Looking 4 feedback on FT Weapon System

9 posts · Sep 15 2004 to Sep 22 2004

From: DOCAgren@a...

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 21:39:36 EDT

Subject: Looking 4 feedback on FT Weapon System

Viggen Heavy Beam Spinal Mount Mass 12 point cost 36

Limited to a single fire arc facing.

Has 2 different fire set-up which the ship can switch at end of each
turn.

1st Allows it Reach out per (More Thrust AA Battery) range bands [0-18 =
3d6
/19-36 = 2d6 /37-54= d6] hitting per Beam Weapon with the rerolls, then
for each hit(DP) rolls a second d6 and apply damage rolled (no rerolling if
a 6) -1
per level of shielding ship has. So a ship with level 2 shields would have
d6-2 damage, so it possible to hit at range and still do nothing to an
enemy.

2nd Allows has it act as a pair of standard B3 Beams

Takes two hits to take out, 1st hit locks weapon in mode selected and and in
Long Range mode, will just hit per standard Beam damage. and in Close Range
mode, will become just 1 B3.

2nd will take it offline.

Any hit requires a Repair Center to do the repair work, so damage control
can't fix it in the field.

Well guys thanks for any feedback on this.   I beleive I have balanced
it possible striking power by it's Mass and the inability to fix damage in the
field.

Have a Good One,

From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>

Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 11:11:20 +1000

Subject: RE: Looking 4 feedback on FT Weapon System

G'day,

Unfortunately I haven't time to do an Oerjan like check of mass-cost
etc, but I was wondering what the motivation for the weapon is, what
nation/species do you see using it etc? For instance do you see it as
someone trying to work from/towards the UNSC grazer idea?

Cheers

From: Thomas Westbrook <tom_westbrook@y...>

Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 20:27:15 -0700 (PDT)

Subject: Re: Looking 4 feedback on FT Weapon System

I personally like the Heavy beam projectors out of EFSB. The only *problem* I
found in my draft rules (only on my hard disk and developed for a local FT
campaign) was that the system tended to follow a economic value of diminishing
returns type curve i.e. after a certain mass the capacitor in system became
cheaper the larger it became. I didn't do it intentionally. Other people tend
to believe that the system MUST grow exponentially, but I say fooey.

Your proposed system could be a two part system with a battery and a single
arc projector like out of the EFSB, with the range dependant on the amout of
power shoved through the focusing projector.

I have thought about something like that for the IJN in FB3. I also
like some of the anime-ish sci fi where the enemy just slices parts of
your ship off.

As far as nationality, I,in general, don't care since most of the FT campaigns
tend to follow the "donught of death" theory and don't occur in the FT
universe. Also, in the FT universe, no weapon system can remain an exclusive
*secret* for too long as I probabably sure that every nation is at least
monitoring each other if not directly spying on each other. I would think that
the UNSC Grazer were developed, at least
in part, at "Cal-tech" in the FCT as per some abmigious hints in the FT
timeline.

> DOCAgren@aol.com wrote:
Viggen Heavy Beam Spinal Mount Mass 12 point cost 36

Limited to a single fire arc facing.

Has 2 different fire set-up which the ship can switch at end of each
turn.

1st Allows it Reach out per (More Thrust AA Battery) range bands [0-18 =
3d6 /19-36 = 2d6 /37-54= d6] hitting per Beam Weapon with the rerolls,
then for each hit(DP) rolls a second d6 and apply damage rolled (no
rerolling if a 6) -1 per level of shielding ship has.  So a ship with
level 2 shields would have d6-2 damage, so it possible to hit at range
and still do nothing to an enemy.

2nd Allows has it act as a pair of standard B3 Beams

Takes two hits to take out, 1st hit locks weapon in mode selected and and in
Long Range mode, will just hit per standard Beam damage. and in Close Range
mode, will become just 1 B3.

2nd will take it offline.

Any hit requires a Repair Center to do the repair work, so damage control
can't fix it in the field.

Well guys thanks for any feedback on this. I beleive I have balanced it
possible striking power by it's Mass and the inability to fix damage in the
field.

Have a Good One,

From: DOCAgren@a...

Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 08:02:43 EDT

Subject: Re: Looking 4 feedback on FT Weapon System

In a message dated 9/18/04 2:00:47 AM,
> owner-gzg-digest@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU writes:

> Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 11:11:20 +1000

Beth,

I was working it up for a home-grown power Midgard Herding, who have
been using B4 for "1st strike" and also have carried some old MT (AA
Batteries) on
some older Heavier Ships.   And looking at a upgrade of thier long range
hitting power as they looking at adding Homegrown "Heavy Warships" to Fleet.
My Idea was that the system repersents a Single Weapons array and capacitor
that
provides the "added punch".   And the reason the weapon takes 2 hits is
1st hit kills the capacitor.

I wasn't looking at it like Grazer even though it does share the same range
band as "Long Range Strike Weapon" however damage handed is overall lower with
Shielding both effect your chance to hit, and damage the weapon does. In long
range mode it fires out a Pulse Beam which if it makes "contact" hits hard.
But in Short range mode, The Weapons array Fires a "heavier beam then
normal(ie=more dice to hit)" but doesn't do the "Bonus damage(ie= does basic
Beam damage" in long range mode.

Hope that explains the "background" to the weapon.

Have a Good One,

From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 09:02:45 +1000

Subject: RE: Looking 4 feedback on FT Weapon System

G'day,

> I wasn't looking at it like Grazer even though it does share the same

Unless I msinterpreted though the version that rolls as beams and then roll
that many D6 is fairly similar in concept to the grazer and that's why I had
thought maybe someone was trying to reproduce it, but hadn't quite got there
(thus the additional impact of shields and lower overall damage vs shielded
targets).

Thinking balance wise (again sorry no time to check for myself) is there a
discontinuity between the two damage profiles which wold allow someone
suitably skilled to always be at the right range to get the most impact by
switching between modes. I'm just a little wary of something that can switch
so fast in game terms, I'd really make sure you haven't opened yourself a huge
can of worms there, particuarly against unshielded targets.

Cheers

From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>

Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 21:16:08 -0400

Subject: Re: Looking 4 feedback on FT Weapon System

> > I wasn't looking at it like Grazer

<Oerjan-esque voice> The UN Grazer System is a plan for confiscation
and redistribution of certain herbivores--in theory taking from the
rich to give to the poor, but in practice taking from the middle class to give
to the UN administrator.

The Graser system is a weapon for spacecraft.

From: DOCAgren@a...

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 11:59:18 EDT

Subject: RE: Looking 4 feedback on FT Weapon System

Beth,

Very true, I had not truely looked over Grasers, after I did some playing
around with Graser when I was home with busted leg, as much not having anyone
current playing with UN fleet has caused me to forget them, and when going and
looking them over they do somewhat seem to "match" up with my Long Range

Profile. (So I'm willing to admit that I might have been inspired by the
Graser in this idea, without planning to use same idea, when I was looking at
upgrading
the Midgard Herding's Long Range Fire).   Against Unshielded ships a
ship carrying this weapon has the ability to I agree open up a large can on
worms, or the whole ship as the case maybe. Yet unlike the UN Graser, this
system can't be fixed in the field, but need a repair dock, and shields effect
it both tp
hit and towards damage.   But I do see your point on the ability to
switch for modes in at the end of phase being a bit much. Would a 1 turn (or
even 2
turns) delay between switches make it less threatening/more balanced
minded?

Have a Good One,

DOC Agren

   (Lurker on the Digest)

In a message dated 9/21/04 2:01:29 AM,
> owner-gzg-digest@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU writes:

> >Â I wasn't looking at it like Grazer even though it does share the

From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:41:13 +1000

Subject: RE: Looking 4 feedback on FT Weapon System

G'day,

> But I do see your point on the ability to switch for

I'd start with 1 turn and see if that's enough (as its going to stop the
weapon firing which is a crimp in a battle even if done a bit at a time).

Cheers

From: Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@t...>

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 10:01:17 +0100

Subject: Re: Looking 4 feedback on FT Weapon System

[forwarded by Roger for Oerjan]

> DOC Agren wrote:

> Viggen Heavy Beam Spinal Mount

IOW a Class-3 Graser which applies the target's screen level to the
damage
roll as well as to the to-hit roll. I'd start by giving it the same MASS
as the G3 (ie. 24) but drop the cost to 3xMASS to compensate for the poorer
anti-screen performance; the unusual threshold/DCP rules for this weapon
might reduce the Mass a little further.

> 2nd Allows has it act as a pair of standard B3 Beams

Why would anyone want to use this "2xB3" mode at all? The only times it is
even marginally better than the "G3" mode is when the target has level-2
screens *and* the range is either 0-12mu or 18-24mu; at other ranges,
and
against weaker-screened targets at *any* range, the G3 mode inflicts
more damage.

Regards,