Prev: Re: [FT] Weapon of the Week - AM-SM Next: Re: photo catalog was: 6-10mm ST Bugs

Re: [FT] Weapon of the Week - AM-SM

From: "Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@t...>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 20:52:11 +0100
Subject: Re: [FT] Weapon of the Week - AM-SM

Charles Taylor wrote:

>Seems reasonable to me, want to think about the damage though, >hmm...

>Example (very contrived & rough):
>A ship with, oh (leafs through FB1), say 4 PDS, escorted by a CE with
>3 PDS is attacked by two salvos -
> All PDS are used (4 vs. 1, 3 vs. other), killing an average of 5.6
> missiles, (3.2 on first, 2.4 on second).

In order to kill an average of 5.6 missiles the PDSs need an
"effectively infinite" number of target missiles - in reality 12 or so
missiles is enough. However, the target salvo doesn't *have* 12
missiles; it only has 1d6 missiles; therefore the average number of
missiles shot down per PDS gets lower the more PDSs you throw at the

The real average damage from 1 SM salvo opposed by 4 PDSs + 1 SM salvo
opposed by 3 PDSs is 4.39 + 3.24 = 7.63 points of damage.

>Same ships are attacked by PBL-2, (same as your AM-SM)
>All PDS fire, removing an average of 1.67 (approx) d6s, so only 0.33
>d6 reach the target - but both ships are hit - oh, make it .67 d6.

C'mon Charles, you're not usually this careless! :-) If all PDS fire
they'll remove on average 7/6 = 1.167 d6, so on average only 0.833d56
gets through to each ( = 2.92 pts each, 5.83 in total).

>So, _in_this_example_ your AM-SM is about as effective as ONE
>standard range SM.

The AM-SM in this example inflicts on average as much damage as
5.83/(7.63/2) = about 1.5 normal SMs, though the AM-SM damage is spread
over two targets rather than concentrated at a single one.
>Not that I am _not_ taking into account a lot of things - extra ships
>the area would both increase (more targets to damage) and reduce
>(more PDS systems) the effectiveness of the AM-SM, also, some >Alien
PDS equivalents are more effective. Finally, I did not account for
>screens (which reduce the AM-SMs effectiveness - if we treat them
>_exactly_ like PBLs)
>On the whole, your version looks good, but I'd either reduce the MASS
>per salvo to 2 (which would allow for extended range AM-SMs), or
>increase the yield to 3 plasma dice.

That's only because you underestimated the damage inflicted by the
AM-SMs by some 60% :-/ You could have extended-range AM-SMs if you
like, but they'll be Mass 4 or 5 per salvo.


Oerjan Ohlson

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

Prev: Re: [FT] Weapon of the Week - AM-SM Next: Re: photo catalog was: 6-10mm ST Bugs