Prev: RE: strike the colors rule Next: RE: strike the colors rule

Re: [FT] Wave Gun (was: OU & IC & FB3)

From: "Mark 'Indy' Kochte" <kochte@s...>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 10:55:10 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: [FT] Wave Gun (was: OU & IC & FB3)



On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Peter Mancini wrote:

[...]
> Hey!	I just thought, why develop a special beam weapon for the
"Shadows" 
> for B5 when I should probably use this.  The Shadows are over the top
so 
> this fits in.  Where are my rules???
> 
> Wave Gun
> --------
> Only forward arc (90 deg. FT2, 60 deg. FB)
> No other weapons fire
> Vehicle is unshielded in forward arc
> Range 36" (progressive area, 2",3",4" for each 12 inches)
> Damage (regressive 4D6,3D6,2D6 for each 12 inches)
> No Normal Defense (yes, I used to play Champions a lot...)
> Needs to charge, requires 6 points, roll 1D6 for each turn charging
and add 
> to total.
> Mass: 10 Cost:30
> 
> FB style Shadow Slice and Dice Beam
> -----------------------------------
> FS FF FP arcs
> Ship only carries this weapon
> No restrictions on shielding
> Range is same with progressive area (simulating cutting swath)
> Same Damage
> Same NND
> Available on odd turns
> Mass: 10 Cost: 90 (this weapon has less restrictions and is available
on a 
> much more reliable basis though original weapon will fire more times
given a 
> long enough game.)

I don't necessarily see the wave gun as being equivalent to the Shadow
Slice(tm). But that is open to various people's interpretation.
Although,
I would have to disagree with the proposed 'progressive area' bit for
the
Shadow Slicer. The Shadows generally target one ship (or group of
fighters) at a time, slice it open (or go 'pop-pop-pop' for fighters),
then move on to the next target or threat (not necessarily in that
order).
Sizes and dimensions of ships at the scale of FT are too small for the
suggested 'progressive area' to simulate a cutting swath. The amount of
*damage* done to a given target by said weapon, however, would do that
quite nicely. 

Mk


Prev: RE: strike the colors rule Next: RE: strike the colors rule