Kra'vak Railgun

Been working on my own set of campaign rules for FT (who hasn't these days)
and I'm trying to work in weapons from other races. Has anyone found the the
Railgun's cost and mass a little out of balance with the other weapon systems?

Pete

> Peter Caron wrote:

> Been working on my own set of campaign rules for FT (who hasn't these

No, I didn't find them just a _little_ out of balance :-) I can't find
my notes right now (they're probably buried under a ton of other gaming
stuff...), but IIRC they work better with a Mass of (Class+1) - ie,
Class 1 RGs have Mass 2, Class 2 have Mass 3, etc.

Later,

> PCARON wrote:

> On Sun, 19 Apr 1998 09:57:16 -0700, John Leary writes:

> PCARON wrote:

> Hi Peter,

I guess I'm not the only one who noted the "slight" imbalance with railguns.
My FT campaign rules require that all systems be available to players to
research so the 3:2 ratio with Kra'vak designs won't apply in this case.

I've been toying with the idea of using Firecontrol rules to limit railguns.
Something like, each railgun requires the dedicated use of a firecontrol
system. Firecons cannot be shared, even if targetting the same ship.

This would also give players a reason to build the larger versions of railguns
rather than a bunch of railgun 1's. We noticed that 3 type 1 railguns equals
damage, cost and range of 1 railgun 3. Everyone went with railgun 1's, helped
when the ship took threshold checks... no sense putting all your eggs in one
basket with railgun 3's. The Firecon rule would deffinately change things...

Pete

P.S. We're changing mass/cost of Firecons as well... These rules won't
be for everyone, that's for sure... tinker, tinker, tinker.

> No, I didn't find them just a _little_ out of balance :-) I can't find

I tried that and it seemed to work well. I'm expanding the number of weapon
systems and wanted to add variety to the "projectile" technologies
(Railguns, scatterguns).  So I'm adding Autoguns, close range multi-arc
systems.

Glad other players are mucking around with the point/mass cost of
railguns. I don't feel alone... (this is FT afterall, I'm sure it's written
somewhere that under no circumstances are you to leave the system mass and
costs intact:)

Pete

> PCARON wrote:

I have been thinking about the 'alien weapon problem' for our current
campaign.   I guess what matters is how much you want the 'alien
weapons to appear on the human ships. If you allow anyone to have anything,
then just do Kra'Vak vs Kra'Vak and be done with it.

What follows is random thoughts on the subject:
1)  A player wishing to use/develop alien weapons must build a
    'test bed/trials ship' for the trials of the weapon on a
    civilian hull that is non-FTL.
2) The trial ship must be of a similar size to the class the weapon will be
used upon. (I.E. A ship must be built to test each class of railgun for each
class of ship.) 3) Prototype 'Railguns' cost double points and are double
mass. Evaluation equipment for the trial ship is equal to the mass and points
of the railgun. (I.E. Prototype cost is 4 X the normal weapon cost and mass).
4)  The weapon/design has been 'proven/approved' when the player
rolls 1D6 equal to the number of turns that he has been trying
    to make the thing work.   A failed test means the player must
replace the railgun (it was destroyed in the failed test). If you are in a bad
mood, you might have him roll to see if
    the test ship was damaged/destroyed.
5) After the weapon has been proven, the player can go thru the same process
to produce the railgun per the rules.

Just some prototype thoughts for consideration.

Bye for now,

> PCARON wrote:
technologies
> (Railguns, scatterguns). So I'm adding Autoguns, close range

Pete, I would suppose that we are all going the same place, but the difference
is the path we have chosen to get there.

Do what works best for you and your group.

My current project is to make the Sha'Vasku playable by giving
them 'free' thrust based on the mass of the ship.   Anything to cut
down on the bookkeeping.

Bye for now,

> On Tue, 21 Apr 1998, Tony Wilkinson wrote:

> Seems that nobody really likes the Kravak railguns. Anyway in
<snip>

The players are permitted to research any weapon system. Not using the FT
"universe". We've designed Technology Trees for research. Just trying to come
up with a way to balence the Railgun with the other systems (or everyone will
research railguns immediately). Ho Hum.

I came up with a new screening system that protects against Railguns. Called
it "Deflectors" ('cause you're deflecting the projectile). This will also help
lessen the use of Railguns.

Pete

I would like to resurrect the idea of ECM systems that degrade Railgun
firecons. Each "level" of ECM gives the ship effectively level 1 armor vs
Railguns (which are considerably slower than Beam weapons)

Michael Wikan, Game Designer Accolade, Inc.

> -----Original Message-----

Seems that nobody really likes the Kravak railguns. Anyway in your
campaign are the players going to be able to use/research railguns or be
Kravak? If they are not then leave the rules as is and the Kravak as a real
big nasty for the players to come across. In the campaign rules that I have
been writing each player had to start as a human nation. The could research
Kravak tech and make use of it if they captured a ship (or on a slim chance
pick up a gun while doing salvage at the battle site). If they successfully
develop railguns then they are on par with the Kravak (almost) and have the
goods over the other Humans. I really wanted the Kravak to be the bogey men
when they appear. It might be mean but that's me.

Tony, twilko@ozemail.com.au

> At 11:48 19/04/98 -0400, you wrote:

Question: If humans copy the railgun tech, shouldn't the first generation
weapon mass 50% more and cost twice the Kravak? AS a general rule I think
stolen tech ought not to match 1 to 1 the originals spec. As a matter of fact
it should probably mass twice and cost 3X what the Kravak price.

Tom Hughes

On Tue, 21 Apr 1998 00:02:46 +0100 Tony Wilkinson
<twilko@ozemail.com.au> writes:
> Seems that nobody really likes the Kravak railguns. Anyway in

> I would like to resurrect the idea of ECM systems that degrade Railgun

Alternatively, I use 2 sets of PDAF for each level of armour (max 2) against
railguns. I play that a projectile has a chance of intercepting another
projectile (as a phalanx system).

Spot on. First time a new system was used it cost 50% over and above developed
model. New ship classes were also costed 50% over. So if you out
brand new Kravak/Human railguns on a new ship they cost 100% extra in
points and 50% in mass. Production models were to be as given in MT. I wasn't
going to penalise the Humans too much because they still weren't get armour.
To be able to research that I was going to make them capture an entire ship
intact (not easy). Ship to Ship the Humans need to be
one-one
to with the Kravak because they aren't likely/able to help each other.
(I
know the egos of my clubs members.

> At 21:25 20/04/98 -0500, you wrote:

> real

> have