High Guard is Here!

P27, large bays
Maybe include the bonus damage on the table.

How does the bonus damage apply to destructive weapons? Is it added before or after multiplying by 10?
 
P30, the spinal mount meson gun example should deal 4DD,shouldn't it?

As an aside perhaps you count annotate spinal damage in a slightly different way (4DD+ perhaps) as a reminder that the damage should be multiplied by 1,000.

Maybe also add "AP (Inf.)" to the meson gun entry on the weapon chart?

Should the entries in the power column be prefixed with '+' as you have done for damage and cost? Also consider moving the max. Mass column adjacent to the base mass column (and for the sake of clarity including the maximum number of increments in brackets after this entry (e. g. '75,000 tons (10)' for the meson gun.).
 
GarethL said:
P24, critical hits, I'm guessing that all categories of ship also take crits from spinal weapons? The text implies otherwise.
Cunningly hidden on p24 (p25 of the pdf), just after the text block:
Spinal mount weapons can always (and will!) cause critical hits.
 
Errata Report:

Page 68, charts show bay weapon damage from medium bays for neutron lasers and plasma-pulse cannon as the same as their respective large bay versions. In other words, at the same TL, the large bay requires much more tonnage, much more power, many more hard points, and costs much more than the medium bay version while doing the same damage.

If this is intentional, why would anyone go with the large bay version over the medium bay version? What have I missed?

Edit - Minor nit: "separate" is misspelled as "seperate" on page 12, left column, 4th paragraph, last line. Also misspelled on page 17, right column, 1st paragraph under "Command Bridges", last line.

(I was called upon to help correct English papers in high school and I've been cursed with spotting misspelling ever since. Sorry.)
 
SSWarlock said:
Page 68, charts show bay weapon damage from medium bays for neutron lasers and plasma-pulse cannon as the same as their respective large bay versions. In other words, at the same TL, the large bay requires much more tonnage, much more power, many more hardpoints, and costs much more than the medium bay version while doing the same damage.

If this is intentional, why would anyone go with the large bay version over the medium bay version? What have I missed?
It's intentional:
Large bays add +1 per damage dice to the final damage total, and gain DM+4 when attacking targets of 3,000 tons or more, due to the massive amount of weaponry they hold.
Large bays hit better and do more damage, especially after armour. The better to hit makes crits much more likely.

(But since crits are nerfed, you will probably not want large bays.)
 
AnotherDilbert said:
SSWarlock said:
Page 68, charts show bay weapon damage from medium bays for neutron lasers and plasma-pulse cannon as the same as their respective large bay versions. In other words, at the same TL, the large bay requires much more tonnage, much more power, many more hardpoints, and costs much more than the medium bay version while doing the same damage.

If this is intentional, why would anyone go with the large bay version over the medium bay version? What have I missed?
It's intentional:
Large bays add +1 per damage dice to the final damage total, and gain DM+4 when attacking targets of 3,000 tons or more, due to the massive amount of weaponry they hold.
Large bays hit better and do more damage, especially after armour. The better to hit makes crits much more likely.

(But since crits are nerfed, you will probably not want large bays.)

This isn't the first time this question has come up. Perhaps adding that one line as a footnote to the table would help.

(Yes, sometimes I don't read, I just look at the numbers on the tables...)
 
Some more minor discrepancies:

- The cost of life support in the Accommodation section is per ton. Isn't that too much compared to the regular stateroom which is 1000 Cr (and 4 tons)?

- Forced Linkage Aparatus - it says there is a bonus for the Boarding action rolls, but it doesn't show how much.
 
Is there any chance of getting an index in the final copy? Pretty please - I know with digital copies it has slightly less utility, but a lot of us use physical books at the table, and there is useful information about systems scattered all the way through this book,

I'll write it myself if there's a chance of it getting in,
 
GarethL said:
Do barbettes and fixed mounts use the "turret" gunnery specialisation?

HG said:
BARBETTES
Barbettes are effectively heavy turrets. A barbette uses a single Hardpoint, and requires the Gunner (turret) skill, but also consumes additional tonnage inside the ship, as its larger weapons need more space for capacitors, targeting mechanisms, ammunition feeds and other components. Like turrets, barbettes require just one gunner to operate.
 
AnotherDilbert said:
SSWarlock said:
Page 68, charts show bay weapon damage from medium bays for neutron lasers and plasma-pulse cannon as the same as their respective large bay versions. In other words, at the same TL, the large bay requires much more tonnage, much more power, many more hardpoints, and costs much more than the medium bay version while doing the same damage.

If this is intentional, why would anyone go with the large bay version over the medium bay version? What have I missed?
It's intentional:
<snip of great explanation>
Thank you for the info; I really appreciate it. I knew I was missing something
 
AnotherDilbert said:
HG said:
BARBETTES
Barbettes are effectively heavy turrets. A barbette uses a single Hardpoint, and requires the Gunner (turret) skill, but also consumes additional tonnage inside the ship, as its larger weapons need more space for capacitors, targeting mechanisms, ammunition feeds and other components. Like turrets, barbettes require just one gunner to operate.
Hmm. Now this begs the question can barbettes use the popup option of turrets, assuming there's enough tonnage available to allow such a configuration?
 
SSWarlock said:
AnotherDilbert said:
HG said:
BARBETTES
Barbettes are effectively heavy turrets. A barbette uses a single Hardpoint, and requires the Gunner (turret) skill, but also consumes additional tonnage inside the ship, as its larger weapons need more space for capacitors, targeting mechanisms, ammunition feeds and other components. Like turrets, barbettes require just one gunner to operate.
Hmm. Now this begs the question can barbettes use the popup option of turrets, assuming there's enough tonnage available to allow such a configuration?


Ya know in all the time we were going through playtest that idea never occurred to me...( golf clap)
 
wbnc said:
SSWarlock said:
Hmm. Now this begs the question can barbettes use the popup option of turrets, assuming there's enough tonnage available to allow such a configuration?
Ya know in all the time we were going through playtest that idea never occurred to me...( golf clap)
What can I say? I've always been a sneaky bassid. Ask my players. :wink:
 
SSWarlock said:
wbnc said:
SSWarlock said:
Hmm. Now this begs the question can barbettes use the popup option of turrets, assuming there's enough tonnage available to allow such a configuration?
Ya know in all the time we were going through playtest that idea never occurred to me...( golf clap)
What can I say? I've always been a sneaky bassid. Ask my players. :wink:

I doff my evil GMs cap to thee, good sir.

Concealed or pop up heavy weapons woud be a nasty surprise if they were available. They'd be perfect for Q-boats, or other ships that need to look unarmed.

A corsair closing on a free trader they think only has a single turret only to find a plasma pulse cannon barbette turning their way might reconsider their life choices.:D
 
wbnc said:
A corsair closing on a free trader they think only has a single turret only to find a plasma pulse cannon barbette turning their way might reconsider their life choices.:D

Briefly. Very briefly.
 
Galadrion said:
wbnc said:
A corsair closing on a free trader they think only has a single turret only to find a plasma pulse cannon barbette turning their way might reconsider their life choices.:D

Briefly. Very briefly.

Gunner closing his console down: "Now they're good pirates..... Anyone want a beer?"
 
wbnc said:
SSWarlock said:
wbnc said:
Ya know in all the time we were going through playtest that idea never occurred to me...( golf clap)
What can I say? I've always been a sneaky bassid. Ask my players. :wink:

I doff my evil GMs cap to thee, good sir.

Concealed or pop up heavy weapons woud be a nasty surprise if they were available.
I do not see why not. But bigger weapon systems should take more tonnage, perhaps 50% - 100% of the volume of the barbette or bay? Spinals are probably easier to hide?
 
AnotherDilbert said:
wbnc said:
SSWarlock said:
What can I say? I've always been a sneaky bassid. Ask my players. :wink:

I doff my evil GMs cap to thee, good sir.

Concealed or pop up heavy weapons woud be a nasty surprise if they were available.
I do not see why not. But bigger weapon systems should take more tonnage, perhaps 50% - 100% of the volume of the barbette or bay? Spinals are probably easier to hide?

The pop-up doubles the size of triple triple turret, so that would be a good rule of thumb for a barbette. Bays and spinal mounts would be tricky due to sheer size and power use..but man would I love to see the expression on some admirals face when the unarmed mining stations on several asteroids that had been "towed into geosynchronous orbit for processing" turned out to be Asteroid monitors with their weapons concealed.
 
Possible Errata Report (not sure):

Page 25, right-hand column, Plasma Barbette definition states, "...the plasma barbette is capable of smashing through even well armoured targets."

In 2nd Ed HG, the Plasma Barbette does the same damage as the Particle Barbette with neither having an AP rating. This may seem to make the Particle version a better choice, given its longer range and additional radiation damage (cost not being an issue to governments). Yet 2nd Edition HG has a plasma torpedo with AP 10 while 1st Edition Trillion Credit Squadron has a Plasma Barbette with damage of 3D6+5 (compared to 1st Edition's 4D6 Particle Barbette), making both more effective against armored targets.

Questions: is the Plasma Barbette missing an AP rating? Or is the longer ranged leave-'em-glowing-in-the-dark Particle Barbette supposed to be just as armour negating as the Plasma Barbette?
 
Back
Top