High-Burn Thruster

[Nerhesi]

So you should be able to neutralize that with effective screens, the 6 screen limit (I think it was right andrew?) is a little obsolete now.

Yup 6. Though they may be getting some adjustment with the new rules.

Yeah - exactly.

I just remembered, it was like 6 for capitals, but only up to 3 max at one time for adventure. However, with the previous max damage for meson or fusion/nuclear being around 8D, and the current being around 2DD or so... as you said, some "adjustment" to that max would be required.

I would honestly have us consider no maximums now because if you think about it.. each activation of a screen costs power. So go ahead and put 20 screens on... your balancing point is still the fact that they will draw power each time, even with the same turn!

Logical, 'realistic' (similar to adding more guns is more damage), and very much balanced based on my tests. I double checked to see power consumption vs bays and so on, and we're good. So you can't reduce more damage with just screens, then bays can put out - which would be the breaking point. Infact, the larger you got putting more and more weapons on one ship, the more inefficient it became to just keep stacking screens on the other.

Of course you can use screens again at a -1, you can use them to guard your fleet or other adjacent ships, etc etc.. and suddenly - we have more meaningful choices! hmm.. 1-to-1 ratio, screens do not keep up with weaponry, but when I consider strategic and fleet values, there are more variables.

Man - warm and fuzzy feeling. The more we have to think about choices, the clearer the indication of balance.

tldr; dont limit screens. The fact that each activation takes 20-30 power is it's own huge limiting factor.

 

[Nerhesi]

Will definitely be interested in understanding where people think the balance is with nuclear dampers. You have to have a lot of them to combat a bay load of nuclear torpedoes coming at you. Would be good to understand what happens in frigate class ship sizes up to full capital ships when full torpedo bays are unleashed.

I didn't explain very clearly what I was driving at with the reflec armor discussion. What I was thinking is that given that:
a) effect stacks on damage
b) the boon of a sensor lock on your target is often going to be at least the +3 that reflec offers let alone the advantage of actually hitting
I reckon reflec is effectively made redundant by the stealth rules. ?? That -4DM against locking of stealth, when stacked with other electronic counter measures such as the Emission Absorption Grid is very important. Blocking a lock works against any attack, far more valuable than just getting an armor bonus vs. lasers.

You actually can't even take stealth with Reflec. So with Reflec, you will be automatically detected and targets will get a +3 to lock on.

With stealth, you wont be automatically detected, and they will get a -4 to detect you or lock on to you. Detection is offset by your sensors and skill. Lock-on and breaking lock-on is pretty much an opposed test the way it works (with different modifiers per side)

 

[Chas]

Will definitely be interested in understanding where people think the balance is with nuclear dampers. You have to have a lot of them to combat a bay load of nuclear torpedoes coming at you. Would be good to understand what happens in frigate class ship sizes up to full capital ships when full torpedo bays are unleashed.

I didn't explain very clearly what I was driving at with the reflec armor discussion. What I was thinking is that given that:
a) effect stacks on damage
b) the boon of a sensor lock on your target is often going to be at least the +3 that reflec offers let alone the advantage of actually hitting
I reckon reflec is effectively made redundant by the stealth rules. ?? That -4DM against locking of stealth, when stacked with other electronic counter measures such as the Emission Absorption Grid is very important. Blocking a lock works against any attack, far more valuable than just getting an armor bonus vs. lasers.

You actually can't even take stealth with Reflec. So with Reflec, you will be automatically detected and targets will get a +3 to lock on.

With stealth, you wont be automatically detected, and they will get a -4 to detect you or lock on to you. Detection is offset by your sensors and skill. Lock-on and breaking lock-on is pretty much an opposed test the way it works (with different modifiers per side)

Whoops. I think you've missed my point Nerhesi. What I'm saying is that NOBODY will take reflec as an option. It need not be in the book. It's useless in comparison to stealth. The importance of avoiding lock-on far far outweighs a +3 armor bonus vs. lasers.

 

[Nerhesi]

Hey now - "the nobody will take this option" is my line. But I think you may be right for heavy military applications. However, according to the Category descriptions in the previous and current CSC, Particle Weaponry and so on are military only. If you think about it, then perhaps stealth is military only. In fact, it really should be so

This would mean, sorry my merchant/freetrader/cargo/what have you, but you can't pack stealth. But reflec would help versus opportunists and pirates - who normally can't use anything but lasers anyways, because you're not really going to dock a starport and ask to repair your illegal weapons. By that same note, you can't pack stealth because you shouldn't be sneaking up on anyone if you're a legal entity or a private citizen..

Even then, you're not really giving designers a choice, you're just saying "this makes you illegal if you pick the better choice"... hrmm..

 

[Chas]

Man - warm and fuzzy feeling. The more we have to think about choices, the clearer the indication of balance.

tldr; dont limit screens. The fact that each activation takes 20-30 power is it's own huge limiting factor.

What would need to be kept into consideration is what happens when you don't have nuclear dampers. Either by build default, or the fact that the number of screens is going to cap out fairly quickly vs. multiple attacks in a majority of ship builds. There needs to be punishment, but not outright destruction once a fusion or nuclear attack gets through, and I'm not sure the rule set now isn't over balanced towards total destruction. :lol:

 

[Chas]

Hey now - "the nobody will take this option" is my line. But I think you may be right for heavy military applications. However, according to the Category descriptions in the previous and current CSC, Particle Weaponry and so on are military only. If you think about it, then perhaps stealth is military only. In fact, it really should be so

This would mean, sorry my merchant/freetrader/cargo/what have you, but you can't pack stealth. But reflec would help versus opportunists and pirates - who normally can't use anything but lasers anyways, because you're not really going to dock a starport and ask to repair your illegal weapons. By that same note, you can't pack stealth because you shouldn't be sneaking up on anyone if you're a legal entity or a private citizen..

Even then, you're not really giving designers a choice, you're just saying "this makes you illegal if you pick the better choice"... hrmm..

What I would recommend as a minimum is a major change in price for stealth considering its benefits (I mean look at it compared Emission Absorption and its tonnage requirement). Stealth could be 1MCr and still be worthwhile (Total Stealth can be 2MCr/ton, it's valuable!). Reflec becomes the cheap alternative at .1MCr that most civilians would prefer given they're likely putting out identification beacons constantly anyways.

 

[Nerhesi]

Man - warm and fuzzy feeling. The more we have to think about choices, the clearer the indication of balance.

tldr; dont limit screens. The fact that each activation takes 20-30 power is it's own huge limiting factor.

What would need to be kept into consideration is what happens when you don't have nuclear dampers. Either by build default, or the fact that the number of screens is going to cap out fairly quickly vs. multiple attacks in a majority of ship builds. There needs to be punishment, but not outright destruction once a fusion or nuclear attack gets through, and I'm not sure the rule set now isn't over balanced towards total destruction. :lol:

I've made some recommendations regarding toning down that upper end nuclear and fusion damage (its kinda nuts). But also, as Hull values will probably be changing (because hulls are a bit weak now AND to get them in-line with vehicles), so I think we may need to double check when that happens.

You're absolutely right. If you take one of those 500-dton SDBs, that mount a 100-ton bay weapon (published in previous supplements). With current hull values (100), they can one-shot each-other with a fusion bay (20-120 damage). Matt is aware of the issue with both fusion damage and low hull values So hopefully we see some changes soon.

 

[Nerhesi]

Hey now - "the nobody will take this option" is my line. But I think you may be right for heavy military applications. However, according to the Category descriptions in the previous and current CSC, Particle Weaponry and so on are military only. If you think about it, then perhaps stealth is military only. In fact, it really should be so

This would mean, sorry my merchant/freetrader/cargo/what have you, but you can't pack stealth. But reflec would help versus opportunists and pirates - who normally can't use anything but lasers anyways, because you're not really going to dock a starport and ask to repair your illegal weapons. By that same note, you can't pack stealth because you shouldn't be sneaking up on anyone if you're a legal entity or a private citizen..

Even then, you're not really giving designers a choice, you're just saying "this makes you illegal if you pick the better choice"... hrmm..

What I would recommend as a minimum is a major change in price for stealth considering its benefits (I mean look at it compared Emission Absorption and its tonnage requirement). Stealth could be 1MCr and still be worthwhile (Total Stealth can be 2MCr/ton, it's valuable!). Reflec becomes the cheap alternative at .1MCr that most civilians would prefer given they're likely putting out identification beacons constantly anyways.

Stealth is a lot higher tech than emission absorption - wouldn't really compare it to that. However, you are right in that it really shouldn't be as cheap as reflec.

Just like how Radiation is damn expensive due to it's great effects.

 

[AndrewW]

Stealth is a lot higher tech than emission absorption - wouldn't really compare it to that. However, you are right in that it really shouldn't be as cheap as reflec.

Yup, Emissions Absorption Grid is an early form of stealth for ships. Though it can be combined with Stealth coating.

 

[Chas]

Looking at a couple of, let's say, fundamental fleet elements, these are an old favorite of mine I did back in the day.
The first is a 45 ton Bow Chaser Sensor Drone Ship. The function of this is an automated vessel of sensors that uses its high thrust drive to zip out in front of its mother ship, to get to its position in front of the sensor range of the mother ship. Effectively acting as a point guard detector able to cruise for long periods of time keeping position with the mother ship behind it. You could imagine a Frontier Cruiser going the whole hog having 6 of these drone ships at each x, y, z axis able to vastly increase its effective sensing range as it patrolled through space.
I've kept a few old edition elements in the build - critically the 1.5 ton drone command unit, which replicates the cockpit. Along with Jump Filters and System Linkage. Not sure what will stay. I saw the computer Intelligent programing for automated use, and assume a lot of this will be addressed in the new ship software rules due.
I'd guess in the final mix the Imperial Navy might standardize these at a 40 or 50t build depending on what a standard fighter hull becomes.
The key design aspect of this first option is the Rapid Deployment Extended Array which enables enhanced long range sensing while still maneuvering, thus only the Improved Sensors in the build.

The second option at 40t is in a similar vein but without the extended array (though it has the Extension Net at need) with Advanced Sensors. This would be the drone ship that zips off to see what is lying in wait behind an asteroid, or charges ahead of the mother ship to help make sure its missing nothing in the advancing enemy fleet front. Or goes off to check on a suspicious passing ship with a close inspection.

A question: do Distributed Arrays and Extension Net range increases stack? There's also a definition needed for Very Distant range under Distributed Arrays.
A suggestion: for Advanced Spacecraft Options allow the Shallow Penetration Suite to drop to 75% tonnage then 50% tonnage for each advantage.

 

[Chas]

Hey now - "the nobody will take this option" is my line. But I think you may be right for heavy military applications. However, according to the Category descriptions in the previous and current CSC, Particle Weaponry and so on are military only. If you think about it, then perhaps stealth is military only. In fact, it really should be so

This would mean, sorry my merchant/freetrader/cargo/what have you, but you can't pack stealth. But reflec would help versus opportunists and pirates - who normally can't use anything but lasers anyways, because you're not really going to dock a starport and ask to repair your illegal weapons. By that same note, you can't pack stealth because you shouldn't be sneaking up on anyone if you're a legal entity or a private citizen..

Even then, you're not really giving designers a choice, you're just saying "this makes you illegal if you pick the better choice"... hrmm..

What I would recommend as a minimum is a major change in price for stealth considering its benefits (I mean look at it compared Emission Absorption and its tonnage requirement). Stealth could be 1MCr and still be worthwhile (Total Stealth can be 2MCr/ton, it's valuable!). Reflec becomes the cheap alternative at .1MCr that most civilians would prefer given they're likely putting out identification beacons constantly anyways.

Stealth is a lot higher tech than emission absorption - wouldn't really compare it to that. However, you are right in that it really shouldn't be as cheap as reflec.

Just like how Radiation is damn expensive due to it's great effects.

Maybe there could be some Advanced Options with Stealth. Start as very expensive 1MCr/ton and then go to 75% and 50% over two advantages. Which could make sense.

 

[Chas]

Okay, so here's another fundamental fleet build concept. The fast boarding boat, where the high thrust sends a boarding vessel scooting over to bring a squad of marines adjacent to a target vessel, and includes the boarding equipment to get them on it.

The sensor automated ship build above sort of worked out from previous edition rules, though needing a size upgrade they didn't go beyond a basic fighter size. But this boarding boat has been weirded out by the change in acceleration couches in the new rules. In the previous edition design I had 6 marines in a 30t fast boat, which sort of felt about right. An elite Imperial Marine squad that size able to take out a typical small smuggler or pirate crew.

Here we've got 36 marines in a 50 ton boat and could fit more. The issue is the 6 people/1 ton of couches. I saw something in vehicle rules for 1/4 space/ton? Is there some other reference here in the rules that could apply? I think you'll need something to define just how much space is needed by a marine in full battle dress other than the couches.

Edit: meh, copy problem with those builds. All computer costs should be 15MCr. :|

 

[Chas]

And what should be my final one of this series. This is following the standard boarding boat concept, but in this case we're going back to an automated fighter type design, and rather than carrying marines, what is conceptualized is 2 automated Walkers, 3 tons each, that I'm calling Slinkies. These don't use a Breaching Tube or otherwise, the fast drone fighter simply pulls up along side and these things leap over onto the outside of the target ship and start drilling in. Yep, just like the Matrix.

Will need to see how the walker vehicle build actually stacks up another time, heh.

 

[Chas]

One major nagging issue I've always had with the high thrust builds. That is, what happens when you specifically make an automated high thrust fighter that is specifically designed to be a kinetic weapon in its own right. A super kamakazi boat. If you've got something hurtling in at Thrust 25, you can't avoid it, and that kind of collision you'd imagine would take out any ship an order of magnitude bigger than the kinetic weapon vehicle. On credit per credit basis it's always going to be a cost effective weapon. Not sure if there should be anything in the rules for this, or to protect against it, in some way.

 

[Nerhesi]

Stealth doesn't have military applicability for sneaking up on anything though.

Stealth -4 DM. So you need a 12+.

Now let's assume a skill of +2 and a sensors of +2. This you basic, competant civilian traffic listening "thing". 8+ to detect.

Military though, +6 sensor check, then characteristic/skill combine bonus of +3 (could be higher)... and you're detected on a 3+.

So definitely no fleet-options for surprise-boarding! Style tactics, unless your targets are civilian in nature

 

[Nerhesi]

I'm not sure how collisions collisions space would work - probably trivially easy to avoid if you consider you normally being shot at with mostly light speed weapons.

Actually, simple to work out - it's just a large missile, so would still be easy to avoid assuming you have thrust to dodge

 

[Chas]

Stealth doesn't have military applicability for sneaking up on anything though.

Stealth -4 DM. So you need a 12+.

Now let's assume a skill of +2 and a sensors of +2. This you basic, competant civilian traffic listening "thing". 8+ to detect.

Military though, +6 sensor check, then characteristic/skill combine bonus of +3 (could be higher)... and you're detected on a 3+.

So definitely no fleet-options for surprise-boarding! Style tactics, unless your targets are civilian in nature

Yep. So that's why your boarding ships are high thrust builds. Too quick to run away from even if you recognize them for what they are...

 

[Chas]

I'm not sure how collisions collisions space would work - probably trivially easy to avoid if you consider you normally being shot at with mostly light speed weapons.

Actually, simple to work out - it's just a large missile, so would still be easy to avoid assuming you have thrust to dodge

It's a very smart, very fast missile though. By dog fight rules your maneuver drive only ship would lose promptly. And against another thrust enabled ship it would effectively have to spend all its time evading.

 

[Nerhesi]

Lol - yes Chas , granted it's more of of thrust thing then stealth thing.

I think the distance bands will need a change if thrust stays as is. These 25G sdbs an space superiority fighters are going to force the issue.

Matt is aware but it's best to wait till everything in ship drives/speeds is finalized then determine if we need to Change the fact that ships can go from distant to adjacent in 2 turns

EDIT: shopping with wife, using blackberry; It has has very weird interaction with these forums. Mangling half th words

 

[Nerhesi]

I'm not sure how collisions collisions space would work - probably trivially easy to avoid if you consider you normally being shot at with mostly light speed weapons.

Actually, simple to work out - it's just a large missile, so would still be easy to avoid assuming you have thrust to dodge

It's a very smart, very fast missile though. By dog fight rules your maneuver drive only ship would lose promptly. And against another thrust enabled ship it would effectively have to spend all its time evading.

Dogfight rules guarantee super position not final result, or else you would automatically hit in dogfights.

Even I you were allowed to fire missile in dogfights, the benefit to winning the dogfight would be a +2 for superior position