Re: [GZG] [FT] Graser-1s again

[Hugh Fisher <laranzu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Yeah, it sucks to be the one in front of a set of grasers
> when they're having a good day.  But that's the same
> reaction people had to SMR, and to Kra'Vak when they first
> came out. We might want to add a line or two of text to the
> weapon description that lets people know that *on average*,
> grasers are about as effective as the same points of
> beams--and sometimes you have good rolls and sometimes you
> don't.

I'm willing to believe that graser-1s are balanced in
terms of average damage, but they are undervalued on
their potential for above average damage.

A Full Thrust battle isn't a series of independent
statistical events. If one side inflicts above average
damage in a turn, the other sides may have thresholds
or destroyed ships which reduce their average damage
from then on, which makes it harder for them to catch
back up. Less formally, once you start winning, it
gets easier to stay in front.

It's the compound advantage effect, and like compound
interest it builds up faster as the gap between the
two sides increases. Using my cruiser vs battleship
example, you can hope to repair systems that fail a
threshold check, but there's nothing you can do if
the ship has been vaporised.

A lucky graser shot is more likely to give you such
a potentially winning advantage than a lucky beam or
torpedo shot. It's not an absolute guarantee that
you'll win, and not guaranteed to happen in every
game, but it's a real benefit that I don't believe
the current mass requirement allows for.


	cheers,
	Hugh
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l