to lurker mode and back to work... :-/
Mk
> On Mon, 7 Dec 1998, Does the name Pavlov ring a bell? wrote:
> Bouncing in for just a quick minute! :)
D'oh, no double D'oh - thats what I get for trying to read posts at
work..
I did not see the damage die + railgun class.. Sorry..
But I still don't like rolling two set of dice..
> I did a cost of 5 per mass and everything seemed to work out well. I'm
This number is also what I arrived at.
> Here we go again.. We can never stop 'wheenie mode' so lets stop
If we're not fixing the RG's why not just use them from MT as written?
The reason is that the FB fixed beams so moving RG's into the
FB you should fix them too. The current proposal from Schoon/Dean
actually works OK. And in the latest version the wheenie problem is basically
fixed. You just have to roll 2 die and accept penetrating damage is factored
into the damage multiplier. I'm happy with that, and its a lot better than
going round in circles.
> On Mon, 7 Dec 1998, Sean Bayan Schoonmaker wrote:
> >I did a cost of 5 per mass and everything seemed to work out well.
I'm
> >happy with version of K'V Railguns.
Schoon, which verison are we talking about 3rd or 4th of Dec post?
SA
This is Dean/Schoon system with changed mass
to fix the wheenie hole. Penetrating damage (rerolls) is being omitted at this
time.
Railgun
=======
To hit number as pulse torpedoes. Damage roll 1 d6 with modifiers:
1d6 + railgun class - target intergral armour level
The final damage roll value is interpreted
1-5 - railgun class in damage points
6 - 2 x railgun class in damage points
-------------------------------------
Railgun Cost Class Arcs Mass (Mass x 4)
-------------------------------------
1 2 2 8
2 1 3 12
3 1 5 20
4 1 7 28
Stats
=====
I have added beams and (Pulse Torpedo) PT's for comparison, factoring in
rerolls for beams. Shields and Integral Armour have been omitted.
Average Damage
-----------------------------------------
0-6 6-12 12-18 18-24 24-30
-----------------------------------------
Railgun
1 1.11 0.89 0.67 0.44 0.22
2 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50
3 4.17 3.33 2.50 1.67 0.83
4 6.11 4.89 3.67 2.44 1.22
Beam
1 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 1.60 1.60 0.80 0.80 0.00
3 2.40 2.40 1.60 1.60 0.80
4 3.20 3.20 2.40 2.40 1.60
PT 2.92 2.33 1.75 1.17 0.58
Average Damage / Mass
-------------------------------------------------
0-6 6-12 12-18 18-24 24-30 Mass
-------------------------------------------------
Railgun
1 0.56 0.44 0.33 0.22 0.11 2
2 0.83 0.67 0.50 0.33 0.17 3
3 0.83 0.67 0.50 0.33 0.17 5
4 0.87 0.70 0.52 0.35 0.17 7
Beam
1 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 1
2 0.80 0.80 0.40 0.40 0.00 2
3 0.60 0.60 0.40 0.40 0.20 4
4 0.40 0.40 0.30 0.30 0.20 8
PT 0.73 0.58 0.44 0.29 0.15 4
Average Damage / Cost
Hey Tim,
How did you factor in the reroll potential? (Just curious as I am not a
probability specialist...)
-=Kr'rt
> ----------
> Hey Tim,
Yes Kurt, neither was I - its from Michael Sandy's rather neat
original calculation - double checked with a monte carlo simulation
of my own.
<Michael Sandy> How much damage, on average, is done by the reroll? Call this
amount 'x'.
x = 4/6 + 1/6*x, or
5/6 x = 4/6
x =.8 points.
So, 1 dice of beam damage can be expected to do
4/6 + .8/6, or 4.8/6, or 4/5 versus no shields.
</Michael Sandy>
i.e. 0.8 average damage with reroll per die(no shields/Iarmor)
Mk. wrote in reply to Steven:
> >If I read this correctly, your verison of the 'K' railguns drops in
As long as they cost a lot, fine. Right now (ie, MT rules) they're far, far,
FAR too powerful for their nominal points value.
[Mk's analysis snipped - it looked OK as far as I could see]
> Now, unless I'm missing something ('cause I haven't the time to number