Spinal Weapons - January Update

[Nerhesi]

Oh, and one more thing...

We already have slugfest fights with bay weaponry. I would see spinal mounts as being used to end/stop slugfests so if you get two big bruisers of warships with spinals facing one another with no supporting elements, it is going to end relatively quickly (if not in destruction then surrender as it becomes obvious who has won).

So Matt - are you open to us changing it (and we're almost there) to a one table entry per spinal type that is basically a formula? Rather than just 4-5 spinal models per each type?

That would cover all sizes from lets a minimum of 2,000 tons to a maximum of 50,000 ton spinal or so

 

[Chas]

Okay thanks Matt.

Let us get this actually played out and see how it looks in action.

I've basically got the protagonists completed except I got twisted inside out with the point defense rules, so will have tonnage for them and let you guys do the rest. Which is what I'll need to have happen. I'll get the ships up done as realistically as I can and will then need to ask you guys to do the actual battles please.

Hopefully have these up tomorrow with all the latest rule tweaks...

 

[phavoc]

Oh, and one more thing...

We already have slugfest fights with bay weaponry. I would see spinal mounts as being used to end/stop slugfests so if you get two big bruisers of warships with spinals facing one another with no supporting elements, it is going to end relatively quickly (if not in destruction then surrender as it becomes obvious who has won).

Perhaps then we need to change the rate of fire on spinals? That way they can retain their killer status, but they won't be so overwhelming? I definitely think they should be included as weapons. But not so powerful that if you don't bring a spinal mount to the battlefield you might as well just surrender. Being able to fire twice in one round might be TOO much, if a ship is designed to only take a couple of hits. This is highly dependent of course on your ability to ACHIEVE a hit.

 

[Nerhesi]

I'm actually all for tossing out rapid fire from spinals. It's such a gross swing in a damage and consistency... (why I can't rapid fire all my bays?!? )

It does really change the balance aspect of things.

 

[phavoc]

I could accept "rapid fire", but if you can double-tap somebody and blow them out of the sky, it is a bit of a game changer. Too much of one I think.

 

[Nerhesi]

Ok - here is the reworked system.

For all Spinals, 1DD = x 1000 No change.
A spinal weapon can only be fitted to a ship that is at least twice the weapon's size. New.
The maximum damage potential of any spinal is 10DD. New.
Remove the rapid-fire option (serious balance issues) New.
Spinal weapons use a number of Hardpoints equal to their tonnage divided by 100, rounding up. No Change.
All spinal weapons suffer DM-4 when attacking targets of 10,000 tons or less, and DM-8 when attacking targets of 5,000 tons or less. Spinal weapons cannot attack targets of less than 2,000 tons unless they are stationary or are caught in the blast by accident! No change.

Meson:
Base TL: 12
Range: Long
Size to Damage, Power & Cost: Per 10,000 dtons - 1DD, 1000 power, 2000 MCr
Traits: Radiation, Ignores Armour

Particle:
Base TL: 11
Range: Long
Size to Damage, Power & Cost: Per 5,000 dtons - 1DD, 1000 power, 1000 MCr
Traits: Radiation, Armour reduces damage by 3% per point.

Rail Gun:
Base TL: 10
Range: Medium
Size to Damage, Power & Cost: Per 5,000 dtons - 1DD, 500 power, 500 MCr
Traits: Armour reduces damage by 2% per point.

High Level Spinal Weapon Modifications:
TL +1: -10% tonnage and MCr cost.
TL +2: -20% tonnage and MCr cost.
TL +3: -30% tonnage and MCr cost.
TL +4: -40% tonnage and MCr cost.

Problems addressed:
a) <done!> Minimum weight - you will notice the minimum craft size to carry a spinal will not be lower than 5,000 tons. So you'll never have a spinal-using-ship that has a -8 to be hit by other spinals.
b) <done!> Chas' Mini-battle rider scenario: At best, the mini-battle rider carrying a TL15 particle (3000 tons), doing 1-6k points of damage will average 3500 damage. At TL15, we have to assume armour value of 15, which means 1,925 damage done. So on average, a 6,000 ton battle-rider (the smallest possible to carry a spinal), will not be able to 1-shot itself/similar craft. It will on average 2-shot itself (assuming it hits). With a lucky hit, it may 1-shot it self (rolling a 5 or 6 for the 1DD damage).
c) <done!> Matthew request: To make sure 75kish cruisers can 2-3 shot each-other. Lets say the 75k cruiser is somehow carrying 36kton spinal (near impossible, possible with Jump 3 and totally crippling your m-drive and so on). So this 6DD TL15 spinal will do, on average 21,000 hull damage, or 11,550 after you consider TL15 armour. A 75k cruiser has 30,000 hull (normal, not reinforced).
d) <done!> Matthew request: Super Spinals. Spinals can now go to 10DD. The largest spinal and most powerful raw damage spinal (paying no attention to weight) is a 10DD spinal. This allows for 35,000 hull damage on average. This ship will be one-shotting TL15 90,000 tonners on AVERAGE, with the potential to one shot things up to 150ktons (if extremely lucky). With only a little bit of luck... this thing will take out a tigress dreadnought in 4-5 rounds. On average, it will do so in 8 rounds.
e) <done!> Chas' Big Ship paradigm not lost!: As you can see - it is no longer trivial to blow up big-ships with just spinals. Trying to do so puts all your eggs in one basket and it is a very focused and vulnerable basket (whether it is to fighters, missiles, bays, etc). Also - with the advent of Large Bays (looking at you Matt!) changing to be better vs capitals, it will further create this symbiotic relationship between fleet ships, further encouraging diversity.
f) <done!> Phavoc's gradient of scaling spinals: Simple formula to produce whatever spinal you want

Ok - waiting on verification with Chas and Phavoc and/or recommendations Gents?

 

[Annatar Giftbringer]

Sorry I can't contribute in any meaningful way - I've got way too little experience with spinals - but I must say, it's an amazing job you guys have done so far! Scaling them rather than having separate classes within each weapon type was an interresting move, but I reckon it might work - though on the other hand, what do I know

A bit sad to see the rapid-fire version disappear, though I understand the reasoning behind it... At just a minor mass increase (and some money) it was almost too good an opportunity to pass up - and why isn't there a rapid-fire option for bays, and turrets, and.... Yeah.

Though if rapid-fire was to be kept, how would that be done? Larger mass penalty, effectively meaning less damage per shot per ton with the new suggested system? Fire twice, but for 75% damage per shot?

Eh, I'll Reavers it to you guys, keep up the good work!

 

[phavoc]

Ok - here is the reworked system.

For all Spinals, 1DD = x 1000 No change.
A spinal weapon can only be fitted to a ship that is at least twice the weapon's size. New.
The maximum damage potential of any spinal is 10DD. New.
Remove the rapid-fire option (serious balance issues) New.
Spinal weapons use a number of Hardpoints equal to their tonnage divided by 100, rounding up. No Change.
All spinal weapons suffer DM-4 when attacking targets of 10,000 tons or less, and DM-8 when attacking targets of 5,000 tons or less. Spinal weapons cannot attack targets of less than 2,000 tons unless they are stationary or are caught in the blast by accident! No change.

Meson:
Base TL: 12
Range: Long
Size to Damage, Power & Cost: Per 10,000 dtons - 1DD, 1000 power, 2000 MCr
Traits: Radiation, Ignores Armour

Particle:
Base TL: 11
Range: Long
Size to Damage, Power & Cost: Per 5,000 dtons - 1DD, 1000 power, 1000 MCr
Traits: Radiation, Armour reduces damage by 3% per point.

Rail Gun:
Base TL: 10
Range: Medium
Size to Damage, Power & Cost: Per 5,000 dtons - 1DD, 500 power, 500 MCr
Traits: Armour reduces damage by 2% per point.

High Level Spinal Weapon Modifications:
TL +1: -10% tonnage and MCr cost.
TL +2: -20% tonnage and MCr cost.
TL +3: -30% tonnage and MCr cost.
TL +4: -40% tonnage and MCr cost.

Problems addressed:
a) <done!> Minimum weight - you will notice the minimum craft size to carry a spinal will not be lower than 5,000 tons. So you'll never have a spinal-using-ship that has a -8 to be hit by other spinals.
b) <done!> Chas' Mini-battle rider scenario: At best, the mini-battle rider carrying a TL15 particle (3000 tons), doing 1-6k points of damage will average 3500 damage. At TL15, we have to assume armour value of 15, which means 1,925 damage done. So on average, a 6,000 ton battle-rider (the smallest possible to carry a spinal), will not be able to 1-shot itself/similar craft. It will on average 2-shot itself (assuming it hits). With a lucky hit, it may 1-shot it self (rolling a 5 or 6 for the 1DD damage).
c) <done!> Matthew request: To make sure 75kish cruisers can 2-3 shot each-other. Lets say the 75k cruiser is somehow carrying 36kton spinal (near impossible, possible with Jump 3 and totally crippling your m-drive and so on). So this 6DD TL15 spinal will do, on average 21,000 hull damage, or 11,550 after you consider TL15 armour. A 75k cruiser has 30,000 hull (normal, not reinforced).
d) <done!> Matthew request: Super Spinals. Spinals can now go to 10DD. The largest spinal and most powerful raw damage spinal (paying no attention to weight) is a 10DD spinal. This allows for 35,000 hull damage on average. This ship will be one-shotting TL15 90,000 tonners on AVERAGE, with the potential to one shot things up to 150ktons (if extremely lucky). With only a little bit of luck... this thing will take out a tigress dreadnought in 4-5 rounds. On average, it will do so in 8 rounds.
e) <done!> Chas' Big Ship paradigm not lost!: As you can see - it is no longer trivial to blow up big-ships with just spinals. Trying to do so puts all your eggs in one basket and it is a very focused and vulnerable basket (whether it is to fighters, missiles, bays, etc). Also - with the advent of Large Bays (looking at you Matt!) changing to be better vs capitals, it will further create this symbiotic relationship between fleet ships, further encouraging diversity.
f) <done!> Phavoc's gradient of scaling spinals: Simple formula to produce whatever spinal you want

Ok - waiting on verification with Chas and Phavoc and/or recommendations Gents?

Nicely done sir, nicely done.

IF we were to continue to pursue the rapid fire conundrum (as Annatar points out, it may be a sad goodbye for some), I think that could be handled by adjusting the overall ROF per spinal type. This could also give an opportunity to offer some additional tactical choices. Say we set the ROF for the slugthower to 1 shot every two rounds, for PA to 1 shot ever three rounds, and Meson 1 shot every four rounds. Mesons coming to the battlefield really changes the paradigm because they are murderers. So most people will go to TL-15 Meson guns and be done with it. However, the lowly rail gun has an advantage - it's higher ROF. With all of them you could increase your ROF by adding in additional capacitors, though you still must charge them. So going into battle you could get your first initial rounds off with your capacitors charged, thus giving you a relatively quick double-tap. Then you gotta start paying the power piper. Should you continue to fire as fast as you can, or do you also try to find the power to give yourself another 1-2 shot when it might change the course of battle?

I've always been a big fan of the railgun. It's older, but there's nothing like slamming a chunk of metal into another ship at high speeds. It harkens back to the days of the TOG and Commonwealth slugging it out in space.

 

[Nerhesi]

Thanks Phavoc - much appreciated.

I was close to actually building in Rapid Fire as a trait for just Rail-gun, to further improve the options. We would have to lower damage, but then we'd increase rate of fire. I would not allow for Rapid-Fire Meson/Particle as it does open up questions regarding (how come bays dont have that? how come turrets dont?) - you guys know I love internal consistency

However, if we wanted Auto-Rating for Rail-Gun Spinals, it would look like this:

Rail Gun:
Base TL: 10
Range: Medium
Size to Damage, Power & Cost: Per 8,000 dtons - 1DD, 500 power, 500 MCr (Max 7DD)
Traits: Armour reduces damage by 4% per point. Possible Auto Rating (See TL Table)

High Level Spinal Weapon Modifications:
TL +1: -10% tonnage and MCr cost.
TL +2: -20% tonnage and MCr cost. Auto 2 for Rail Guns.
TL +3: -30% tonnage and MCr cost.
TL +4: -40% tonnage and MCr cost. Auto 3 for Rail Guns.

TL15, 7DD auto 3 Spinal Rail Gun. Average damage from 3 hits against a TL15 target is: 29,400.
TL15 10DD Particle. Average damage against a TL15 target is: 19,250.
TL15 10DD Meson. Average damage against a TL15 target is: 35,000 (minus screens)

As you can see - it takes some fiddling - but is doable and balanced, as a way to reward those brave souls making it into medium range

 

[phavoc]

Thanks Phavoc - much appreciated.

I was close to actually building in Rapid Fire as a trait for just Rail-gun, to further improve the options. We would have to lower damage, but then we'd increase rate of fire. I would not allow for Rapid-Fire Meson/Particle as it does open up questions regarding (how come bays dont have that? how come turrets dont?) - you guys know I love internal consistency

However, if we wanted Auto-Rating for Rail-Gun Spinals, it would look like this:

Rail Gun:
Base TL: 10
Range: Medium
Size to Damage, Power & Cost: Per 8,000 dtons - 1DD, 500 power, 500 MCr (Max 7DD)
Traits: Armour reduces damage by 4% per point. Possible Auto Rating (See TL Table)

High Level Spinal Weapon Modifications:
TL +1: -10% tonnage and MCr cost.
TL +2: -20% tonnage and MCr cost. Auto 2 for Rail Guns.
TL +3: -30% tonnage and MCr cost.
TL +4: -40% tonnage and MCr cost. Auto 3 for Rail Guns.

TL15, 7DD auto 3 Spinal Rail Gun. Average damage from 3 hits against a TL15 target is: 29,400.
TL15 10DD Particle. Average damage against a TL15 target is: 19,250.
TL15 10DD Meson. Average damage against a TL15 target is: 35,000 (minus screens)

As you can see - it takes some fiddling - but is doable and balanced, as a way to reward those brave souls making it into medium range

So you would retain a ROF of 1/turn?

 

[AndrewW]

With all of them you could increase your ROF by adding in additional capacitors, though you still must charge them. So going into battle you could get your first initial rounds off with your capacitors charged, thus giving you a relatively quick double-tap. Then you gotta start paying the power piper. Should you continue to fire as fast as you can, or do you also try to find the power to give yourself another 1-2 shot when it might change the course of battle?

This could also lead to the decision to give more tons over to the power plant for a faster recharge.

 

[phavoc]

With all of them you could increase your ROF by adding in additional capacitors, though you still must charge them. So going into battle you could get your first initial rounds off with your capacitors charged, thus giving you a relatively quick double-tap. Then you gotta start paying the power piper. Should you continue to fire as fast as you can, or do you also try to find the power to give yourself another 1-2 shot when it might change the course of battle?

This could also lead to the decision to give more tons over to the power plant for a faster recharge.

Yup. I'd have to model powerplants to see what that kind of increase would mean tonnage wise. Plus there should be an additional capacitor tonnage increase as well. Spinal-equipped ships would then become definite targets of ion weaponry, to stop them from being able to double-fire.

 

[Nerhesi]

Thanks Phavoc - much appreciated.

I was close to actually building in Rapid Fire as a trait for just Rail-gun, to further improve the options. We would have to lower damage, but then we'd increase rate of fire. I would not allow for Rapid-Fire Meson/Particle as it does open up questions regarding (how come bays dont have that? how come turrets dont?) - you guys know I love internal consistency

However, if we wanted Auto-Rating for Rail-Gun Spinals, it would look like this:

Rail Gun:
Base TL: 10
Range: Medium
Size to Damage, Power & Cost: Per 8,000 dtons - 1DD, 500 power, 500 MCr (Max 7DD)
Traits: Armour reduces damage by 4% per point. Possible Auto Rating (See TL Table)

High Level Spinal Weapon Modifications:
TL +1: -10% tonnage and MCr cost.
TL +2: -20% tonnage and MCr cost. Auto 2 for Rail Guns.
TL +3: -30% tonnage and MCr cost.
TL +4: -40% tonnage and MCr cost. Auto 3 for Rail Guns.

TL15, 7DD auto 3 Spinal Rail Gun. Average damage from 3 hits against a TL15 target is: 29,400.
TL15 10DD Particle. Average damage against a TL15 target is: 19,250.
TL15 10DD Meson. Average damage against a TL15 target is: 35,000 (minus screens)

As you can see - it takes some fiddling - but is doable and balanced, as a way to reward those brave souls making it into medium range

So you would retain a ROF of 1/turn?

Absolutely - no need to have them fire very other turn...why would you? They've got significant down-points:

Rail guns would be categorized by:
More susceptible to armour
Shorter ranged
Worst damage ratio, weight-to-damage ratio, until...
You hit TL 14, at which point they can out-damage TL15 Particle IF you hit with all 3 shots, AND you make it into Medium range (despite longer the enemy hitting you with longer ranged spinals, swarms of fighters and battleriders, smallcraft, destroyers, bays, etc...)

It's the whole fortune favours the bold thing

 

[Chas]

One thing that will need checking and that is the effect of multiple critical hits. It is one thing to say a ship is destroyed in 2 to 3 shots. It's another when the opposition craft is effectively defeated after 1 shot which we still don't want.

 

[Chas]

With all of them you could increase your ROF by adding in additional capacitors, though you still must charge them. So going into battle you could get your first initial rounds off with your capacitors charged, thus giving you a relatively quick double-tap. Then you gotta start paying the power piper. Should you continue to fire as fast as you can, or do you also try to find the power to give yourself another 1-2 shot when it might change the course of battle?

This could also lead to the decision to give more tons over to the power plant for a faster recharge.

I've built the play test ships with the extra power for double shot and in itself it is no paradigm changing mechanic. I also thought it would be a good application for the high density batteries. But they are 3x as efficient as the power plant per ton and more advantageous.

Still the double shot could be kept with say a combo of down time and additional special power requirements.

 

[phavoc]

Absolutely - no need to have them fire very other turn...why would you? They've got significant down-points:

Rail guns would be categorized by:
More susceptible to armour
Shorter ranged
Worst damage ratio, weight-to-damage ratio, until...
You hit TL 14, at which point they can out-damage TL15 Particle IF you hit with all 3 shots, AND you make it into Medium range (despite longer the enemy hitting you with longer ranged spinals, swarms of fighters and battleriders, smallcraft, destroyers, bays, etc...)

It's the whole fortune favours the bold thing

I was asking because the higher rate of fire means shorter battles. And that's where the battle modeling comes in. If you recall during Return of the Jedi, when the rebel fleet finds itself trapped between the operation death star and the enemy fleet, Lando tells Ackbar to move and engage the enemy fleet. Ackbar says they won't last long against them, and Lando points out they'll last a lot longer than they would against the death star.

And that's kind of the point. If large combatants can get shredded with just a few spinal hits, then space combat is going to be very short and whoever wins the die rolls is gonna win. However, if we model capital ship combat more along the lines of WW1/2 battleship battles (which is pretty much down to the Germans against the Brits...again), you had some battles that lasted hours. In the Pacific you had the cruiser battles at Savo Sound, and there you saw much the same thing. Tech and environment is different, and there are no torps to sink you, but the idea would remain the same. Do we want the armored battlewagons to be able to take a beating and still dish it out, or if you get a couple spinal hits they just die?

The lower ROF means the main gun is still important, but you also now have a reason to have a good weapons mix to use on each other while you are waiting for the main gun to re-charge.

I've built the play test ships with the extra power for double shot and in itself it is no paradigm changing mechanic. I also thought it would be a good application for the high density batteries. But they are 3x as efficient as the power plant per ton and more advantageous.

Still the double shot could be kept with say a combo of down time and additional special power requirements.

If we adopted this then we'd probably want to up the power requirements, or else it becomes a straight-up main gun capacitors take X number of turns to recharge, and they are different than batteries, so one can't be substituted for the other (discharge speeds?). Not entirely sure how to shoe-horn in the higher power requirement to make it reasonable and logical though. I like consistency in rules that lets you have an inkling into the how's and why's. Also helps when you have to come up with tactics to work for or against you.

 

[Nerhesi]

Critical hits shouldn't be a problem under the current proposition (given in another thread)

a) The attack will only critical on an effect of 6+ (unless we want to make it mandatory for Spinals? Not a bad idea)
b) Sustained damage criticals are nothing to worry about - you will get a few sev 1 criticals. (They're always sev 1)

And

c) <Not a spinal weapon issue> The crit severity should vary based on the size of the ship. This will ensure that being hit by a spinal for example, and surviving it, gives you a handful of crits, but they're not 5 different systems destroyed or so. This is equally needed to ensure a single hit from a bay weapon isn't causing a Sev 6 crit, so it's not a Spinal only issue (http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?f=149&t=118280&p=897001#p897001)

So really - it is just the "on-hit" critical and that is neatly addressed via the other post

 

[Chas]

Right, I've put up some craft designs for spinal consideration and play testing here:

http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?f=149&t=118444&p=897005#p897005

I'll get back to your break down Nerhesi.

 

[Nerhesi]

Right, I've put up some craft designs for spinal consideration and play testing here:

http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?f=149&t=118444&p=897005#p897005

I'll get back to your break down Nerhesi.

A quick thumbs up will suffice

Really though, I think we've addressed ALL major issues so looking forward to seeing if there anything else.. or can we tell Matt to go ahead. Perhaps the only thing left is:

With rapid fire gone, do we want Railguns with Auto Ratings as per my second example? Or keep em as is as the poor-and-out-of-luck-spinal? (I prefer the former)

 

[phavoc]

What do you think of cutting the TL advantages down? A 40% reduction is an awful lot of space to return for a ship killer. Plus it gives you 4 TL advantages to take advantage of, when the normal rule is 3.

Or, we cut the advantages in half - 5/10/15/20% reductions. I like to compare this to naval guns - the basic tech stayed the same even as they added in range and other thing. But 8" gun remained essentially the same. This would still allow for spinals, but the secondary armaments would be fewer since less space is available.