Proposed New Rule for handing PDAF/ADAF
In order to address a few oddities with the current PDAF/ADAF rules I'd
like to propose the following changes.
PDAF can fire against any target within 6 measuring units of the ship.
PDAF's are considered pulse lasers or guass autocannons
ADAF can fire against any target within 12 measuring units of the ship.
ADAF are considered short-ranged antifighter/antimissile missiles
Both can engage ships within their range and roll one die.
Target unshielded - 5,6 hits for 1 damage point
Target level 1 shield/armour - 6 hits for 1 damage point
This gives them some minimal antiship capability against lighter ships, such
as the battle pod swarms discussed a few months ago.
> Tim Guay wrote:
I prefer to use these weapons only against small targets such as fighters and
missiles. I suppose there is no reason to not use them against larger craft
except most ships would be protected sufficiently to make such a weapon
useless.
> PDAF's are considered pulse lasers or guass autocannons
Keep it generic to work with different backgrounds(e.g. short range missiles).
> ADAF can fire against any target within 12 measuring units of the ship.
ADAF works on the premise that it can share targeting data from another ship
within its 6" range. The ADAF targeting system is more or less a networked
PDAF.
> ADAF are considered short-ranged antifighter/antimissile missiles
Again, this would be best left as generic, fitting the background of your
choice.
> Both can engage ships within their range and roll one die.
Interesting, but I prefer to keep using these weapons against fighter and
missiles only. It just seems that giving a PDAF/ADAF the damage
capability of major weapons(taking hull damage or rolling for a threshold)
seems less realistic.
> Both can engage ships within their range and roll one die.
I don't know that I'd give them armor/shield piercing capability;
a shield or an armored hull should be proof against the wimpy little charges
that [PA]DAF's use. (Unless you're playing a hard SF game, which this is not,
and base the damage on kinetic energy.) And the small ships that you mention
are too small to be shielded, and usually don't get armor.
> Interesting, but I prefer to keep using these weapons against fighter
Then you haven't seen the what twin 40 mm could do to a destroyer.
> At 05:15 PM 11/14/96 +0000, you wrote:
Wasn't there a similar concept (PDAF/ADAF having an anti-ship
ability) in the latest B5 FT adaptations? I don't remember what the rule was
but it seemed like a good idea when I read it.
Not that it has anything to do with anything but I also thought the
inertialess drives idea from the B5 FT adaptations would be a good addition to
Star Trek FT as warp drives are inertialess.
Outta here,
James
> Mike Miserendino wrote:
> Interesting, but I prefer to keep using these weapons against fighter
Comparing PDAF and ADAF to modern day weapons they would be the same as
Phalanx (or Goalkeeper) for point, and SAM for area defense. In Harpoon
(modern naval combat) these systems can both be used in anti-ship roles.
They haven't got a long range or do a lot of damage, but it works. So I see no
reason why not to use this variant rules, if you want to.
BTW: When the Argentines invaded South Georgia (Falklands war), Royal marines
engaged an Argentine Frigate with small arms and AT weapons. The frigate had
to pull back after having its 100mm gun knocked out by two LAW hits, being hit
in the waterline by a Carl Gustav round and another round hitting its missile
launcher! They also downed a Puma and damaged an Alouette III.
How about a rule letting the marine contingent of a ship ride on the outside,
and engaging enemy ships and fighters<g>?
> Tim Guay wrote:
I was thinking of the 12" armor belt of a battleship. P'Ting, P'Tang might
scratch some mighty fine looking grey paint. It just comes across as
unrealistic to have the possiblity of some pea shooter on a scout do similar
damage as a major weapon.
> Then you haven't seen the what twin 40 mm could do to a destroyer.
You have a point there, my intent was for dual-purpose weapons to engage
escorts. so change to 6 does on hit on unshielded and unarmoured then shielded
or armoured cruisers and cap ships are safe, however the tin cans, lancers,
etc are vulnerable as they should be. (the Slot battles in the Pacific. etc)
And if a cap ship is so shredded that it lost its shields, then the hull is
likely to so ruptured and weakened than such a weapon could damage it and push
already weakened systems over the threashold.
To get the Reliant stitching the unshielded Enterprise with pulse phaser
effect is also what I'd like to replicate.
> Mike Miserendino wrote:
seems less
> >>realistic.
That's exactly what Tim had in mind when he tought up the rules, the lesser
chance to inflict damage on (lightly) shielded ships would represent hits on
the unarmoured upper structure or something like that.
> On Fri, 15 Nov 1996, Mike Miserendino wrote:
> Tim Guay wrote:
seems less
> >>realistic.
Then again, in a gane of Harpoon we played a few years back, USS
Iowa was hit by 20 or Russian anti-ship missiles (can't remember which
type). The ship lost 350 of it's 880 hit points, but it was still far from
sinking. What DID happen, however, was that every single radar and gun
control system aboard the ship was destroyed/damaged. Even the
battleship with the 12" armor belt has it's weak spots.
> On Fri, 15 Nov 1996, Mike Miserendino wrote:
Which effectively neutralises the ship as far as the battle goes. Much the
same hear. All the sensor and fire control arrays are going to be hanging
outside the hull. And lets not forget the ol' shot up the tailpipe.
And the ships armament is vulnerable to an extent, especially the light stuff.
Come to think of it we should have special rules for firing at a ship
recovering or launching fighters. Nasty stuff getting shot though an open
hanger bay, could get grim if something big hits in there. Brings back
memories of cool scenes from Battlestar Galactica and from the Wing
Commander novels, especially _End Run_ and _Fleet Action_.
> Tim Guay wrote:
Nope. This wasn't me.
> Then again, in a gane of Harpoon we played a few years back,
> Which effectively neutralises the ship as far as the battle goes. Much
You're right, those ships always looked so vulnerable. I liked the way the
Sulaco from Aliens launched its dropships by using two blast doors to prevent
opening the hanger to the vacuum of space. A hanger hit in FT for this might
represent damage to the actual doors preventing the
launch/recovery of small craft from that hangar opening.
> Tim Guay wrote:
etc)
> And if a cap ship is so shredded that it lost its shields, then the
Now I understand what systems you're describing. Sort of like 5"
multi-purpose guns or multi-role missiles. I like using C-batts for
something like this since they have already work as dual purpose via the
More Thrust rules. I've always thought of the PDAF/ADAF as a really
light weapon like the Phalanx which is designed to take down soft targets.
> Ludo Toen wrote:
Actually, the upper structure on many ships does contain armored emplacements
including turrets, barbettes, fire control and sensor towers in addition to
the hull. The remainder of the upper hull (crew stations, super structures,
sensors, etc.) might contain some protection, but only from small arms fire.
In todays modern warships the most heavily protected
system/compartment is the computer room for the Combat Information
Center (CIC) which might or might not reside entirely below the hull.
> Ludo Toen wrote:
Not all SAMs carried aboad a ship are designed for the anti-ship role.
Some ships can launch both SAMs and SSMs from the same launcher, but some SAM
emplacements would be worthless against a warship.
> BTW: When the Argentines invaded South Georgia (Falklands war), Royal
The
> frigate had to pull back after having its 100mm gun knocked out by two
Using weapons designed to penetrate heavily armored vehicles would make a
difference versus one designed for soft targets.
> Niko "GNiko" Mikkanen wrote:
Taking out sensors and fire control units seems reasonable. Does Harpoon let
you actually sink a BB with something like a Phalanx gun? Seems kinda
funky if it does. This is what I mean by not using a PDAF/ADAF to apply
normal hull damage as a main weapon. Maybe if the PDAF/ADAF could
target external soft items like sensors and fire control units this might
work. How about using it as a short range needle beam with screens reducing
its effectiveness. The system could only target sensors and firecons.
TYPE: PDAF/ADAF against large craft(excluding fighters and missiles)
RANGE: 6"
USAGE: Anti-ship role - Select to target only a firecon or a sensor and
roll 1D6. On a 6 the system is damaged, but not destroyed(can be repaired).
> From: guay@portal.ca (Tim Guay)
Which reminds me of one popular local complaint about FT. There really no such
thing as a critical hit. You've got to pound the shit out of a big ship
forever, to neutralize or destroy it. Not as satisfying as seeing a WWI German
cruiser blow sky high on a magazine hit in a game of Panzerschiffe the other
day. And remember the Hood?
What kind of critical-hit rules have folks put into their games?
Date sent: 18-NOV-1996 19:36:18
> Which reminds me of one popular local complaint about FT. There really
I've always thought it excellent that FT has such a GREAT critical hit system.
You can never tell which systems are going to die when you go over a
threshold. (In short you make critical hit checks all at once.)
A critical loss can leave you dead in space. It's surprising how few ships are
combat capable after just one or two checks.
True it does break down when you get Extreamly large ships, but I never did
see the appeal of having giants. For escorts, cruisers and smaller capitals,
it works just fine.
Come to think of it, I'm sure the length of rows for capitals doesn't follow
on from escort to cruiser. Anyone want to have a go at defining
Escort -> Cruiser -> Line -> Capital -> Heavy Capital -> Mauler etc.
Or whatever you want to name them. I think Superships need redoing too.
> What kind of critical-hit rules have folks put into their games?
None. The originals work for me.
> On Mon, 18 Nov 1996, Mike Miserendino wrote:
> Taking out sensors and fire control units seems reasonable. Does
Nahh, You'll run out of ammo before you can do that. Can't remember
exactly, but I think Phalanx has damage of 1 and ROF of maybe 3-4.
Against Iowa's 880 hit points...
> What kind of critical-hit rules have folks put into their games?
It may be worthwhile here to consider how the FT ideas can be converted into
the FMA mechanics system; if nothing else, critical hits in that system are
quite possible. (Plenty of *BOOM* recipients amongst the DSII populace here,
I'll bet.:)
> And the ships armament is vulnerable to an extent, especially the
Errrrr...FT doesn't have critical hits?? Well, maybe I'm mistaken, but I was
under the impression that Threshold Checks equated to critical hits. I've seen
some big ships 'go down' after taking only 2 runs through
the Threshold Check procedure. In a recent PBeM/FT game I ran, a couple
of the Omega-Destroyers (90-some Mass ships) really took a beating in
the Threshold Checks, even though they still were viable vessels as far as
hull integrity was concerned.
Mk
> Mk wrote:
I think some folks might be used to using critical hits such as the kabloohy
principle where there's something like a 1 in 10 chance of vaporizing the ship
on a critical hit roll. Games like Traveller and Star Strike used such
critical hit tables. I prefer the use of the threshold roll in FT so big ships
don't go kabloohy from a single shot without first taking some major hull
damage.
I presented some rule mods a while back that adjusted damage as follows:
*FTL Hit: Roll 1D6. On a 6 the ship is destroyed from the energy release of
the FTL drive. I gave a description of something like a micro-black
hole
generator losing its containment field allowing the micro-black hole to
run amok.
*Fuel Tankage Hit: (optional system) Roll 1D6. 1-3 the tanks are
reduced to half of their current quantity; 4,5 the tanks shatter emptying all
fuel; 6 the tanks explode damaging the ship with one 1D6 of damage.
*Magazine Hit: (optional system for HE missiles) Roll 1D6 for each missile in
magazine and record as damage.
NOTE: The HE missile went something like this:
TYPE: HE Missile Launcher MASS: 10 COST: 18 DAMAGE: 1D6 RANGE: Same as Nuke
DESC: Missile magazine resembles a lego brick(block with six circles) on ship
diagram. Each circle represents one missile. As missiles are fired, the
circles are filled.
My specs for the above might be a bit different than what I posted
earlier -
did this from memory.:)
I used a hybrid critical hit for one of my games at last weekend's PentaCon.
For the Dark Star scenario, any hit on an Earth force ship's FTL drive or
Improbability drive resulted in the following rolls:
1. Roll 1D12 to determine course change and rotate ship to new facing using 12
as the ship's line straight ahead. 2. Roll 1D6 to determine how many inches to
move the ship along its new course.
This resulted in some hilarious and unexpected ship movement. I'll post my
PentaCon results soon.