Prev: RE: [SG] Scenario with engineers Next: Re: [GZG][FH] Planet types (was Re: Locations of Stars)

RE: [FT] FB Kra'Vak - A Simple View

From: "Dean Gundberg" <dean.gundberg@n...>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 09:15:17 -0600
Subject: RE: [FT] FB Kra'Vak - A Simple View

> >Dean Gundberg <dean.gundberg@noridian.com> wrote:
> >
> >[snippety]
> >
> >>Shotgun Fire Option - Roll to-hit as if 1 range band closer,
> >damage is equal
> >>to RG class, no chance for double damage.  All damage to
> >Human armor first.
> >>(Yup, will lead to automatic hits at closest range band but
> >damage will be
> >>limited to class size).
> >
> >I was right there with you until I hit this. This seems to go
> >against the "simple" aspect we were trying for. I'd rather see
> RGs with one
> mode of
> >fire only.

I added this because someone mentioned having multiple fire modes for
railguns, both 'trash can' and the 'shotgun' modes, and it seemed to be
a
neat idea.  If at long range and you want a better chance to hit but are
willing to lose the possibility of higher damage, its an option.  I'm
not
married to this additional fire mode, its just a simple variation (+1 to
hit, no double damage) to the current mechanic where damage potential is
traded for an increased chance to hit.

> I agree with schoon, lose the shotgun mode. Also you like the MT
> RG's but then propose something different such as class
> based range bands. They can be used to model the different velocity
> envelopes of the different classes, but this isn't in MT either.

But the MT railguns (like FT2 beam weapons) need some fix, in this case,
why
use a class 3 when 3 class 1's work just as well?  My spin on the
railguns
is that the larger ones have higher velocities so the class 3 has a
longer
range than a class 1, so now there is a reason to mount them.

> Looks like the armor as % of hull is popular though. However my
position
> is that the FB now has a 'standard' armor mechanic so why translate
> something completely alien from MT. KV armor is just more
dense/efficient
> than human, so they get more per mass. If a beam ablates the armor
then
> its still going to fry their ship as any other armored ship. Same for
> penetrating shots.

It depends on how you see the K'V's toughness related to armor.  With FB
armor they basically have a very hard shell which when breached lets
fire
get to the soft and squishy insides of the ship (think a medieval
knight).
On the other hand there is the MT version of armor which doesn't give
the
ship a outer shell but instead makes each hull box harder to damage,
plus
this ability is never lost (maybe an ogre or troll that is just tough to
hurt).	The hard outer shell thing can be done by humans like the NSL
(and
maybe some future aliens ;).  I would like the K'V to be different, and
by
using armor levels like they had in MT, I think it works and it fits my
view
of their overall toughness.

Dean

Prev: RE: [SG] Scenario with engineers Next: Re: [GZG][FH] Planet types (was Re: Locations of Stars)