As for EMP resolution, I don't think we really had any. It'd really be nice to
come up with a decent direct fire EMP weapon, but as of now there seem to be
too many approaches. If anyone wants to ammend the specific systems they have
in the archives, or give me something they think
is a synthesis of some of the ideas, they should probably e-mail me
directly.
As for Needles, I responded to BIF's post a while ago, point by point, but it
must have gotten lost in transit.
Beth asked regarding the HNB:
> Why the need for two firecons to get extra range? I can't really
The HNB, in my opinion, needed a fraction more limitation than simply the
extra mass. An extra firecon seemed right. As with regular needle beams, it's
per terget, so if you had 2 HNB's you still ned only two dedicted firecons.
Further playtesting could determine whether this limitation was
really necessary. It could easily be that the HNB balances at 4 Mass/2
Firecons or 5 Mass/1 Firecon.
> (Charles [on phalon needles)) On second thoughts I think I'll go with
I'd say you have to choose a single arc for the Needle. I'd allow "class 1 as
PDS" fire for the Pusler N, since the gun is tuned to a very narrow beam and
not the wide barrage of most PDS fire.
For the SV Needle Pods, I favor the (T) version (Charles') but don't relish
the cost of one biomass for each shot. I'd say if you consume a biomass you
should get two needle dice vs. the chosen target.
And stepping back to BIF's message from the 2nd & 24th...
> 1-Multi arc needle beams
Don't like, but would want +2Mass/arc if we had to have them.
> 2-heavy needle beams (as on noam`s site, with the double dammage
But
> each to their own (if it works for him, OK).
The HNB can only target a single system at close range.the possibility of
double hits (only on double 6) is reasonable due to the increased power of the
beam. And even so that only affects systems which take 2 hits to destroy, like
Main Drive.
> 3-Long range needle beams
> 4-Multi arc long range needle beams
> 5-Needle beam MT missiles
> 6-Variable focus needle beams/class 3 bats.
I kind of like this. Adds some interesting flexibility to heavy weapons. I'm
not sure whetehr I'd trade 3 beam dice for one needle die in actual combat,
though. Anyway, For multi-arc class 3's you'd have to choose a "Primary
arc" at the start of the game that would be the single arc it could fire
through in Needle configuration.
> Absender: Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu
Why don't you like it? Would be nice to know the reasons. I personally like
the idea, as I consider the 1 arc to be fairly restrictive, especially with
the low probability of achieving a significant hit with a neeedle beam.
For 2 Mass/arc I might as well buy a second needle beam - depending on
points cost, of course. What would you consider as points cost/arc ?
Greetings
In message <6B3C0EEAB4FED3119F5F009027DC5E9EA9AE3D@spacemsg3.jhuapl.edu>
> "Izenberg, Noam" <Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
> As for EMP resolution, I don't think we really had any.
And, if you need it, PSB - needs the extra resolving power of an
additional firecon to lock on to a small target at that distance.
Hmm.. we _could_ extrapolate (we don't have to, but we could :-), thus:
Classed Needle Beam. Needs 1 firecon dedicated to it. Roll 1 'needle dice' per
class (1d6,
1-4: miss, 5: 1 damage point, 6: 1 damage point + target system hit, no
re-rolls, not affected by screens or armour). 2 or more
'system hit' results destroy the main drive, or get a normal beam
re-roll if attacking another system.
With more than one dedicated firecon, the CNB gains an additional 12 mu of
range per additional dedicated firecon, but loses 1 dice per additional 12 mu
of range.
Class MASS COST
1 2 6
2 5 15 3 11 33
above that the MASS is determined as double the MASS of the previous
Class, +1, cost is MASS x3.
This is the 1 arc version, if you're inclined to multi-arc needle
weapons (I have another post on this subject) then each extra arc should
increase the MASS by 25-33%.
> >(Charles [on phalon needles)) On second thoughts I think I'll go with
Seems reasonable - might be a bit confusing though (Pulsar-C,M,L act as
normal PDS, Pulsar-N acts as 'Class 1 as PDS')
> For the SV Needle Pods, I favor the (T) version (Charles') but don't
Hmm... maybe - I worked out the effective 'MASS' and 'COST' of a pod by
comparing Lance Pods to Pulse Torpedos - but I didn't account for the
difference in armour penetrating capability.
> And stepping back to BIF's message from the 2nd & 24th...
err... you may as well have another needle beam - it costs the same (or
was this intentional :-).
> > 2-heavy needle beams (as on noam`s site, with the double dammage
Hmm... but there already exists the MT Needle Missile.
> > 6-Variable focus needle beams/class 3 bats.
My thoughts on Needle Beams.
I have considered that Needle Beams (and PDS) are in fact Laser weapons
- this would explain the ability of both weapons to ignore screens
(which are designed to stop particle beams - using the traditional
Tuffleyverse PSB).
In this case, I would not have a problem (from PSB grounds) with
multi-arc needle beams - all you need to steer the beam is a moving
mirror array (actually, not _quite_ that simple :-).
One implication of this is that you _might_ be able to partly protect
your ship using a mirrored hull - but I'm not going there just yet!
If you allow multi-arc needle beams - it also answers certain queries
about pulsars in needle mode and variable focus needle/Cl.3 beams, but
raises questions about the pulsars - which are presumably some form of
particle beam weapon normally (assuming traditional PSB) (OTOH, maybe a
Pulsar is a versatile particle beam, capable of firing electrons - C
mode, protons - M mode, or neurons - L mode, in which case, needle or N
mode is a modification to C mode where the electron beam is used as a
Free Electron Laser - hows that for PSB :-)
I think the important question is - is a multi-arc needle beam balanced?
On a related topic, and something I forgot to put in my original message
- is the concept of allowing 'standard' weapons to fire at specific
systems - which I've seen a number of times.
My version (largely for Star Trek games :-):
Firing standard beam batteries at specific target systems: This requires a
firecon to specifically target the system. Maximum range is 6 mu. Roll damage
as normal, if any of it penetrates screens and armour, roll 1d6 if the dice
rolls a 6, the target is destroyed (or damaged if main drive). Elaborate as
required.
First some general venting about Needle Beams:
Alot of my opinions on Needle beams are based on simple woeful experience. (No
small part of it courtesy PBeM's run by Scott Fields).
A short range, single arc weapon that kills systems on a 1 in 6 chance is just
out and out weak, and is penalized further by the jeopardy you have to place
your ships in to get a needle shot off. In order for them to be useful in a
scenario you need at least 4 Needles on target (for a better than 50% shot at
achieving the objective), meaning you have to coordinate lots of little ships
or dedicate one or two bigger ships
for the purpose, _and_ get into the enemies' best firing ranges. The
only truly logical targets for Needles make things worse: Firecons are
redundant on most ships worth targeting with Needles, so require multiple hits
to deal with, and Main Drives, require two hits to destroy (though i'l concede
that one MD hit is still a good thing).
Multi arcs would help coordinate Needle beam attacks. Longer range would make
needle attacks less suicidal.
As they stand now, Needle beams are "flavor" weapons with IMO/IME little
real game effectiveness. Sure "Pirate ships have Needles to cripple their
prey" Just try it in a real scenario.
Next, assorted replies:
From: KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de
> >1-Multi arc needle beams
> Why don't you like it ? Would be nice to know the reasons. I personally
> like the idea, as I consider the 1 arc to be fairly restrictive,
I considered the short range to be the most restrictive aspect. The single arc
made more sense to me for a precision weapon.
> For 2 Mass/arc I might as well buy a second needle beam - depending on
> points cost, of course. What would you consider as points cost/arc ?
That was sort of the point. After thinking about it some more I could see
going for +1/arc max 3 arcs, as with some other weapons. I could
probably be convinced of it.
> From BIF:
You mean something like a single Needle beam die out to 24" at a cost of 4
Mass or so?
Maybe. Think of re-outfitting a Heavy cruiser - say a Vandenburg, as a
Needle ship. Tou'd be trading one 3-arc clas 3 and a class 2 for 2 long
Range Needles (F only). you'd be trading quite alot of beam flexibility for an
inflexible Needle system.
> 4-Multi arc long range needle beams
Are you referring to "Primary Beams?" All I know about them is what's been on
the list, and I havent' paid too much attention to that. If you jest mean
"main (or even spinal) weapon" I'd think of them as being power, not
precision. Look at the KV. Heavy K-guns are all single arc. They have
the maneuverability to use restricted arc wepons well, however. Even if I were
to finally be convinced about multi arc Needles, it would be afor "short
range" needles only. Max 3-arc for standard, single arc for "long".
> From Charles:
It's interesting, but I don't think we need to class all weapons in FT
:-).
(Minor point) I think that precision beam weapon PSB would need to be modified
for really long ranges (i.e. it'd no longer be a needle beam, but some sort of
transdimensional attack where distance would not interfere with targeting.) Of
course charging 11 mass for a class 3 weapon would be pretty
self-limiting.
OTOH, a strike force of Class 3 or 4 needle armed cruisers could probably take
out the engines of key heavy elements of an opposing fleet before the battle
is even joined. This makes an independent argument for not having high class
numbers.
Noam ranted:
(snip--all of which I agree with)
> As they stand now, Needle beams are "flavor" weapons with IMO/IME
And try to justify it. "Skiper, we've just captured a 2000MCr merchant."
"Great! Send over a prize crew and take it back to base." "Ah, sir, well,
there's a teeny little problem with that. We blew out its drives, it'll need
at least a month in a shipyard to fix."
G'day Noam,
> As they stand now, Needle beams
I don't usually use Needles except for my Henti, they have Needle armed
SC/CT (think the lasso armed light horsemen of the Ancient middle east
for inspiration as to their role). A swarm of these can be effective! That's
why I'd be leery of a lot of classes or too many arcs.
Cheers
Beth
Exactly the reason an EMP weapon would be usefull. Damage/Disrupt the
engines instead of destroying them. Also good for "coast guard" type ships.
-----
Brian Bell
-----
> -----Original Message-----
> >As they stand now, Needle beams are "flavor" weapons with IMO/IME
As has been stated, running an 'opponent's' ship may be as problematic as
fixing it. In SFB, a pirate is more likely to transship than to attempt to fly
the old one; plenty of good, arguable PSB for it.
If the cargo is valuable enough, and the ship isn't, needle beams' selectivity
is exactly what the doctor orders.
The_Beast
> devans@uneb.edu wrote:
> > >As they stand now, Needle beams are "flavor" weapons with IMO/IME
Historically; pirate vessels were small cargo ships with more guns than the
[quoted original message omitted]