RE: [FT] RG Damage Vs. Armour

Tim wrote:
> Nagging doubts.
>
> I looked back at the system Dean proposed, and it
> has advantages. No multi shot probability effect,
> works with KV armor, fixes equivalent RG class
> problem, very like MT mechanic.
>
> The only problem is needing two rolls for the hit / damage.
> and remembering different range bands (latter is hardly a
> problem IMO). Combining hit with damage roll doesn't really
> work as long range shots 4,5,6 would always cause double
> damage, which is weirdness we don't want.
>
> Anyway I suggest revisiting it, Dean do you have the
> stats as for the other system analysis you did?

Yup, I did them up at the same time preparing for this ;)  They are
listed
as dGRs to differentiate them from the prior RG stats I posted.  I also
added info for a Class 4 dRG.  To refresh memories, this version of the
RG
is very close to the MT versions, rolling to-hit like Pulse Torps but
range
bands vary by size (4/6/8/10), for each hit a d6 is rolled for damage
with
1-3 = class level damage and 4-6 2xclass damage (integrated armor
reduces
this damage roll by armor level), cost is 5 per mass and class1s have 2
arcs
with the others having a single arc.

Ave Dmg Mult	2+	3+	4+	5+	6
dRG1		1	1.250	1.000	0.750	0.500	0.250
dRG2		2	2.500	2.000	1.500	1.000	0.500
dRG3		3	3.750	3.000	2.250	1.500	0.750
dRG4		4	5.000	4.000	3.000	2.000	1.000
Pulse Torp		2.917	2.333	1.750	1.167	0.583

Dmg / Mass	Mass
dRG1		1	1.250	1.000	0.750	0.500	0.250
dRG2		2	1.250	1.000	0.750	0.500	0.250
dRG3		4	0.938	0.750	0.563	0.375	0.188
dRG4		6	0.833	0.667	0.500	0.333	0.167
Pulse Torp	4	0.729	0.583	0.438	0.292	0.146

Dmg / Cost	Cost
dRG1		5	0.250	0.200	0.150	0.100	0.050
dRG2		10	0.250	0.200	0.150	0.100	0.050
dRG3		20	0.188	0.150	0.113	0.075	0.038
dRG4		30	0.167	0.133	0.100	0.067	0.033
Pulse Torp	12	0.243	0.194	0.146	0.097	0.049

Note that these tables are by to-hit value and when comparing the PT to
the
RGs with larger range bands a long range shot for the PT would be in a
closer range band for the RG.

When comparing the dRG2 to the PT since they use the same range bands,
the
dRG2 has a slightly lower average damage but only takes up half the
mass.
Damage to cost ratios on these two end up very close.

The larger RGs (dRG3 and dRG4) have lower damage to cost ratios but I
think
their increased ranges make up for it.

In looking at the figures that Matt Seidl posted a while ago on the same
system, he calculated higher masses on the RGs but that was at 3
pts/mass.
At 5 pts/mass the final points costs are very similar.

I could be talked into allowing Class2s to get a 2nd arc for another
point
of mass (50% increase) but anything larger should stay a single arc.

Also when reading MT I noticed it stated that all of the RGs fire at the
same velocity and it is the increased size of the projectile that
increases
damage.  If JT wants to keep this assumption, then my PSB of increased
velocities giving greater range is shot down and something else is
needed to
make larger RGs desirable.

Dean