February Update - Missile Effectiveness

[AnotherDilbert]

I used medium bays upteched to reduce size by 30%, so 70 dT.
350 med bays * 24 = 8400 missiles.

 

[Nerhesi]

I used medium bays upteched to reduce size by 30%, so 70 dT.
350 med bays * 24 = 8400 missiles.

AH - the problem there is the uneven element of comparing 700 PD hardpoints to 350 missile hardpoints. Granted the Cost is of course in favour of PD

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The number of bays and PDBatteries where almost picked at random.

An early estimate gave that investing 1/3 of my hardpoints into PDBatteries would discourage missile sniping. 200 kT => 2000 hardpoints / 3 = 667 rounded to 700. Very expensive. Proved reasonable for the missile ship, probably to much for the cheaper spinal ship.

Perhaps 1/4 of hardpoints in PDBatteries or 1/2 of hardpoints in laser turrets (much less tonnage) would be good for the spinal ship.

The number of bays was simply what I could squeeze in after removing the spinal.

 

[Chas]

Is it going to be worthwhile to drop the PD effectiveness of turrets a little? Let the missiles, the expensive missiles, have more of a chance vs. make-shift PD, and then make it necessary to devote more resources in the dedicated PD systems. As it is the cost of missiles are high for multiple salvos to play the pound and ground game, cost and weight once you move into stored ammo.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

We need the capital ship salvo/barrage rules before we start to tinker with details.

And the Core book is published...

 

[Chas]

We need the capital ship salvo/barrage rules before we start to tinker with details.

And the Core book is published...

Yes point taken about the Core book. However you could easily rule on the barrage basis massed laser turrets aren't as effective vs. small high maneuver missiles... that's quite logical.

 

[Nerhesi]

We need the capital ship salvo/barrage rules before we start to tinker with details.

And the Core book is published...

Yes point taken about the Core book. However you could easily rule on the barrage basis massed laser turrets aren't as effective vs. small high maneuver missiles... that's quite logical.

Or vice versa - I would think we wouldn't want to lower the effectiveness of PD at all now. I think we should really consider that to stop X missiles, you will need 2X hardpoints - and that means a larger ship with significantly increased cost and so on. Therefore PD should not be though of as sufficient at the moment - and we should hold off on anything that makes missiles better/more effective.

 

[Chas]

We need the capital ship salvo/barrage rules before we start to tinker with details.

And the Core book is published...

Yes point taken about the Core book. However you could easily rule on the barrage basis massed laser turrets aren't as effective vs. small high maneuver missiles... that's quite logical.

Or vice versa - I would think we wouldn't want to lower the effectiveness of PD at all now. I think we should really consider that to stop X missiles, you will need 2X hardpoints - and that means a larger ship with significantly increased cost and so on. Therefore PD should not be though of as sufficient at the moment - and we should hold off on anything that makes missiles better/more effective.

What I was thinking was to make turrets less effective PD to match a missile turret on a 1:1 basis, and actual PD more effective to match an equivalent bay 1:1. Then it becomes easy for everybody to nut out while they are building as well. Do I want a missile heavy ship to have attacks against fighters. Or do I want a missile light ship with good defense against capital ship missile salvos...

 

[arcador]

Let me put a semi-wild idea here; forgive me if I put a little off-topic.

Firing missiles is not taking into account any gunner skill, but it receives bonus to hit based on the number of missiles in the salvo. Also, the attack benefits from the Smart trait.

However, when the number of missiles goes up to ~12+, it the bonus to hit, taking aside all PD and EW, makes it 100% hit. At some point with 100+ of missiles, even the defences don't reduce that hit chance under 100%, but only reduce the damage the spaceship will take.

No other weapon, currently, has 100% hit chance. A spinal can roll low and completely miss the target. Even beams miss vs some enemies.

I propose maximum bonus of to hit with missiles due the salvo size to be 8 (not accounting the Smart trait, it will add at least +1). Even if the salvo is 9000 missiles, the bonus is still +8. This will keep the missiles in line with other weapons in risk of missing the attack, even if it is a low one. Packing missiles in one salvo will still have benefits (more damage, subject to only one EW). It can even introduce some sort of operational decision making - for example, knowing the enemy can stop ~10 missiles per PD attempt, the attacker might want to keep his salvoes high enough, that even reduced with 10 (in this particular example), they will still have at least 8 remaining for the +8 to hit. The attack roll will still matter in terms to hit, rather than simply modifying the damage with ~+-5. It will also make the smart trait meaning something for the missiles, rather than being +1 multiplier for the damage.

Of course, the number 8 is quickly made up, and this suggestion is made without any knowledge to the barrage rules for missiles, thus it can make the suggestion irrelevant.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The current system says: Effect is the number of missiles that hit.
So cap the + to hit to 8 and you cap the number of missiles that can hit to something like 15, even if you fired 9000 missiles, problematic.

We need a new system that scales from 10 missiles to 10000 missiles. It cannot be based on roll 2D, that number of missiles hit.

Suggested system

Launch salvo, no roll. Keep track of number of missiles
EW potentially kills some missiles.
PD potentially kills some missiles
Attack roll 2D +Smart -Evasion. 50%+10%*Effect of missiles hit (max 100%, round 50% up, 49% down), one roll
Damage roll (4D - Armour) * N, where N is # of missiles hit, one roll

No modifiers for size of salvo.
No tables for damage modifications.
Attack to hit chance is somewhat similar to single shot system.
Damage is somewhat similar to single shot system.
Armor works as usual.
Works for 100t ships.
Works for 1 000 000t ships.

Basically the same system could work for energy weapons.

Matt dislikes the % based to hit, but I cannot see how we can get a simpler system that scales from small to very large.

 

[MongooseMatt]

We need a new system that scales from 10 missiles to 10000 missiles. It cannot be based on roll 2D, that number of missiles hit.
.

This is a fleet scale thing.

I am quite happy in the 'basic' game to say that if 10,000 missiles get fired at you, you are going to get smegged, whatever ship you are in

Fleet scale will handle this somewhat differently, but I want to lock the 'single' ship side of things first.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

OK, I assumed the basic system was for adventure class ships.

I thought we needed another system even to have two destroyers shoot it out. (No one is going to roll 100 separate PD rolls every round.)

 

[GhengisRexx]

For a fleet scale, or even just capital ship scale, could we not have a "Point Defense Score" based on number of pulse and beam lasers dedicated, EW value, and PD systems, divided by some value for the size of the hull. (Bigger ship, harder to defend). A penalty based on the TOTAL # of Missiles hitting. Then make a single 2d6 roll + the pd value to get the % of missiles that are shot down based on the effect value of the roll. ( I know this is only half baked, I'll try to crunch some #s if one of you doesn't beat me to it. )

Ultimately, missile defenses should help, but I hate the idea of ships having to be all or nothing with missiles to be effective, so I would only have very high effect rolls stop all missiles. No other weapon system has such a hard counter.