Re: Area effect 'arc-o-death' weapon idea

On Sat 05 Aug, Morgan Vening wrote:
> Date sent:		Fri, 4 Aug 2000 17:00:52 -0700
> To:			gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> From: 		Sean Bayan Schoonmaker <s_schoon@pacbell.net>
> Subject:		Re: Area effect 'arc-o-death' weapon idea
> Send reply to:	gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> 
> > >Prototype #1 - low power/short range varient.
> > >This weapon has a single fire arc, and fires an expanding energy
field
> > >that strikes all targets within the fire arc that are in range
(doesn't
> > >necessarily do damage though, read on...) When fired, any ships in
the
> > >fire arc of the weapon (friend -or-foe, it's indescriminate) may
take
> > >damage, for each ship, roll a number of dice equal to the class of
the
> > >SFAEEF, reduced by 1 for every full 6 mu of range, and score them
> > >_exactly_ as beam damage, counting screens, armour, etc. as usual.
> > 
> > I like this so far. Simple but different.
> > 
> > >Alternatively, just roll one lot for the weapon, then figure
effects on
> > >ships on a case-by-case basis, when reducing the number of dice as
you
> > >cross range bands, discard the _largest_ dice result. (you _might_
want
> > >to cut the MASS/COST down if you use this option)
> > 
> > IMO, a bad idea. A separate roll for each ship is far better.
> 
> Agreed. All ships have at least some degree of variation in it's 
> protective factor. And the energy of the effect might not be purely 
> constant. If it diminishes on range, that might have an effect, as 
> might space debris in the path weaken the wave to some effect.

Well, it does diminish with range (lose 1 beam dice per 6 mu - should
the 'range bands' be smaller,
with a reduced MASS and COST? anyone?) - but in hindsight I agree as
well.
> > 
> > >I can't decide if you need a firecon to fire this monster :-(
> > 
> > I'd say "Yes."
> > 
> I'd say yes too. I'm not sure if this is intended as a 'spinal mount' 
> (being new to the list), but if being used in multiples, I would 
> suggest a FireCon for each.

I visulise two applications for this weapon:

1) spinal mount

2) mount 6 of them, 1 per fire arc, all the same class, rule that they
all _must_ fire as one, to get a
'spherical energy wave' weapon, similar to the one on the Dreadnough
cruise
missile (early ST: Voyger I'm afraid - but more like an Expanding Sphere
Generater than the system of that name in SFB :-). 
>  
> > >Ok, the bottom line: 
> > >Class  MASS 
> > >1	     10 
> > >2	     30 
> > >3	     90 
> >
>every additional class is triple the MASS of the previous. > > >COST is
MASS x4 
> >  
> > I'm not going to do the math at the moment to figure if these are
decent 
> > figures or not. 
> >  
> Just from a mathematical POV it would be easier if you used the  
> 'square' principle. Instead of using your current system, go with 
> (Mass^2)*10. Instead of the 10, 30, 90, 270 system you currently  
> have, it would be 10, 40, 90, 160, 250. It's just easier from a  
> mathematical POV. Then again, this is assuming you have it as a  
> spinal mount with no multiples.  

Well, I based the cost progression on Beam Batteries, where the cost
doubles
every time the beam battery class increases by 1. I used triples to
represent that
each increase in weapon class increses both range and area of effect.
I did some maths on beams, and I think that, for high beam classes, a
square 
progression as you suggest might be better (does anyone think that
'high' power
beam batteries, Class 4+, are too expensive?), in which case this weapon
should use
a 'cube' progression, maybe?
>  
> With multiples, you find that two Class 2's are an improvement over  
> a Class 3 at most ranges (Up to 6, 1 extra dice, up to 12, less  
> Mass and Cost). You might want to allow larger class weapons to  
> work on a bigger arc. Class 1 gets the traditional 11-1 facing. Class 

> 2 gets a 10-2 facing. Class 3 a 9-3 (full front arc) facing. Allow the
 
> larger devices to be fired in a narrower arc, but have it determined	
> at the point of firing. If this is deemed too powerful, reduce the  
> Damage dealt at each expansion. So a Class 3 firing on full arc  
> gets 1D out to 6". A Class 5 firing on the Class 3 Arc would get  
> 3D. Anyways, that's just the ramblings I've come up with.  
> Playtesting would be needed, across multiple games and varying  
> ship types, to figure if this is too powerful. 

Comment about multiple weapons equally applies to Beam Batteries, I'm
interested in you idea
for handling higher classes of this weapon - maybe as an 'advanced'
varient.
>  
> Morgan Vening 
> - Faction undecided. 
>  
> 
Thanlks
Charles

-- 
Sig eaten by hard drive :-(