Simple space combat query - no really

[iggy42]

The rule on firing beam weapons (main rule book pg. 147) states a weapon fires once in a round.

My question is - if a beam weapon has been used to fired on a target is it available for point defense, or does a turret / beam weapon need to be reserved for point defense?

My assumption is that the "may only fire once per round" bit includes point defense.

Cheers, Iggy

 

[AndrewW]

The rule on firing beam weapons (main rule book pg. 147) states a weapon fires once in a round.

My question is - if a beam weapon has been used to fired on a target is it available for point defense, or does a turret / beam weapon need to be reserved for point defense?

My assumption is that the "may only fire once per round" bit includes point defense.

That would also fit with the mention from High Guard (page: 74):

Point defence lasers protect only against incoming missile attacks."

 

[BP]

I'd interpret the rules as written to mean one target per round per weapon - so point defense or offense, but not both in a round.

(My own take is custom rules that allow for skill and other qualifiers to determine number of relative attacks - affecting the time on target/effectiveness factors I use...)

 

[iggy42]

Cheers guys - confirmed what I thought.

Now just gotta sort out the broken movement mod and I'm sorted

 

[DFW]

Cheers guys - confirmed what I thought.

Now just gotta sort out the broken movement mod and I'm sorted

Which broken movement mod?

 

[iggy42]

Hi - I'm referring to the movement mod for ground combat i.e. -1 per 10 meters of movement.

That's fine and dandy for character movement which amounts to -1 or -2 at worst, but consider an air/raft or other vehicle that flits by at a 60kmh / 37 mph (not fast really) - that generates a whooping -10 to hit... In short fast movers (or should that be slow movers) are unhittable.

Ref - You're surrounded by 50 imperial guard in battle dress, FGMPs trained on you.

Player - That's ok - I'm doing 90, they've got no chance.

Ref - Oh heck... -15, ok, you get away.

 

[DFW]

Hi - I'm referring to the movement mod for ground combat i.e. -1 per 10 meters of movement. ...

Got it. You jumped from star ship combat to a different topic. That's what threw me.

Clearly, one rule doesn't fit here. There is also whether or not the movement is across your sight, towards you, away from you, speed of projectile, etc. It is better for the ref to take it on a case by case basis.

 

[rust]

Clearly, one rule doesn't fit here. There is also whether or not the movement is across your sight, towards you, away from you, speed of projectile, etc. It is better for the ref to take it on a case by case basis.

Indeed, combat rules often have problems when different types of com-
bat (personal, vehicle, starship) are involved, and it rarely makes much
sense to use the rules for one type of combat for another type of com-
bat - in this case it is often better to "wing it" and use what seems most
plausible instead of the rules.

 

[far-trader]

It's a bit of a side topic to the original but worth some comments.

I agree, mixing combatant levels (personnel, vehicle, etc.) is going to mess things up some, but it should be workable with a little logic.

Not sure MgT applies any scaling rules to hit and damage but that could help. For example, personnel shooting at a vehicle. The vehicle gets a speed DM making it harder to hit, but that should be offset to some degree by the size DM making it easier to hit (both comparative to the personnel scale combat). Though if using the personnel weapons there should be a damage mod penalty meaning while you can hit it you won't do much damage unless you get lucky.

Also as mentioned by DFW one might (should) apply relative speed. So personnel shooting at a speeding air/raft would normally be at a harder to hit speed DM, but if they are also in an air/raft, giving chase at the same speed, it should cancel. And of course they'd have the easier time hitting for the size DM noted above (if such exists, as it should).

And for those BD troopers not having a shot at a fleeing high speed vehicle, sure, IF said BD troopers are plinking away at it with hand held and eye aimed weapons. And IF said BD troopers are just standing there watching it flee. Which of course being BD troopers is unlikely. More likely they'll be chasing with their built in gravbelts and their BD will have enhanced targeting systems and they'll be carrying anti-vehicle weapons linked to it (missiles, lasers, even the FG or PG) all of which will go a long ways to offsetting or negating the speed DM, and then throw in the vehicle size DM for a little more, I'd say running from a platoon of BD troopers is a quick trip to Terminal City.

 

[BP]

RE: the -1 DM per 10m

As mentioned, no one, universal rule will likely accommodate this in all situations.

Generally, one could use a cap based on range - say past 50m (Medium range) its -5 plus -1 per range. Makes distance shots without other DMs impossible, but with skill, weapon and attachment DMs, etc., doable.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Cheers guys - confirmed what I thought.

Now just gotta sort out the broken movement mod and I'm sorted

Which broken movement mod?

Not to hijack his thread, but how about this movement problem?

Ships are always assumed to be zero relative velocity to each other, so that thrust can be used to move you easily between combat rounds.

Unfortunately, the real world doesn't work like that. Ships would have a relative velocity to each other that might close or increase the range between the ships by several range categories in a single round, with no additional thrust required.

The rules have no provisions for this, except for vector movement, which is often not necessary and very complicated for most people.

 

[iggy42]

Thanks all for your comments - I appreciate that a common sense applies. Ultimately all situations come down to a ref's judgment and negotiation with the players.

Apologies for changing tack half way through the thread!

And agree - well equipped imperial guard wouldn't be so easily evaded

Cheers, Iggy

 

[DFW]

Ships are always assumed to be zero relative velocity to each other, so that thrust can be used to move you easily between combat rounds.

Well, the rules MUST have a base frame of ref. Zero velocity is the only place you can write the rules from. Since range bands are listed, the GM is responsible for doing the needed calculations...

 

[BP]

...
Ships are always assumed to be zero relative velocity to each other, so that thrust can be used to move you easily between combat rounds.

Unfortunately, the real world doesn't work like that. Ships would have a relative velocity to each other that might close or increase the range between the ships by several range categories in a single round, with no additional thrust required.

The rules have no provisions for this, except for vector movement, which is often not necessary and very complicated for most people.

Yeah, the rules are a little over simplistic in this regards.

Being 'realistic', however, requires dealing with 4D vector maths.

Higher relative velocities are actually easier to deal with - a ship that comes from out of range, into range and then back out in one round was still in range during a round. So combat becomes a single round. (Given the typical Gs available it would often be a bit before velocities could become close enough to re-engage ignoring any heavy gravitational gradients).

In my games starship combat either begins with similar velocities, or very disparate ones. Most engagements occur because both parties desire it, one party has been misled, or they are engaging in a gravity well (planetary/station orbits).

One can adjust things by starting off with the turns to match a given 'speed' based on thrust, before accounting for range band changes...