Re: Scatterguns and SMPs... and PDAF

On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, David Brewer wrote:

> More, say I. The all-arc capability alone seems to justify that.
> Asking around on the list people seemed to agree with a value of 
> n+n/arc (in mass and points) for beam weapons.

I don't agree it's such a big point for one-shot offensive weapons. 

> That seems like a fair cost for an SMP that covers both 
> your front and your arse.

This IS a big point. It's the only anti-ship weapon capable of 360 fire! 

> Let's look at this from a different POV as well. Is a scattergun 
> an SMP with a secondary anti-fighter capability... or an expendable 
> PDAF with a secondary anti-ship capability?
>
> Both. Awesome isn't it?

Let's look at it this way: A scattergun, on the average, blows away
half a squadron of fighters. A squadron of fighters costs 20 points,
so an even trade should cost 10pts. Whether the PDAF is better or worse 
is immaterial (or rather, it relates only to whether PDAF is priced
right 
wrt fighters).

Yes, my earlier assessment was too low.

> Well, lets be conservative and call it one 4-arc SMP from above
> (15 pts) and two PDAF. That's three mass and 21 points. Bring it
> down to 1 mass as per your formula... call it 30 points.

I'm more in favor of 20-25pts, but I guess we're circling around the 
correct neighborhood.

> This rather suggests it needs a little toning down.

Nah... the KayVees are the ultimate combat monsters of the galaxy. So 
what if a fair fight pits their destroyer against a human battleship?
 
> For a start, I say ditch the 4-arc capability. This would promote
> some groovy tactical play where fighters try to keep on the right
> side of a Kra'Vak ship to avoid it's remaining scatterguns.
> Secondly, drop the damage it does to half-a-die. I could live with
> it then as a 5 point weapon.

Hmmm... That's still better than SMP. Even without AF capability.

> Observation: There is no reduction in scattergun damage for the 
> thick armour carried by Kra'Vak cruiser and capitals... but there
> is for heavy fighters. They must be *really* heavy.

The protection system is indeed in dire need of overhaul...

> Wouldn't it be so much easier if, say, a damage point was a 1-mass
> "system"?

Otherwise nice, but I can just see those Mass 18, 1 Damage Point, decked

out with missiles, disposable launcher ships. As I've pointed out
earlier, 
no one ever gets a shot at them, so the 1DP is no problem. This just 
makes it even cheaper to flood the table with missiles.

--
maxxon@swob.dna.fi (Mikko Kurki-Suonio) 	  | A pig who doesn't
fly
+358 50 5596411 GSM +358 9 80926 78/FAX 81/Voice  | is just an ordinary
pig.
Maininkitie 8A8 02320 ESPOO FINLAND | Hate me?	  |	     - Porco
Rosso
http://www.swob.dna.fi/~maxxon/     | hateme.html |