Re: Two AARs--John Atkinson vs Laserlight

John M. Atkinson wrote:

>>Actually I don't think that's necessary, just out of interest were
>>you using the new mechanic or the old for dealing double damage?
> 
>New.  Where a K5 does 10 points of damage 84% of the time.

*If* they hit - which they aren't guaranteed to do even at point-blank
range, since you roll to hit as for a P-torp. At point-blank range the
K gun will inflict 10 points only 69% of the time, 5 points 14% of the
time, and 0 points 17% of the shots... and the percentage for no damage
rises fast as the range goes up.

>Note that to average that high takes 15 beam dice, 

If you don't use re-rolls, that is. With re-rolls it only takes 12.5
dice (OK, round  up to 13)... and you haven't included the chance that
the K-gun misses.

>which at 12-24 takes 16 mass worth of beams.  Haha.  That's even.  >Or
let's compare PTs, which average 3.5 points of damage and have >the
same range bands and (usually) arc limitiations.  Gee, that takes an
>average of 4.6 (or thereabouts, havn't done the math) to do 10 points
>of damage.

John, I'm *very* glad you pointed out that you haven't done your maths
here - otherwise I would never, ever dare to use a bridge (or even a
dug-out) you've been involved in building, or be anywhere within ten
miles of any demolition you're doing.

10/3.5 = 2.86, not 4.6. You need 2.86 *average-damage* P-torp hits to
equal a K5 hit's *maximum* damage; as you noted the hit bands and hit
rates are equal so you can compare one hit with another. 2.86*4 = 11.4
Mass, compared to the K5's 11 Mass for the K5.

However, you're comparing the *maximum* damage of the K5 with the
*average* damage of the P-torp. The *average* damage of a K5 hit is
slighly lower than 10 - 9.17, to be exact - so you only need 9.17/3.5 =
2.62 P-torps for 10.5 Mass to equal the K5's 11 Mass.

11.4 or 10.5 Mass to equal the damage of a weapon with 11 Mass seems
reasonably well balanced, at least to me. A bit difficult to get closer
without using dice bigger than d6, or using fractional mass ratings.

>>NRE designs are heavily based on the FB1 NAC. In the NRE-KV >>battle
the NRE CHs were Vandenburg-Ts (design-wise at least, >>don't know what
models he used), the CME was most likely a Furious >>and the FHs were
> 
> CME was my escort varient:  11 PDSs.

OK. Makes more sense against the IF; agreed - though 11 PDS and only
one ADFC does seem a bit unbalanced... I agree with your planned refit
<g>.

That also confirms my suspicion that the force you used was CruRon4 and
not CruRon5 :-/

>>...the DDs are variants of the FSE San Miguel rather than the NAC
>>Ticonderoga. (A bit surprising, given John's opinions about French
>><g>)
> 
>I like the designs.  I hate the French _people_.  It's like AK-47s. 
>Great guns, subhuman users.
  
Great guns (though the AK-74 is even better - even I can hold it on
target through a half-magazine burst :-) ), quite a lot of nice (and
also quite well-trained) people... as long as you don't go too high in
the hierarchies :-/

>>>Concentrated beam fire polished off one Vo'Bok.
>> 
>>No Pulse Torp fire, or just Kochte-cursed die rolls?
> 
> Slightly cursed.

OK. 
 
>>>John suggests the quick and easy modification would be to delete
>>>the provision for KV weapons doing double damage.
>> 
>>In that case, John would probably suggest that all P-torp damage
>>rolls be reduced by 2 points if he ever ran into Nik Linnell's Free
>>Orange Republic fleet. They're more dangerous to an "official
FB1"->>style fleet than any screen-less Kra'Vak force can be... it did
take the
>>Tasmanian gang a while to figure out how to beat the FOR, but they
>>managed in the end <g>
> 
>Nonsense.  I can handle them.

In that case your proposal to remove the double damage from the Ks is
utter nonsense as well. Most Ks inflict less damage than an equal
Mass of P-torps... and *none* of them inflict as much damage as an
equal *cost* of P-torps.

>>Well, first of all try to stay outside 6mu range to avoid the
>>scatterguns and give the K guns at least some chance to miss. OK,
>>each individual scattergun isn't very scary unless you're a fighter
>>or missile, but being hit by 14 of them at once tends to hurt even
>>starships :-/
> 
>Gee, that's easy with a higher thrust for the KV AND an objective to
>defend.

Attempting a salvage under fire, without first driving the enemy off?
You've only got yourself to blame, then <shrug>

Yes, it is quite easy to avoid having your vectors cross like yours did
in the recent battle even with a 2-thrust difference, particularly if
you start as far away, and at as low a velocity, as the report says you
did.

>>Third, it was just as important for John to keep your ships in his
>>(F) arcs as it was for you to keep his in yours - about 1/3 of his
>>weapon mass were (F)-arc only weapons, and all the rest covered >>the
(F) arc as
> 
>Eh?  You're still assuming I am running a book Furious.

With the CME instead of the book Furious, your (F)-arc weapons (6
P-torps; 2 on each heavy cruiser and 1 on each destroyer according to
the OOB on your web page) were 30.4% of your non-PDS weapons. Pretty
close to 1/3, don't you think?

FWIW, with a standard Furious the (F)-arc weapons are almost 40% of
your total weapon Mass, but since I wasn't sure Laserlight really meant
CruRon4 rather than CruRon5 I left it at "about 1/3".

>>noted above) he either had the KV ships in his broadside arcs, or
>>lost over half of his remaining weapons before they got to fire, or -
>>again - atrociously bad luck with his dice.
> 
>They did indeed loose a LOT of weapons to systems checks before >they
got to fire.

OK. IOW; bad luck with your dice while Laserlight rolled quite hot. A
really good basis for objectively evaluating a new weapon, don't you
think?
 
Regards,

Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Hen3ry