I am building a HH style ships, and am using MT missiles as primary weapons,
with c mode pulsars for the close range laser weapons, and scattergun pack
for countermissiles with a 50/50 intercept rate (modified up/down for
how advanced the tech of the relative navies).
I am after some input for the grasers, and using plalon layered armour for the
larger ships, require a heavy armour piercing weapon along the lines of k
guns, but with only a 12 mu range.
These weapons would need to have a 2 arc version, and a 1 arc vesion (to
represent broadside and chaisers), with the 1 arc being more powerful. Also,
the weapons would need to have pds ability.
I was thinking along the lines of using mkp`s, with unlimited fire, and pds
the same as a b1 (ie-5 or 6). And havig heaveir versions inflicting
heavier dammage. Also using mkp to hit rolls. Size is Small, Medium, Heavy and
Large.
2 ARC
CLASS MASS COST DAMMAGE
S 1 5 3
M 2 8 4
H 4 13 5 L 6 22 7
1 ARC
S 1 4 3
M 2 9 5
H 5 18 6 L 7 25 8
These are just very rough ideas, with the numbers picked out of the air. If a
number cruncher out there can run these numbers for me (I`m useless at
this at the moment, HELP), I would be able to chose some better numbers for
mass/cost/dammage ratio. Also note the larger weapons are very powerful,
and will go through armour like butter, which is the idea.
BIF
Any fluff tech needed? Multi soursc of up the anti tech. Choose one peoples
weapons and learn them, AKA Human, Kravak, or other specific.
david smith <bifsmith207@hotmail.com> wrote:I am building a HH style ships,
and am using MT missiles as primary weapons, with c mode pulsars for the close
range laser weapons, and scattergun pack
for countermissiles with a 50/50 intercept rate (modified up/down for
how advanced the tech of the relative navies).
I am after some input for the grasers, and using plalon layered armour for the
larger ships, require a heavy armour piercing weapon along the lines of k
guns, but with only a 12 mu range.
These weapons would need to have a 2 arc version, and a 1 arc vesion (to
represent broadside and chaisers), with the 1 arc being more powerful. Also,
the weapons would need to have pds ability.
I was thinking along the lines of using mkp`s, with unlimited fire, and pds
the same as a b1 (ie-5 or 6). And havig heaveir versions inflicting
heavier dammage. Also using mkp to hit rolls. Size is Small, Medium, Heavy and
Large.
2 ARC
CLASS MASS COST DAMMAGE S 1 5 3 M 2 8 4 H 4 13 5 L 6 22 7
1 ARC
S 1 4 3 M 2 9 5 H 5 18 6 L 7 25 8
These are just very rough ideas, with the numbers picked out of the air. If a
number cruncher out there can run these numbers for me (I`m useless at
this at the moment, HELP), I would be able to chose some better numbers for
mass/cost/dammage ratio. Also note the larger weapons are very powerful,
and will go through armour like butter, which is the idea.
BIF
> Charles Lee wrote:
> Any fluff tech needed? Multi soursc of up the anti tech. Choose one
Sticking to "one peoples" (ie., one GZGverse species's) tech is only useful if
you play in the GZG background. If OTOH you play in some *other* background
where the GZGverse aliens don't exist, you have to use whichever tech systems
are suitable to represent the tech featured in that background completely
regardless of which GZGverse species "owns" those tech systems. If the
background has some weapon(s) which aren't represented by anything
in the current FT rules you have to make up your own - which is exactly
what BIF is doing here.
> BIF wrote:
> I am after some input for the grasers, [...]
Note to the rest of the list: BIF is talking about the *HHverse* grasers
here, not the FT weapon of the same name used by the beta-test UNSC
ships.
> I was thinking along the lines of using mkp`s, with unlimited fire, and
HHverse grasers are good at ripping through *armour*, but they seem to be just
as vulnerable to sidewalls as the lasers are. Are you using FT's "screens" to
represent sidewalls, or do you include the effect of the sidewalls into the
ships' armour instead?
(Of course the Kra'Vak MKPs ignore screens, but since their to-hit roll
is a beam die with no reroll it is pretty trivial to apply the standard
screen-vs-beam mechanic if you want. It has some impact on the mass and
cost of the weapon though, so I'd better ask about it before I do any
number-crunching :-/)
Later,
> From: Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com>
> Subject: Re: FT-quick number crunching needed
> what BIF is doing here.
This is what bif (ME) has done before, specifically, using cl3 k guns as the
lasers/main foreward guns on EA omega class destroyers (which to my mind
are carriers with enough firepower to not require escorts).
> BIF wrote:
The armour piercing effect of said graisers is what sent me looking down the
route of the k gun/mkp mechanics. Sidewalls will be represented as
standard on every warship for free (level 0, no effect), with bigger ships
having
sheild generators to represent hevier sidewalls (upto 2, as fb construction
rules). Civilian ships will have no sidewalls, and a ship with no sidewalls
(civ or battledammaged warships) will take dubble dammage (as will end on
shots up the kilt/down the throth*).
> (Of course the Kra'Vak MKPs ignore screens, but since their to-hit roll
> cost of the weapon though, so I'd better ask about it before I do any
Quick answer, yes.
Another question, for each 5% mass, you gain 2 screen generators (one for each
sidewall). Would you consider this unbalanced?, considering that you are only
covering 2 arcs with each and doubbling dammage throgh the open
ends?
> Later,
* NOTE-I CANNOT SPELL <G>
BIF (who has probably forgotten something again)
> BIF wrote:
> I am after some input for the grasers, [...]
> standard on every warship for free (level 0, no effect), with bigger
Not just "no screen", then? Makes sense for the setting; "up-the-kilt"
etc. shots always seem to inflict FAR more damage than shots that had to go
through sidewalls first.
Could be a bit difficult to tell when a small warship with "level-0"
sidewalls has lost its sidewall if there's no explicit sidewall generator
to lose, though - it might be worthwhile to represent the free "level-0"
sidewall generators as explicit systems on the SSD too so they can be lost in
threshold checks.
> Another question, for each 5% mass, you gain 2 screen generators (one
That should be OK - you get a bit more redundancy since you can Roll
Ship to present an undamaged sidewall, but with the double damage for "naked"
arcs you won't always have time to do that. Similarly you could represent a
pair of broadside Laser batteries by buying one each 3-arc and 1-arc
Pulser-C (total of 5 Mass), and then move one arc from the 3-arc to the
1-arc so you get 2 2-arc weapons instead for those 5 Mass.
***
> I am building a HH style ships, and am using MT missiles as primary
Using the launcher/magazine variant in the WDA, then? (If not, you
should <g>)
***
Back to the HHverse grasers:
> These weapons would need to have a 2 arc version, and a 1 arc vesion
I think it'll be less confusing if the 1- and 2-arc versions both
inflict
the same damage - if you want your chaser armament to be more powerful,
simply use a larger weapon in the chaser mounts!
Since these weapons only have a range of 12mu, they're going to be quite
small - except for the "L" version they're too small to pay for the
difference between 1- and 2-arc versions with a Mass difference, so
instead
I'd make the 1-arc version cost 3xMass while the 2-arc one costs 4xMass.
I'd also shift the damage values for the larger weapons a bit upwards to
make them a full Mass point better than the next smaller variant:
Rough mass and damage ratings:
Size: Damage: Mass
S 3 1
M 5 2
H 7 3
L 10 4
Cost:
1-arc version: 3xMass
2-arc version: 4xMass
They're degraded more by level-1 and -2 sidewalls than the lasers are,
and
except for the "S" they're not quite as good for anti-missile work; but
their (much) better armour penetration should compensate for that.
The Mass and damage values above make the "H" version somewhat underpowered
compared to the "M" and "L" - ideally it should inflict 7.5 pts/hit
instead
of 7 :-/ It also makes the "L" able to punch through even 4-layer SDN
armour with ease and gut a destroyer with a single hit; this might be a bit
over the top, but then again the biggest HHverse grasers do seem to gut DDs
pretty easily.
Hope this helps,
> I wrote:
> Sidewalls will be represented as standard on every warship for free
Civilian
> ships will have no sidewalls, and a ship with no sidewalls (civ or
That is to say, the double damage against "naked" targets makes sense given
the HHverse setting; merely using "no screen" would be a bit too wimpy
:-/
Later,
<earlier message sections cut>
> Ojeran Wrote:
> The Mass and damage values above make the "H" version somewhat
Hrm. By the above comments I take that the HH ships will be using some kind of
Phalon style layered armor, yes?
Also, I had an idea a while back for simulating HH laser heads in FT,
and it might be applicable for you. The basic load was same cost/mass
as a ER salvo load, but wiht a 24 MU range. The warheads would then detonate
and cause 6 beam dice of attack to all ships within 6 MU (or three for
vector). Ships with an ADFC can knock down the birds before they detonate, and
kravak scatterguns would engage as per normal salvo missiles. Nasty toys I
think, but a bit light in playtesting on my
end...
Perhaps you can use the mechanic somewhere for the laser heads...
Also, it would seem to me that every HH ship would have an ADFC, given that
their datalinking of PDS systems is virtually routine in
combat....