[ATCA-SF] Looking Ahead - Phaser-G

[Da Boss]

Weapons, overload and fire all four photon torpedoes!"
"Aye, Captain!" [SFX: ptu-ptu-ptu-ptu-boom]
"Sensors, how many hits?"
"Out of four weapons fired, twenty-seven of them hit."

or

Weapons, overload and fire all four photon torpedoes!"
"Aye, Captain!" [SFX: ptu-ptu-ptu-ptu-boom]
"Sensors, how many hits?"
Registering damage all across enemy vessels primary hull, secondary explosions continuing.... damage assessment incoming

:wink:

 

[AdmiralGrafSpee]

Okay, I started a hellbore discussion topic.

I don't think making gatlings d6 multihit really reflects what they can do in SFB - but it is kind of cool. So would having d6 AD - but the question would be when to roll that to determine how many dice you get?

Still I think the simplest is to just keep them as Ph-3 with 4AD - cause that's what they are!

-Tim

 

[Lincolnlog]

Plus its worth as a defensive weapon goes out the port hole, do the methane suckers have port holes?

It can (could) engage 4 Drones. making it a multihit weapon removes that and makes it nastier at close range but significantly reduces the Drone (and later on the fighter) defence of the Methane suckers.

Exactly....Most empires use this weapon as a defensive weapon against drones. See the thread on Drone Spamming, Phaser-G could equalize the playing field. This weapon needs a multi target engagement capability (even is that is rulled just against seeking weapons). But I have to agree each weapon fires once per turn so choose your target carefully (all 4 AD are fired when the target is declared). 8)

If I were to deploy a Federation Fleet against the Kzinti, I would employ a few fire power ships, and then fill in with lots of escorts with Phaser-G (glad I'm not playing in tournaments yet, since Phaser-G doesn't formally exist yet. :shock:

Also, IMHO removing the ACC +1 doesn't take away the knife fighting ability of these ships. Get within 6" on a two weapon bank you can still potentially do 8 points (agreed, more likely on average to do 4 points). :twisted: I can see arguments for leaving the ACC +1 and removing it.

I would like to point out that multihit 2 is better than 2 AD of no multihit, as every successful HIT will remove 1AD of drones, so 1 success = 2 dead drones. A phaser-G should be good against drones but better on fighters at knife range. And if you really aren't happy how about this:
Phaser-G / 6 / Accurate +1, Multihit d6, Precise
Is that more in line with a rapid fire Phaser rather than just 4 Phaser-3's duct-taped together? Remember a single weapon (with the exception of Plasma) only has 1AD, it's when you start stacking weapons together that they get multiple AD.

Hermit,

It isn't a matter of being happy or unhappy. It is simply a discussion on how everyone believes they should work. Your opinion is as valuable as everyone elses. And I certainly haven't made up my mind yet. I am simply saying that each Phaser-G should be able to target a single ship 4 AD, or up to 4 AD of Drones. If you only have 2 AD of Drones incoming, you still would have to fire all 4 AD (which could be good in the case of misses anyway.

As to the multihit, some of the smaller escort vessels have large numbers of these weapons. Agreed, that the ballance is these small ships are theoretically easy to kill. But, would not want a 90 point FF on the table putting out 130 pts worth of fire power.

Once again, my mind is not made up yet, but I definitly need some convincing. And then there will have to be some playtesting. Hopefully when the official rule comes out in a couple of years, it will match what we discuss.

Bob

 

[Sgt_G]

You are confusing yourself. Each Attack Die represents one weapon firing. Each weapon may or may not be able to score multiple hits. A burst from a Disruptor or a beam from a Phaser (when from close range) may strike multiple locations on a ship, hence multihit...of course Photon Torps and Plasma and drones are all explosions and likely to cause collateral damage to a ship, hence multihit...Each HIT then rolls for damage IF it leaked or if shields are down...

I don't think that's right. Take a Photon, which is Multi-Hit 4. You roll one d6 to see if it hits, and if that roll is a "6", then all four points go internal. Your way says that you could have half a single AD of photon hit shields and the other half go internal.

 

[Lincolnlog]

Decision made, until there is an official ruling:

Phaser-G Range 6 4 AD per, Acc +1, Kill Zone 2, Precise, Must fire all 4 AD at the same target or mutilple drones in the same defensive fire.

 

[Sgt_G]

If there's a fear that the Ph-G is too powerful as an offensive weapon, make it so that on non-Hydran ships (Fed escorts, LDR, and Oriorns) it can only fire one pulse at a ship, but fout pulses defensively.

 

[Nomad]

If there's a fear that the Ph-G is too powerful as an offensive weapon, make it so that on non-Hydran ships (Fed escorts, LDR, and Oriorns) it can only fire one pulse at a ship, but fout pulses defensively.

If the Hydrans can't seriously harm an opponent within 2" range there's no point writing them into the game.

Quoted from the ADB Discuss BBS...

As well as trying to find a way to nerf the Fusion / Hellbore rules to the point that no one wantsto play a certain three-legged, empire

...that appears to be certain playtester's intentions.

 

[Sgt_G]

Notice that I said "non-Hydran ships" ... the trash-cans would still get to use four-pulse mode offensively.

 

[Nomad]

Good point, well made.

...but that still nerfs the LDR.

 

[Captain Jonah]

I don't see it as being overpowered at 2". No special rules for races, its 4 P3s on a single mount. If you are that close and didn't want to be, well, Oops. :wink:

The LDR are insanely proof against drones, thats the way they should be. If you let them get within 2" expect tp get murdered.

Hydran short range stuff with Phaser Gs and fusions will eat a larger ship in one go at 2", the flip side is that they are all but useless at even medium range.

 

[Nomad]

Sorry, my last sounded snarkier than it was meant to be (in a hurry, on my way out the door, post in haste regret at leisure et.c).

The LDR are grossly hard anyway. Close-range gatling and ESG death is very much their M.O.

Basically, I'd just like to see a gatling being a gatling, same rules for everybody. The Hydrans get 1 or 2 on each of their ships (OK, four on BBs and 'several' on specialist carrier escorts) and one per Stinger-2 fighter, the LDR generally get about twice that on their ships, the Orions and WYN occasionally get upto one per ship in an option mount and the Feds only ever get them on carrier escorts - which don't appear without their carriers.

 

[Rambler]

Couple of things to remember here. People are getting way bent out of shape over the Hydran answer to The Anti-Drone. The whole point odf ACTA is to keep it simple. The Gatling Phaser is 4 Phaser 3 duct tapped together. If you get within 2 inches of a Hydran he is going to peel the paint of your hull. That is just the way he is designed so do not close with him. And Nomad you need to understand Scoutdad's humor. The running joke is he absoluetly can not stand walking talking 3 legged trash cans. He is not going to see to it that Hydran are nerfed out of exsistance but, he will see to it that they are balanced and not overpowered.

LDR ships are going to probably to have such a high point surchage jacked up on them than a basic Layrans. Which will make them less attractive to play than regular Lyran ships.

WYN can not use Gatling Phasers anyway so there is no problem there. If you see Gatling Phasers on a Orion expect that it will be limited to only x number of phaser can be deployed in the total fleet. This same type of rule will probably be added to cover Tholian Web Casters and the Interstellar Concordum's PPDs anyway.

As far as Feds go as was stated you should only see them on Federation Carrier Escort Vessels which are suppose to be limited to only being deployed with Carriers or in the extrem cases they maybe on the Fed Battleship or, Mathew may say no the BB doesn't need them. Time will tell.

Keep it simple treat each Gatling Phaser as a bank of 4 Phaser 3s. You decide if all 4 are used Offensively and thus can have thier Atack Die Split like normal or is the Bank being used Defensively like a Antidrone.

Edited for a mis spelling.

 

[Captain Jonah]

Keep it simple treat each Gatling Phaser as a bank of 4 Phaser 3s. You decide if all 4 are used Offensively and thus can have thier Atack Die Split like normal or is the Bank being used Defensively like a Antidrone.

Edited for a mis spelling.

What he said :lol:

Well apart from the bit about the walking three legged methane suckers, they deserve to suffer. Oxy breathers of the verse unite. Pick on the methane suckers :twisted:

 

[Lincolnlog]

Rambler,

I agree, Phaser-G must be kept simple. That's why I decided to go with:

Phaser-G Range 6 4 AD per, Acc +1, Kill Zone 2, Precise, Must fire all 4 AD at the same target or mutilple drones in the same defensive fire.

For most races Phaser-G is going to be a defensive weapon. But in the case where it is used primarily as an offensive weapon I would think it is supposed to be powerful.

Bob

 

[greenboy]

With a eange of only 6 are there really going to be multipul targets that often that it's going to be an issue

 

[Lincolnlog]

With a eange of only 6 are there really going to be multipul targets that often that it's going to be an issue

Yes, often if you consider this is primarily a anti-drone defensive weapon.

Bob

 

[Sgt_G]

With the way ACTA:SF rules/ ship stas work, what's the difference between a Ph-G and a bank of four Ph-3??

In SFB/FedCmdr, the Ph-G takes half the power to arm. ACTA doesn't track power like that.

In SFB/FedCmdr, the Ph-G is a single weapon and take one hit to kill vs four for 4xPh-3. ACTA treats a bank of weapons on the same line as a single weapon system that can all be destroyed with a single hit. Presumably, both the Ph-G and x4Ph-3 would have 4AD.

In SFB/FedCmdr, the Ph-G and 4xPh-3 must both declare all fire before rolling any dice. Perhaps this could be the difference in ACTA by allowing the Ph-G to sequence fire instead of salvo fire, rolling one d6 and check results and resolve damage before rolling for next pulse. Also allow it to switch to a new target after each pulse without having to declare the targets in advance, just require the player to say he's firing the Ph-G during nomination phase.

 

[Nomad]

Once again, with feeling; It's only a defensive weapon for the Federation.

The Orions, the WYN, the LDR and the reviled Hydrans are just as interested in using it as a close-assault anti-ship weapon.

 

[Nerroth]

And even then, it is not a defensive weapon for the Federation in FC (at least not yet; the NEC is on the list for this year's Reinforcements Attack module-plus-boosters release, but I don't recall if that ship is supposed to have gatling phasers or not).

Plus, FC puts a cap on how much use an Orion or WYN force can make of phaser-Gs; the former can have only one gatling per ship, and the WYNs can only have 1/3 of the ships in a given fleet mount a single "foreign weapon" (which includes gatlings).


I don't necessarily agree with the idea of all four shots having to fire at the same target offensively; there should be the option of firing less than the full amount at a given unit (either to split the rmeainign fire, or to hold on to it in order to lessen the risk of overkill).

 

[Sgt_G]

Guys, you missed my point. Again, with feeling, within the ACTA game engine, how is a single Ph-G different from a bank of four Ph-3 when both are a single weapon system and both have 4AD????