Followup to Operation Furious Riposte [FB KV speculations]

My reply to Laserlight:
Defeat in detail would not have happened. The KV players weren't dumb,
and the NAC feel they'd have even been more destroyed if the KV main
battle line had split into them.... given that it would run through them
with scatterguns flushing.... it'd have went through them like a hot
knife through butter. The NAC players figure the KV were not aggressive
enough (though it was, I might add, their first time running this
variant of the KV so they didn't really know what a huge advantage they
had).

To Oerjan:
I like your thoughts. Increase the costs. That might just do the trick.
I'll try some of your figures. Though I have to ask how on a per mass
basis you can equate RG to beams... given that a beam 1 or beam 2 has a
range of 12 or 24 MU and a class 1 and 2 RG have a 30" range. That means
that your small ships are ineffective for a turn or more while the KV
are "in the zone".

I believe this summarizes the average damage:
Beam	 RB1	    RB2     RB3
1	 0.8	     --      --
2	 1.6	     0.8     --
3	 2.4	     1.6     0.8

Whereas RG (to compare, I've average groups of 2 6" RB to produce a
composite result)

RG	RB1	    RB2       RB3
1	1.0	    0.55      0.1
2	2.25	    1.27      0.24
3	3.71	    2.12      0.39

I think we can see clearly that at any range, RG are better. But more
particularly, they are PRONOUNCEDLY better at RB2 and RB3 where all but
class 3 beams are very ineffective. RG of class 2 or 3 are still very
effective in RB2, and can be quite effective out in RB 3.

We can't compare maximum damage, because of beam rerolls, but a class 3
railgun (if it rolls a 6 at 30") then a 3 on the dice, will do six
points. Not that hard to do. For a class 3 beam to do that kind of
damage, it needs to roll either three sixes to start with or at least
one six and some other good numbers followed by some other good numbers.
It just doesn't happen that often. So it seems likely that with some
luck, a class 6 RG is significantly more dangerous than an equivalent
beam (fewer die rolls, regresses less to mean results).

So I'm not sure how you can say whether the RG costs are good or ill.

I wonder what the impact of removing size class as a modifier for the
doubled damage. It slightls the big guns a bit, but it would certainly
prevent someone building a class 5 railgun which would always do 10
points when it hit... that's a scary mechanic that does not scale well.

Your comments on the armour and hull appear quite valid. I think the
general observation is either the ships need toned down or they need
cost increased.

Your comment on reducing scattergun effectiveness against other ships I
find appealing also. Then they are still a nasty but temporary fighter
defence, but they'll deter scouts from whacking destroyers and the like.
12" of lethality versus ships is just nasty. If we dropped the result by
1 per full 2" (-1 at 2" to -6 at 12"), then we'd have a weapon still
nasty against fighters, and nasty against ships the KV are good enough
or lucky enough to get beside, but not so lethal against anything in a
24" diameter sphere!

To Schoon:

Hey bud, don't get me wrong: You did something (with Dean) that needs
doing. Old style KV won't do - they aren't FB compliant. Though a group
I know uses new FB ships vs old KV ships and finds the balance not too
bad. But I don't like that answer. I like the idea of getting the costs
right.

As for what to do in cinematic? I think if we got the costs right, the
other issues go away. Your designs are fine. I don't believe the KV are
so stupid as to design ships with no good side armaments and since RG
have limited arcs, you need some side mounts. It helps in vector too in
any sort of larger engagement. So I have no issue with the designs, only
the cost of same. I have a wee issue with scattergun effectiveness (it
works great against fighters AND allows scouts to easily kill
destroyers). I have a wee issue with the mega-armour/mega-hull combo -
for those of us that use core systems and thresholds, that's a huge
distinction. And I have mentioned my concern about how we compare a RG
to a beam.

Basically, we've created a KV who has lethal close in FP (RG are deadly
and hit often - if they are class 2+, they do good damage most of the
time and one can flush a terror of scatterguns thus hitting really
really hard...) and they are dangerous further out (their RG of all
classes fire 30" and with one good and one moderate die, they can do
double damage.... unlike beams that have to roll lots of good dice for
this effect). And they are superfast, can turn on a dime, can out push
and outthrust most humans, and take a beating till the cows come home.
All in all, this is the UBER ET we hope never to meet. I don't mind them
having that flavour... if the point costs let us have a fun battle.

Thanks for the commentary everyone, and I'm glad to see Y2K has been the
fizzle everyone has been working to make it. I'm sure that the media
will say "Oh, what a scam." The truth is, a lot of folk worked very hard
and I think they should get a pat on the back. It seems they've mostly
done the work to make it a non-event. (Thought it'd be wise to be just
as serious or perhaps moreso about the lesser attended feb/march
turnover date). Kudos to all involved!

Now back to your regularly scheduled diatribes.

--
---------------------------------------------------------------
"Good? Bad? I'm the guy with the gun." - Ash, Army of Darkness

Homepage: http:\\fox.ntsn.ca\~kaladorn\index.html
ICQ: 58316640 (Tomin8tor)

"Ah. I see. Inform me if there is any change in his condition."
<hangs up the phone>
"How is he?"
"He's dead."
-- The movie Top Secret