[FT] WotW #8 Gatling Battery & Gatling Phaser

10 posts · May 1 2001 to May 17 2017

From: Charles Taylor <charles.taylor@c...>

Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 23:01:17 +0100

Subject: [FT] WotW #8 Gatling Battery & Gatling Phaser

Well, if we've finished with the Holofield, I suggest something simple, that
shouldn't take long, a '2 for the price on 1 deal' (ok, so they have similar
names).

Gatling Batteries [Paul Wellman] (Sam Penn's Website) MASS: 3, Cost 9

The Gatling battery is a high rate of fire class 1 battery, with an effective
range of 9mu and attacks target ships with 4 dice. Alternatively, the Gatling
Battery can attack incoming fighters and missiles as 2 standard PDS.

Comments: (Oerjan) Mass and cost is for FT2, not FB. Superseded by the
Pulser-C.

Gatling Phaser [Star Fleet Battles Conversions by Alan Brain]

Treat as Re-useable submunitions which do not ignore shields (i.e. a
half range class 3 beam) but can be fired at incoming Fighters, Missiles and
Plasma Torpedos as a single PDS. Still requires Firecon in PDS mode. Same cost
and arcs as a Class 2 Beam.

Comments: (Oerjan) Depending on its PD firepower it could be anything from
very poor or very good. It should balance ~OK if it gets 1 PDS die
or 2-3 B1 dice against fighters/missiles/plasma torps. I know I've asked
Alan about it before, but can't find his reply at the moment.

Despite there obvious differences, the concept behind these weapons is
similar - a short-range, rapid fire beam with reasonably good
capabilities as both an anti-ship and a point defence weapon.

The Gatling Battery is similar to a weak Pulsar-C with improved PDS
capability - from a comparison with a Pulsar-C I'd say that either its
MASS should be increased to 4 (and COST to 12), or its MASS left
unchanged (at 3) and its COST increased to 15 (assuming an all-arc
weapon).
Or give it pulsar arcs, 1-arc is MASS 2, 3-arc is MASS 3, and 6-arc is
MASS 4, COST is 3x MASS.

The Gatling Phaser is a half range Class 3 beam battery with PDS
capability (treat as PDS system with same arcs - c.f. Pulsars - needs
firecon), and is MASS 2 for a 3-arc version, and MASS 3 for a 6-arc
version - COST is 3x MASS - I think the MASS and COST given is quite
alright.

Both weapons _could_ be replaced by a 'locked' Pulsar-C (i.e. weapon
description could be replaced by 'treat this weapon as a Pulsar battery
configured in Close (C) mode').

My vote is to treat both weapons as the same - use either Alan Brain's
version or a Pulsar-C.

What do you think?

From: Izenberg, Noam <Noam.Izenberg@j...>

Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 12:27:21 -0400

Subject: Re: [FT] WotW #8 Gatling Battery & Gatling Phaser

> Gatling Batteries [Paul Wellman] (Sam Penn's Website)

I agree that the Pulser-C is the more balanced and better costed
alternative to this. I'd rather not tweak the design to conform to the
original text.
I'd take a Pulser-C and re-label it.

> Gatling Phaser [Star Fleet Battles Conversions by Alan Brain]

> Treat as Re-useable submunitions which do not ignore shields (i.e. a

I prefer the single PDS die in PDS mode. This makes it look alot like a
slightly modified Pulser, so flavor might be more distinct as 2
Class-1-as-PDS dice.

> Despite there obvious differences, the concept behind these weapons is

I would point out that the "rapid-fire" bit is purely PSB and not
mechanics
driven. Any FB-standard beam weapon could be redefined as, for example,
"a
series of rapid-fire beam pulses".

I'd drop Paul's weapon in favor of the Pulser. You could do the same with
Alan's, or keep it as a slight twist on the standard Pulser

From: Bif Smith <bif@b...>

Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 18:23:09 +0100

Subject: Re: [FT] WotW #8 Gatling Battery & Gatling Phaser

[quoted original message omitted]

From: Charles Taylor <charles.taylor@c...>

Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 20:38:26 +0100

Subject: Re: [FT] WotW #8 Gatling Battery & Gatling Phaser

In message <6B3C0EEAB4FED3119F5F009027DC5E9E01D73071@spacemsg3.jhuapl.edu>
> "Izenberg, Noam" <Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu> wrote:

> > Gatling Batteries [Paul Wellman] (Sam Penn's Website)

Agree
> >Gatling Phaser [Star Fleet Battles Conversions by Alan Brain]

Good point :-)
> I'd drop Paul's weapon in favor of the Pulser. You could do the same

ATM I'd say give the 'Gatling Battery' the same stats as a Pulsar-C
(available in 1, 3, and 6 arc versions), while leaving the Gatling
Phaser as written - and it rolls 1 dice as a PDS in PDS mode (for
simplicity).

A couple more weapons that I think I should have included (maybe) in
this one (similar theme - at least in the latter - its another Pulsar
variant):

Meson Flechette [Noam Izenberg] (NIFT-Midbar Skunkworks)

Mass 4+1/arc, Cost 3xMass. Maximum 3 arcs.
Short range beam-like heavy weapon,  Damage 0-12 mu = 6 beam dice,
12-24 mu = 3 beam dice. Cost of  Flechette +2 arcs is the same as for 3
class 2 beams, and has exactly the same power.

I assume that screens & shrouds protect normally. Costs look ok for 3 arcs
(assuming the limitation that it can only target one target and can be
completely lost to 1 failed threshold or needle beam strike is offet by the
advantage that is is less likely to
loose _some_ firepower to thresholds and is easier to repair once
damaged), not sure about 1 & 2 arcs - may be underpriced at 1 arc - but
probably only by about half a MASS :-)

Twin Particle Array [B5Wars conversion by Clint Kozell/Corye Seale]

As Pulser-M     Â
May fire as normal or as 2xPDS Mass = 1 per arc Points = 4 x mass

Comments:
(Oerjan)  If it works as a Pulser-M but fires 2 PDS dice in PD mode, it
should have the same Mass as a Pulser and cost 6xMass. The above weapon
is *WAY* overpowered/underpriced for 1, 2 and 3 arcs, merely overpowered
for 4 arcs, OK for 5 arcs and somewhat *under*powered for 6 arcs.]

Question: if used in PDS mode, do both PDS dice have to be used on the same
threat (fighter group, missile salvo, plasma bolt)? I'd say yes.

On cost, I agree with Oerjan - MASS should be as Pulsar, COST is 6x
MASS.

I'd be tempted to cut the PDS down to 1 dice - then it just becomes a
Pulsar-M (but I guess that loses the 'twin effect' - so the PDS mode
could become '2 class-1's as PDS' - roughly the same as 1 PDS system).

From: Charles Taylor <charles.taylor@c...>

Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 21:56:35 +0100

Subject: Re: [FT] WotW #8 Gatling Battery & Gatling Phaser

Well, there hasn't been a lot of activity on this one for a couple of
weeks (WotW is turning into WotM :-) so is everyone happy with the
conclusions drawn so far?

In summary (IIRC)

Gatling Battery

This is equivalent to a Pulsar in Close Mode that cannot be
re-configured.

Gatling Phaser - Star Fleet Battles conversion genre weapon

AFAIK is ok as it is. Alternatively, it could be treated as the same MASS in
Class 1 beam batteries.

From: Ndege Diamond <nezach@e...>

Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:14:07 -0700

Subject: Re: [FT] WotW #8 Gatling Battery & Gatling Phaser

> At 09:56 PM 5/16/01 +0100, you wrote:

> Meson Flechette

Woah, what is a Meson Flechette?

From: Izenberg, Noam <Noam.Izenberg@j...>

Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 07:22:37 -0400

Subject: Re: [FT] WotW #8 Gatling Battery & Gatling Phaser

> From Ndege Diamond:

> Woah, what is a Meson Flechette?

A name pulled out of the technobabble blender...

From: Charles Taylor:

> Gatling Battery

Works for me.

> Gatling Phaser - Star Fleet Battles conversion genre weapon

Agreed

> Meson Flechette

I wanted a weapon that could have fewer than 3 arcs, or 4, or 5. Otherwise,
exactly right.

> Twin Particle Array - B5 Wars conversion genre weapon

"anything _but_ medium range"?
Also works for me.

I'll see if there are any more comments, then make the changes in the archive.

> Any ideas what we can do for number 9?

Several. Most, I'd like to see the Beam Bridge and E/M Sabot discussed,
then the various damage shields.

From: Charles Taylor <charles.taylor@c...>

Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 18:25:10 +0100

Subject: Re: [FT] WotW #8 Gatling Battery & Gatling Phaser

In message <6B3C0EEAB4FED3119F5F009027DC5E9E01D730A7@spacemsg3.jhuapl.edu>
> "Izenberg, Noam" <Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu> wrote:

> From Ndege Diamond:

Like most of the systems in the archive :-)
> From: Charles Taylor:
[snip]
> > Twin Particle Array - B5 Wars conversion genre weapon
Yes, that is what I _meant_ to say :-|
> Also works for me.
Ok, why not - should be interesting :-)

From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>

Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 22:36:33 -0400

Subject: Re: [FT] WotW #8 Gatling Battery & Gatling Phaser

> Several. Most, I'd like to see the Beam Bridge and E/M Sabot

"Beam Bridge"? Is this what connects the forward hull and the after

From: aebrain@a...

Date: Thu, 17 May 101 06:58:48 GMT

Subject: Re: [FT] WotW #8 Gatling Battery & Gatling Phaser

> At 09:56 PM 5/16/01 +0100, you wrote:

A small Meson Flech, obviously.

Sorry.