Fleet Combat system - running the #s

[Nerhesi]

Good evening folks - We have an opportunity here to make sure the new fleet combat system is not creating some very weird results. For that, I believe it would be greatly beneficial to get your help running the numbers on many scenarios.

Basically:

a) Go through examples of either previously existing ships, ships that you've created, ships that are just purely conceptual and floating in your head.
b) Translate these ships to the abstract system now provided in the most recent high guard
c) Run a few examples of those ships in space combat.

Example:

My_2000ton_destroyer Vs 1 a squadron of 10 x 200 ton pirate ships
4 of My 500 ton SDBs vs 2 x 1000 tons corvettes
5 squadrons of my 400 fighters vs 50,000 ton cruiser..

What I'm looking for really is the following:

1) Is damage too low?
2) Is damage too high?
3) Are things doing NO damage a LOT of the time?
4) While we KNOW the results will not be as if you played the game and rolled for every attack and every damage roll - we want to see the delta here.

Please keep in mind that one of the key Mechanics is a bit unclear, so I will clarify it hear:
Damage is basically Base Damage * (Attack Roll % - Armour %). This makes it a simpler, single calculation to determine damage. Example:

Lets say Base damage for a particular attack is 2000 damage.

Your Attack Roll result in an 8 (60%), against a target with 15 armour (45%) - damage is 15% of 2000 , (300).
Your attack Roll result is an 11 (100%), against a target with 15 armour (45%) - damage is 55% of 2000 , (1100).

Ok - looking forward to your findings ladies and gents. Please experiment with everything from Bays, Turrets, Spinals, Large Bays (treated differently) etc etc

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Ok, let's see:

Basic system (TL15): Attack: 2D +7[basic att] -7[targets basic defence] = 2D ± 0

Some DMs are:
Long range -2
Very Long Range -4
Accurate +1
Fighter vs Ship +2
Bay vs Fighter -2
Bay vs <2000dT -2 (I assume these are not cumulative?)
Large Bay vs >3000dT +4
Spinal +2 (Fire Control)
Spinal vs <10000dT -4
Spinal vs <5000dT -8
Spinal vs <2000dT Impossible
Very High Yield +10%
Intense Focus +10% (I assume this is added to the result from the Fleet Damage table, before armour is deducted? Not defined.)

Since we often end up with median damage = 0, and the Fleet Damage table is unsymmetric we cannot rely on median damage calculations, we have to do average calculations.
Average Damage is: (first row with armour [45%], second row without armour [meson,ion])

2D +             -4     -3     -2     -1     ±0     +1     +2     +3     +4
Average Dam     0,7%   2,2%   5,0%   9,3%  15,1%  22,2%  30,0%  37,4%  43,8%   
without armour 11,8%  18,8%  27,6%  38,2%  49,6%  61,0%  71,8%  81,1%  88,5%

So normally we do 15% damage, Long range 5%, Very Long 0,7%.

Normally we cannot do damage at Very Long range. Bays cannot do damage to fighters at Long Range.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

A few variants of a Battlecruiser 2+2 à la Chas. Note that I do not intend to ever drop the drop tanks, they are quite sturdy and can take a bit of damage (30% of ship).

TL 15, 110 kT, 36,7 kT Drop tank, Armour 15, 8066 Hull, GCr ~124.
J-4, M-9 (with drop tank)
Capital Attack 2[crew] + 3[AdvFireCont] + 2[TL] = 7
Capital Spinal 2[crew] + 5[FireCont] + 2[TL] = 9
Capital Defence 2[crew] + 3[Evade] + 2[TL] = 7

Name:    "BC Particle"            "BC Particle Ion"       "BC Meson"
Cost     MCr 124 000              MCr 123 250             MCr 116 300

Spinal:  Particle 7DD             Particle 6DD            Meson 3DD

Bays:    Large Plasma-pulse       Large Particle          3 Large Meson 
         LongRange Dam: 56?       Accurate Dam: 7         Accurate Dam: 21?
         
                                  5 Med Particle          15 Med Meson 
                                  Accurate Dam: 32        Accurate Dam: 105?
                                  
                                  50 Small Ion
                                  LongRange Dam: 300
                                  
Turrets: 499 Quad Particle        472 Quad Particle       490 Quad Pulse Laser
         Accurate Dam: 1397       IntFocus Dam: 1321      Accurate  Dam: 784
                                                          SalvoDefence: 2450
         
SalvoDef 400 PDBatt:   4800       400 PDBatt:   4800      400 PDBatt:   4800

Screen   250 Meson:    2500       250 Meson:    2500      250 Meson:    2500
         250 Damper:   2500       250 Damper:   2500      250 Damper:   2500

The BC Meson is cheaper because the laser turrets are cheaper.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Fight 10 Particle vs 11 Meson:

Meson Attack (Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] with armour deducted from table above)
Meson Spinal: 2D +9[basic] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D + 0 ⇒ Average Dam 49,6% * 3000 ≈ 1488
Meson Large bay: 2D +7[basic] +4[large bay] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D + 3 ⇒ AvD 81,1% * 21 ≈ 17
Meson Bay: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 1 ⇒ AvD 38,2% * 105 ≈ 40
Turret: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 1 ⇒ AvD 9,3% * 784 ≈ 73

11 meson ships do 11 * ( 1488 + 17 + 40 ) ≈ 16995 meson damage on 2 ships - 2*2500 meson screen = 11995 damage.
Turrets do 11 * 73 = 803 damage
Total damage 12798 killing 1 1/2 enemy ship or 15,9% of the enemy force.


Particle Attack (Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] with armour deducted from table above)
Spinal: 2D +9[basic] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D + 0 ⇒ Average Dam 15,1% * 7000 ≈ 1057
Large bay: 2D +7[basic] +4[large bay] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D + 2 ⇒ AvD 30,0% * 56 ≈ 17
Turret: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 1 ⇒ AvD 9,3% * 1397 ≈ 130

10 particle ships do 10 * ( 1057 + 17 + 130 ) ≈ 12040 damage killing 13,6% of the enemy force.

Multiplied Armour:
Particle Attack (Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] without armour deducted from table above)
Spinal: 2D +9[basic] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D + 0 ⇒ Average Dam 49,6% * 7000 ≈ 3472
Large bay: 2D +7[basic] +4[large bay] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D + 2 ⇒ AvD 71,8% * 56 ≈ 40
Turret: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 1 ⇒ AvD 38,2% * 1397 ≈ 534

10 particle ships do 10 * ( 3472 + 40 + 534 ) * 55%[armour] ≈ 22253 damage killing 25% of the enemy force.


Conclusions: Particle spinals do no damage for low attack rolls. Mesons always do damage. No contest. The same meson ships would lose catastrophically in the basic system. If we double meson spinal damage as discussed earlier, mesons will be completely overpowered in Fleet Combat.

Large meson bays are pointless, smaller bays always do more damage for the same tonnage.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Very Long range: Particle (Accurate) bay vs Meson (Long Range) bay

Meson Attack (Very Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] with armour deducted from table above)
5 Meson Bay: 2D +7[basic] -7[targets basic defence] -4[range] = 2D - 4 ⇒ AvD 11,8% * 35 ≈ 4,13 damage
1 Large Bay: 2D +7[basic] +4[large bay] -7[targets basic defence] -4[range] = 2D + 0 ⇒ AvD 49,6% * 7 ≈ 3,47 damage

Particle Attack (Very Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] with armour deducted from table above)
5 Particle Bay: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -4[range] = 2D - 3 ⇒ AvD 2,2% * 35 ≈ 0,77 damage
1 Large Bay: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] +4[large bay] -7[targets basic defence] -4[range] = 2D + 1 ⇒ AvD 22,2% * 7 ≈ 1,55 damage

Multiplied Armour:
5 Particle Bay: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -4[range] = 2D - 3 ⇒ AvD 18,8% * 35 * 55% ≈ 3,619 damage
1 Large Bay: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] +4[large bay] -7[targets basic defence] -4[range] = 2D + 1 ⇒ AvD 61,0% * 7 * 55% ≈ 2,34 damage

Conclusion: Particles fall off the Fleet Damage table and do very little damage at Very Long range. A Meson bay does 4,13 / 0,77 ≈ 5 times as much damage as a particle bay. In the basic system the particle would have a better chance to hit and do about half the damage. Not balanced between the systems. Multiplied damage have greater similarities between the systems.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Fight 10 Particle vs 10 Particle Ion

Particle Attack (Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] with armour deducted from table above)
Spinal: 2D +9[basic] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D + 0 ⇒ Average Dam 15,1% * 7000 ≈ 1057
Large bay: 2D +7[basic] +4[large bay] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D + 2 ⇒ AvD 30,0% * 56 ≈ 17
Turret: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 1 ⇒ AvD 9,3% * 1397 ≈ 130

10 particle ships do 10 * ( 1057 + 17 + 130 ) ≈ 12040 damage killing 14,9% of the enemy force.

Multiplied Armour:
Particle Attack (Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] without armour deducted from table above)
Spinal: 2D +9[basic] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D + 0 ⇒ Average Dam 49,6% * 7000 ≈ 3472
Large bay: 2D +7[basic] +4[large bay] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D + 2 ⇒ AvD 71,8% * 56 ≈ 40
Turret: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 1 ⇒ AvD 38,2% * 1397 ≈ 534

10 particle ships do 10 * ( 3472 + 40 + 534 ) * 55%[armour] ≈ 22253 damage killing 27,6% of the enemy force.


Particle Ion ships attack: (Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] from table above)
Ion Bays: 2D +7[basic] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 2 ⇒ AvD 27,6% * 300 ≈ 83 damage
10 ships do 830 Ion damage, reducing defences by 16, e.g. 4 on each of 4 enemy ships.
Then the rest of the weapons:
Spinal: 2D +9[basic] -3[targets basic defence - Ion] -2[range] = 2D + 4 ⇒ Average Dam 43,8% * 6000 ≈ 2628
Turret: 2D +7[basic] -3[targets basic defence - Ion] -2[range] = 2D + 2 ⇒ AvD ( 30,0% +10%[IntFocus] ) * 1321 ≈ 528

10 particle ion ships do 10 * ( 2628 + 528 ) ≈ 31560 damage killing 39,1% of the enemy force.

Multiplied Armour:
Particle Ion ships attack: (Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] from table above)
Ion Bays: 2D +7[basic] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 2 ⇒ AvD 27,6% * 300 ≈ 83 damage
10 ships do 830 Ion damage, reducing defences by 16, e.g. 4 on each of 4 enemy ships.
Then the rest of the weapons:
Spinal: 2D +9[basic] -3[targets basic defence - Ion] -2[range] = 2D + 4 ⇒ Average Dam 88,5% * 6000 * 55% ≈ 2920
Turret: 2D +7[basic] -3[targets basic defence - Ion] -2[range] = 2D + 2 ⇒ AvD ( 71,8% +10%[IntFocus] ) * 1321 * 55% ≈ 594

10 particle ion ships do 10 * ( 2920 + 594 ) ≈ 31560 damage killing 43,6% of the enemy force.


Conclusions: We do too much damage with spinals (and quad particle).
Ion is extremely effective to stun big ships, probably pointless vs small ships. In the basic system the Ion bay would have halfway stunned a single ship, here it made 4 enemy ships helpless, probably too good?
Multiplied damage makes little difference when we mostly hit, like with the ion stunned ships. With multiplied damage we do not fall off the Fleet Damage table so easily, doing more damage in difficult cases, such as at Very Long range. Multiplied damage is more like the basic system.

 

[Nerhesi]

So if armour is multiplied as a second step, rather than combined with the attack roll %, you're saying the results are more... accurate?

This is due to us having less 0% hits.

Ok I'm onboard thus far.

However, how does this affect the simulation of our basic system when attacking at long range may be impossible anyways? The multiplication proposal would not capture that... You'd still have good chance of doing damage to smallcraft with bays at very long range. Example 500 particle bays fire at 100 fighters.

Basic game -4 for bays and -2 to hit. No way to hit.

With the above multiplication, you may still hit -

Could be still more realistic overall though.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Basic game -4 for bays and -2 to hit. No way to hit.

These modifiers stack?
Bay vs <100dT -2
Bay vs <2000dT -2

But these do not?
Spinal vs <10000dT -4
Spinal vs <5000dT -8

Or these?
Long range -2
Very Long Range -4

If you want the bay vs smaller targets modifiers to stack, you had better explain when modifiers stack and when not...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

OK, bays vs fighters: Assuming a very expensive fighter with Evade/3.

Particle Attack (Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] with armour deducted from table above)
5 Particle Bay: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -4[bay vs fighter] -2[range] = 2D - 5 ⇒ AvD 0,1% * 35 ≈ 0,035 damage


Multiplied Armour:
5 Particle Bay: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -4[bay vs fighter] -2[range] = 2D - 5 ⇒ AvD 6,8% * 35 * 55% ≈ 1,309 damage


Basic system:
5 Particle Bay: 2D +6[gunner] +3[AdvFireC] +1[accurate] +1[aid] -4[bay vs fighter] -3[Evade] -3[dodge] -2[range] = 2D - 1, hit on 9+ (27,8%), average 1,39 hits.
Damage: 1,39 * ( 8D - 15 ) ≈ 1,39 * 13 ≈ 18 damage ≈ 1,39 fighter killed.

Conclusion: Multiplied damage is more like the basic system for shooting bays at fighters.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Frigate (armed with the crit fisher's new favourite the Plasma-Pulse Large Bay):
I can run Evade/3 and any two of AdvancedFC/3, FC/5, or Point Defence/2, not all (CORE/70). All payed for.

TL 15, 2100 dT, Armour 15, 92 Hull, MCr ~1725.
J-3, M-9
Trait: Fleet Defender, Antirad
Capital Single Bay Attack 2[crew] + 5[FireCont] + 2[TL] = 9 [ Direct violation of the rules, but reasonable? ]
Capital Attack 2[crew] + 3[AdvFireCont] + 2[TL] = 7
Capital Defence 2[crew] + 3[Evade] + 2[TL] = 7
Large Plasma-Pulse (Long Range) bay: Damage 70 * 8 / 10 = 56? [ Estimate based on Particle bay multiplied by 8 for Auto 8 ]
6 Quad Particle (Accurate) turret: Damage 6 * 4 * 7 / 10 = 16? [ Estimated damage for particle ]
6 Quad Pulse Laser (Accurate) turret: Damage 6 * 4 * 4 / 10 = 9 or Salvo Def = 6 * ( 2[crew] + 3[quad] ) = 30
4 PD Batteries: Salvo Def 4 * 12 = 48
2 Dampers: Screen (Damper) Def 2 * 5 * 2 = 20

 

[Nerhesi]

The mods for bays don't stack in basic. I was adding range to target size mods, not multiple target size ones

I was just running my own calcs and it seems were in alignment now. Multiplication of attack roll % and then armour % is the way to go.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Fight a Particle Ion BC vs 71 frigates.

Particle Ion ship attack: (Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] from table above)
Ion Bays: 2D +7[basic] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 2 ⇒ AvD 27,6% * 300 ≈ 83 damage
83 Ion damage, reducing defences by 1. Yawn.
Then the rest of the weapons:
Spinal: 2D +9[basic] -8[spinal vs small] -6[targets basic defence - Ion] -2[range] = 2D - 7 ⇒ Average Dam 1,5% * 6000 * 55% ≈ 49,5, annoy 1 frigate.
Turret: 2D +7[basic] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 2 ⇒ AvD ( 37,6%[IntFocus] ) * 1321 * 55% ≈ 273 killing another 3 frigates.

Total killed 3 frigates or 4,2% of the enemy force.


71 Frigates:
Pulse Plasma Large bays: 2D +9[basic] +4[large bay] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D + 4 ⇒ AvD 88,5% * 56 * 55% ≈ 27,25
No missiles to defend against so turrets can fire, too.
Particle Turret: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 1 ⇒ AvD 38,2% * 16 * 55% ≈ 3,36
Laser Turret: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 1 ⇒ AvD 38,2% * 9 * 55% ≈ 1,89

71 frigates do 71 * ( 27,25 + 3,36 + 1,89 ) ≈ 2307 damage killing 28,6% of the enemy ship. Easy win for the frigates.

Conclusion: Spinals have a problem with many small ships (unless they group into squadrons).

Edit: Switch to multiplied armour. Forgot penalty to spinal.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I was just running my own calcs and it seems were in alignment now. Multiplication of attack roll % and then armour % is the way to go.

OK, I will switch to multiplied armour as default. Hope Matt agrees.

 

[arcador]

Just to add something: currently, if we don't touch the rules for armor as they are, the default interpretation seems to be multiplied armour i.e. first you calculate the damage, and then the armor. Of course, if Matt settles with the suggestion perhaps it can me made 1 step further more clear.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Fight a Particle Ion BC vs a squadron of 71 frigates.

Squadron:
TL 15, 71 * 2100 dT, Armour 15, 71 * 924 /10 = 6560 Hull, MCr ~122 500.
J-3, M-9
Trait: Fleet Defender, Antirad
Capital Single Bay Attack 2[crew] + 5[FireCont] + 2[TL] = 9 [ Direct violation of the rules, but reasonable? ]
Capital Attack 2[crew] + 3[AdvFireCont] + 2[TL] = 7
Capital Defence 2[crew] + 3[Evade] + 2[TL] = 7
71 * Large Plasma-Pulse (Long Range) bay: Damage 71 * 70 * 8 / 10 = 3976? [ Estimate based on Particle bay multiplied by 8 for Auto 8 ]
71 * 6 Quad Particle (Accurate) turret: Damage 71 * 6 * 4 * 7 / 10 = 1192? [ Estimated damage for particle ]
71 * 6 Quad Pulse Laser (Accurate) turret: Damage 71 * 6 * 4 * 4 / 10 = 681,
or Salvo Def = 71 * 6 * ( 2[crew] + 3[quad] ) = 2130
71 * 4 PD Batteries: Salvo Def 71 * 4 * 12 = 3408
71 * 2 Dampers: Screen (Damper) Def 71 * 2 * 5 * 2 = 1420




Particle Ion ship attack: (Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] from table above)
Ion Bays: 2D +7[basic] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 2 ⇒ AvD 27,6% * 300 ≈ 83 damage
83 Ion damage, reducing defences by 1. Yawn.
Then the rest of the weapons:
Spinal: 2D +9[basic] -6[targets basic defence - Ion] -8[spinal vs small] -2[range] = 2D - 7 ⇒ Average Dam 1,5% * 6000 * 55% ≈ 49,5
Turret: 2D +7[basic] -6[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 1 ⇒ AvD ( 48,2%[IntFocus] ) * 1321 * 55% ≈ 350

Total damage 400 or 6,1% of the enemy force.


Frigate Squadron:
Pulse Plasma Large bays: 2D +9[basic] +4[large bay] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D + 4 ⇒ AvD 88,5% * 3976 * 55% ≈ 1935
No missiles to defend against so turrets can fire, too.
Particle Turret: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 1 ⇒ AvD 38,2% * 1192 * 55% ≈ 250
Laser Turret: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 1 ⇒ AvD 38,2% * 681 * 55% ≈ 143

Squadron does ( 1935 + 250 + 143 ) ≈ 2328 damage killing 28,9% of the enemy ship. Easy win for the frigates.

Conclusion: Spinals still can't handle small ships. Good.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Let's try 5 Particle Ion BCs vs a squadron of 355 frigates:

Particle Ion ship attack: (Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] from table above)
Ion Bays: 2D +7[basic] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 2 ⇒ AvD 27,6% * 300 * 5 ≈ 414 damage
414 Ion damage, reducing defences and attacks by 8.
Then the rest of the weapons:
Spinal: 2D +9[basic] +8[Ion] -7[targets basic defence] -8[spinal vs small] -2[range] = 2D + 0 ⇒ Average Dam 49,6% * 6000 * 55% * 5 ≈ 8184
Turret: 2D +7[basic] +8[Ion] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D + 6 ⇒ AvD ( 96,9% ) * 1321 * ( 55% + 10%[IntFocus] ) * 5 ≈ 4160

Total damage 12344 or 37,6% of the enemy force.


Frigate Squadron:
Pulse Plasma Large bays: 2D +9[basic] +4[large bay] -8[Ion] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 4 ⇒ AvD 11,8% * 3976 * 55% * 5 ≈ 1290
No missiles to defend against so turrets can fire, too.
Particle Turret: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -8[Ion] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 9 ⇒ AvD 0,1% * 1192 * 55% * 5 ≈ 3,3
Laser Turret: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -8[Ion] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 9 ⇒ AvD 0,1% * 681 * 55% * 5 ≈ 1,9

Squadron does ( 1290 + 3,3 + 1,9 ) ≈ 1295 damage killing 3,9% of the enemy ship. Easy win for the battleships.

Conclusion: Don't make too big squadrons.

 

[Nerhesi]

Just to add something: currently, if we don't touch the rules for armor as they are, the default interpretation seems to be multiplied armour i.e. first you calculate the damage, and then the armor. Of course, if Matt settles with the suggestion perhaps it can me made 1 step further more clear.

That's good then - I'll reiterate with Matt.

Sam W

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Let's try Black Globe.
Fight 10 BC Particle vs 10 BC Particle with Black Globe (flicker @ 50%).

Start with ships without Black Globe attacking:
Particle Attack (Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] from table above)
Spinal: 2D +9[basic] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D + 0 ⇒ Average Dam 49,6% * 7000 * 55% * 50% ≈ 955
Turret: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 1 ⇒ AvD 38,2% * 1397 * 55% * 50% ≈ 147

10 particle ships do 10 * ( 955 + 147 ) ≈ 11020 damage killing 13,7% of the enemy force.


Ships with Black Globe attacking:
Particle Attack (Long range) (Average Damage [AvD] from table above)
Spinal: 2D +9[basic] -5[Globe] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 5 ⇒ Average Dam 6,8% * 7000 * 55% ≈ 262
Turret: 2D +7[basic] +1[accurate] -5[Globe] -7[targets basic defence] -2[range] = 2D - 6 ⇒ AvD 3,5% * 1397 * 55% ≈ 27

10 particle ships do 10 * ( 262 + 27 ) ≈ 2890 damage killing 3,6% of the enemy force.

Conclusion: Black Globes are useless.

"If the amount of damage reduced in a single round is equal to twice the ship’s Hull, the ship will be immediately destroyed." This will never happen, if the Black Globe have absorbed equal to the ship's Hull, the ship has taken enough damage to destroy it.

 

[Nerhesi]

Conclusion: Black Globes are useless.

The scenario is unfortunately loaded and cannot draw a conclusion to form the blanket statement of "uselessness".
The above scenario also shows particle turrets to be useless (compared to Fusion bays with Long Range advantage), or compared to missile bays against those same ships. They do more damage despite the possible protection against the missiles (not present).

Much like MGT1 - the Blackglobe isn't an always on phenomenon. It has niche uses.

"If the amount of damage reduced in a single round is equal to twice the ship’s Hull, the ship will be immediately destroyed." This will never happen, if the Black Globe have absorbed equal to the ship's Hull, the ship has taken enough damage to destroy it.

Yes. I think for simplicity's sake this may just become "Prevent X% of damage (based on flicker/whatnot). If the damage prevented is greater than capacitors / 100 , destroy the ship"

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The scenario is unfortunately loaded and cannot draw a conclusion to form the blanket statement of "uselessness".

OK, it's a very simple example. But the malus on your own attack roll nearly always prevents more damage you do, than the % reduction of the enemies damage. It was the same in CT.

You might use them for stealth.

The above scenario also shows particle turrets to be useless (compared to Fusion bays with Long Range advantage), or compared to missile bays against those same ships. They do more damage despite the possible protection against the missiles (not present).

? Neither of these weapons were involved, and the ships have rudimentary defences.

Yes. I think for simplicity's sake this may just become "Prevent X% of damage (based on flicker/whatnot). If the damage prevented is greater than capacitors / 100 , destroy the ship"

Great.