Re: FT-WotW - back to needles

In message <6B3C0EEAB4FED3119F5F009027DC5E9EA9AE59@spacemsg3.jhuapl.edu>
	  "Izenberg, Noam" <Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu> wrote:

> From: "Bif Smith" <bif@bifsmith.fsnet.co.uk>
> Subject: FT-WotW
> 
> > I know we are discussing needle beams at the moment, but I was
> > wondering if anybody has given thought to what should be covered
later
> > (Noam?).
> 
> I agree, but would rather make sure we do each subject to some sort of
> conclusion before rushing ahead to the next. I'm a bit unsatisfied
with the
> EMP discussion, since we resolved basically nothing - too many people
liked
> too many different systems to agree on much of anything, When I update
the
> archive with Comments on the EMP discussion, I'm basically going to
have to
> say "Look at the GZG-L archives in Feb 2001 for the EMP WOTW
discussion. No
> consensus was reached."
> 
> I think we have a slightly better chance at needle beams, but we're
not
> there yet. I'm not keen on moving on to the next thing until we've
hashed on
> Needles more and/or decided we're bogged down there too. If the
latter, I'm
> not encouraged to do more "general systems" duscussions like EMP or
Needle
> or Fighter, but would rather attack one specific weapon/system at a
time.

On consideration, that's probably a good idea.
> 
> > Subjects
> >I think need discussing (just from the WDA) are-MT missiles (and the
> >launcher varient)
> 
> MT Missiles (and fighters) are done every 6 months to year on this
list.
> There are a couple of good proposals out there (several of which are
linkd
> to in the WDA) and I think it's going to have to be one of the things
Jon
> will update in FT3 or FB3. I like MT missiles alot, but  I wonder
whether we
> should let them lie for now.
> 
> > human railguns (asraised by Matthew Smith), 
> 
> My personal bias is to just rename K-guns. There's not logic in
creating
> something that is basically a K-gun and give it  a differnet mechanic
just
> so Humans can use them.

I agree.
> 
> > AF-SML`s (and SMR version), 
> Fine with me. 
> 
> > wave guns (scalable?, overpowered?), 
> Sure, I suppose. I'd rather look at some others first, though.

I think we can probably leave things like that for later, fun they may
be :-)
> 
> There are several other systems I'm dying to discuss, but I want to do
> justice to each one or each group one at a time.We really risk getting
ahead
> of ourselves and shortchanging the subject at hand by rushing onto
thinking
> about the next thing.
> 
> That said, back to the Needle:
> 
> Also from BIF:
> > Another thought I had for a long ranged needle beam is that at short
range
> > (0-12 mu), you can target a system at will as normal. At long range
(12-24
> > mu), you roll to hit as normal for a needle beam. If you roll a 6 (a
> needle
> > hit), the targetted player specifies the system to be hit, and the
> attacking
> > player rolls a 6 to disable. The defender keep specifing systems
until the
> > attacking player rolls a 6. 
> 
> I agree with Beth on this one. It's pretty long and drawn out. I think
a
> long range Needle with one die thoughout can be done, but it's best
cost
> cmpared with Pulsers than Beams. My HNB was made using the Beam
mechanic. A
> single arc of pulser fire at close range costs 2 mass and gives 6
dice. A
> like number of dice for an M pulser costs 6 mass, or 3x. that'd be too
> expensive for Needles, but 3 Mass would be too cheap. You'd either
have to
> make if 3xMass at 4 or 5Pts/mass or 4 massat normal (or slightly less
than
> normal) cost.
> 
> Noam

Long Range Needle Beam

Well, if we assume that the FB values for a needle beam are balanced,
then a double range needle beam (exactly like the standard one, but
range is 24 mu) would, if we use Oerjan's estimate that the
effectiveness of a weapon increases with the 1.75th power of the range,
all other factors being equal, have a MASS of 7 (actually about 6 3/4),
and a COST of 20 (21 if you want to make it MASS x3)

Hmm... thats even more than Noam's 3x 1-arc Pulsar-M cost!

I think I'll think about this one some more!

Multi-Arc Needle Beam
Well, so far there are people both for and against these - ignoring PSB
issues - is there really a problem with allowing Needle Beams with more
than 1 arc? for the right cost, of course.

I think we may have to actually try and playtest some of these.

Charles