Prev: RE: [FT] Railgun To Hit (?) Next: Re: (FT) Fleet Book Kra'Vak

# Re: (FT) Fleet Book Kra'Vak

From: Sean Bayan Schoonmaker <schoon@a...>
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 08:02:44 -0800
Subject: Re: (FT) Fleet Book Kra'Vak
``````
Steven Arrowsmith <arrowjr@usit.net> wrote:

>I read a proposal to use the range as the number need to be rolled. I
>personally like this idea, simple and quick. I would take it one step
>more, when firing a big railgun, measure the distance, and divide that
in
>half and add 1 to the number needed, not rolled. Thus a 1 is always a
>miss. If we give the following dice; class1 = 2d6, class2 = 3d6, and
>class3 = 4d6. We see a  effective range of 10" for a class1, 22" for a
>class2, and 34" for a class3, about the same as Human beams, with
maximum
>Range twice that.

Actually I get effective ranges (meaning 50% chance to hit) as:
Class 1 - 12"
Class 2 - 20"
Class 3 - 26"
...but the concept is basically sound.

>When a hit is scored, look at the "to-hit" die roll. Add them together,
>this is the damage done to the target. Any roll of 6, regardless of
>modifier, is a reroll . If firing against Kra'Vak Armoured hulls,
subtract
>2 from each die for damage. If the target is using Human armour, then
half
>the damage scored (round up) is taken on the armour, and the remainder
>applied directly to the hull.

I'm not quite so sure I can support the damage mechanic. Assuming a hit,
your average damage for each class is:
Class 1 - 7 points
Class 2 - 10.5 points
Class 3 - 14 points
...and that's not including the possibility for rerolls.

That translates into any ship under Mass Factor 45 being vaporised by
one
Class 3 shot.

While I agree that the K'V should be dangerous, that seems a bit
excessive.

Schoon
``````

 Prev: RE: [FT] Railgun To Hit (?) Next: Re: (FT) Fleet Book Kra'Vak