The Plasmatic Pulsar Device (PPD) -- UNOFFICIAL

[storeylf]

24" range should be enough, 36 is far beyond what they have in SFB/FC and takes us back to the whole problem with Drones killing ships on turn one.

Not really. In FC all weapons are range 25 max. Drones are range 25, and the PPD is the same.

Range has nothing to do with whether you can kill a ship in one turn. I could have range 999 but if I only do 1 damage it won't kill squat. Equally I could have range 2 and wipe somthing out with 60pts of damage.

Forgot to mention probably the key point on why I propsed that very long range.

In order for an echelon formation to work the PPDs in the back line has to be able to fire on anything that is hanging back and just trying to hit the gun line.

If a disrupter/drone empire hangs at 24" to the gun line, then they can start killing that line, and the ships in the gunline can't respond (only plasma and phasers), the formation really requires that the PPDs can reach out from that extra distance further back and hit the enemy ships, without having to join the gun line.

If the PPD only has a range of 24" then I don't see the formation that the fluff says the ISC pretty much always fight in being that viable against the SFUs most common heavy weapons.

 

[Finlos]

Some very good points here. It seems to me that the PPD was created to give their opponent (enemy) a lose-lose choice. Stay at range and get hammered by the PPDs or close and face the gunline plasma torpedoes. With that in mind how does the following sound?

PPD: 4 AD, Range 30" (36"?), Traits: Multihit 2, Accurate +2, Reload.

Precise or Devastating may both be too good if we give the PPD that kind of range.

I'll have to consider echelon formations before deciding which range I like better. Multihit 3 may be too much given that a DN (which will sit in the back of the echelon) will have *4* of these and give you a maximum potential of 48 damage :shock: out to 36". :twisted:

I have no problem with overloads staying in the game. I doubt it will be used often, given the narrow window of opportunity between minimum range and 6".

 

[Rambler]

Pretty sure overloaded PPDs add Pulses so range is irrelevant. Part of the reason FC did away with it.

 

[Da Boss]

I like Finlos last itteration

 

[storeylf]

I think that is far to weak for a PPD.

Remember there are 2 DN variants, the P variant is the 4 PPD version, the T is the 2 PPD and 2 Plasma S.

I'd Expect the ISC DNs to be very expensive, the P version especially. In FC the ISC DN is about 10% more expensive than a C8. If that translates over to ACTA you are looking at a 350+ plus ship, I wouldn't be surprised to see the DNP being a good chunk more than that.

Don't focus to much on what a single ship can do, the problem with the ISC is that they have 2 very different types of ships, PPD and others. The PPD ships are the hard hitting ones, the rest are pickets, and lack heavy hitting power or range. Their whole fleet is expressly designed to work together, each ship fulfilling a role. You may have a DN with 4 PPDS, you would also have several smaller ships with non. You will need the other smaller ships to give a decent echelon formation and cover a DNPs ass up close, where it really sucks for a DN.

The cheapest other PPD ship in FC is the CS, with 2 PPDS (but again terrible up close), expect that to come in somewhere about CA+ cost. A DNP and CS would probably take up well over half your points in a 1000pt game, and leave you enough for about 4 smaller ships (DDs, FFs), maybe not even that.

That is a fairly PPD heavy fleet. You would have no plasma S and about 8 plasma F forward. So whilst it should be fairly heavy hitting at long range, it would not be so good a short range relative to what might be attacking it. Given the stats I posted previous your 6 PPDs would have the same average long range firepower as 24 disrupters (over a 2 turn reload cycle). That is not far off what a klingon would bring in 1000pts (about 20-22?). But as the klingons close the ISC get out shot, the disrupters gain a bit more power relative to the PPD, and they get their drones in range. The ISC have good phaser suites, but the klingons aren't that lacking either on many ships. On top of that the klingons have their front shields and manouverability + wider arcs (and possibly intiative bonus?).

A more 'balanced' force would be more likely to be 3-4 PPDs and some plasma S for the extra short range punch. A CC + CS (bit cheaper and more points for the front line), or DNT + CS or a CC + CA (3 PPDS but extra Plasma S)

Using your stats the 6 PPDs are equal to only 16 disrupters. That would mean even the PPD heavy force will get outshot at range by a disrupter/drone force of about the same points, and crushed at short range. The more 'balanced' fleet with 4 PPDs would be seriously short on firepower, being equivalent to less than 11 disrupters.

The problem for the ISC is that they are not really that good without the PPD being fearsome, they do not carry the plasma weight of the gorns/roms that can crush ships up close, and whilst they have decent phaser suites they are not going to be out shooting anyone that dramatically. The weaker the PPD is the more you'd be forced to go PPD heavy to make up for it, because a PPD-weak force is going to be plain weak. That would start to go somewhat against the fluff.

So, yes, the DNP should be a darn scary ship at range. 4 PPDs should be likely to tear someone apart. It will probably cost an appropriate amount as well. I'd hope to see the PPD ships expensive but the non-PPD ships cheap, that should encourage the ship mix for echelon style tactics.

Adding stuff like devastating/precise would alter the dynamic, and may be a way of adding some extra capability rather than just raw damage. I think precise better reflects a PPD, with its wrapping damage it would be more likely to find a critical point, as opposed to delivering one devastating hit. But either way, I'd certainly like to see a PPD with a very long range, and to pack a serious punch at that range (it needs to be somewhere equal to anyone else heavy weapon punch, accounting for the ratio of heavy weapons that the 2 fleets would likely bring, disrupters seem a good benchmark as they are raw damage with no crit modifers complicating things).



Going back to the other mention, reducing them to accurate +1, multi hit 2 but killzone 10. That PPD in the killzone averages 10.66 damage. My Multihit 3 accurate +2 but no killzone version averages 10. So there is almost no difference at that range. However, multihit 2 accurate +1 beyond range 10 would be aneamic for a weapon that is having to pull the weight of ~4-5 heavy weapons per PPD their opponents will have, averaging 5 damage at range 10-half way, and only 4 beyond that. Remember that is every 2 turns if we are talking reload weapons. No one would have any incentive to close and face the gun line, you'd just happily take the long range duel.

 

[storeylf]

Pretty sure overloaded PPDs add Pulses so range is irrelevant. Part of the reason FC did away with it.

Not so. In SFB range is extremely relevant. you do extra pulses, that means extra time needed to deliver your full damage. That means you have to keep your opponent in the very narrow range 4-8 for longer. That is not easy in most cases.

So in SFB an overloaded PPD is a rarity, or at least one that actually has the overload effect kick in.


Yes that is, however, why it wasn't in FC from my memory of the discussions going on at the time, partly as it was rare enough in SFB that there seemed no great reason to add it in FC, partly because the play sequence would make it far easier to use, and provide a huge boost to what is already a good weapon.

 

[Captain Jonah]

PPDs can be overloaded in FC, they do 6 pulses not 4 but because FC only has 4 Impulses now a target that is in the Overload zone gets everything. Not like SFB where you could zip through the overload zone before all the pulses were fired.

In ACTA-SF because everyone moves and then fires they would work the same way, move to place a target that has already moved within 4" to 6", declare overload, roll 6AD for every PPD and send some engineers out to clean the bits of exploded enemy off your paintwork. Within the overload zone each pulse does 1+4+1 damage, against single shields thats 6 points, in a game where photons do 8. All six pulses from a single PPD will bring in 36 damage, 4 and a half times the damage of a photon hit. A DNP will one shot a cruiser at that range. :twisted:

PPDs are not helpless at short range, its getting inside that 4” zone where they cannot fire where the big PPD ships are in trouble. Still that’s what the horde of Gun line ships are for.

Yes Ok Storyelf, you have persuaded me. Make it MULTIHIT 3 :wink:

The common big ship of the ISC is likely to be the CC which will probably cost about 270-280 points. Considering that ACTA-FC ships are 25% up on FC costs. The DN is going to be 350 odd points so I suppose for those points it should be able to crush an enemy cruiser at long range. The CA has one less PPD and no command but is otherwise the same for getting on for the cost of a BCH

PPD F 4AD (rules to be determined)
PPD F 4AD
PLASMA S F/S
PLASMA S F/P
PLASMA F CLUSTER S/A (three plasma Fs, only one from the cluster can be fired at a ship each turn but any number can be fired at fighters or PFs or drones)
PLASMA F CLUSTER P/A
P1 FH 2AD
P1 F/P 2AD
P1 F/S 2AD
P1 T 2AD
P3 SH 3AD
P3 PH 3AD

Its hardly helpless at close range since it has Gorn like plasma arcs and if you get behind the gun line they can just fire Plasma Fs all day without reloading. :lol:

 

[storeylf]

PPDs can be overloaded in FC,

No they can't.

In ACTA-SF because everyone moves and then fires they would work the same way, move to place a target that has already moved within 4" to 6", declare overload, roll 6AD for every PPD and send some engineers out to clean the bits of exploded enemy off your paintwork. Within the overload zone each pulse does 1+4+1 damage, against single shields thats 6 points, in a game where photons do 8. All six pulses from a single PPD will bring in 36 damage, 4 and a half times the damage of a photon hit. A DNP will one shot a cruiser at that range. :twisted:

Not sure what you are talking there, the damage bit appears to be a reference to FC, but you are talking ACTA move/ranges.

But certainly I have no issue with a DNP inflicting a some mega serious pain (once every 2 turns). It is a very expensive DN, and is the most heavily armed in the ISC fleet. Note, in FC the ships with PPD or plasma options cost the same, I don't epxect that in ACTA. I expect the PPD version will be more expensive than the plasma version.

To put it in context, a Gorn plama DN inflicts in raw damage 19 D6 damage, just short of 70 damage. A good chunk of that might get shot down. Using 4AD, mulihit 3 and acc +2 PPDs leaves the DNP inflicting 40 damage average. I'd say that is about right given it can't be shot down like plasma. An overloaded version (if allowed) would inflict 60 damage average.

PPDs are not helpless at short range, its getting inside that 4” zone where they cannot fire where the big PPD ships are in trouble. Still that’s what the horde of Gun line ships are for.

Inside the myopic zone is what I meant by close range. The PPD heavy ships which give up plasma have only phasers up close (within the minimum range), that is their big weakness, and why they need the gun line. That is why I don't think we should get to concerned about the stat line of a PPD looking potent in isolation. You don't get many of them, and the more you take the weaker you are up against someone simply charging straight in at you.

PPD F 4AD (rules to be determined)
PPD F 4AD
PLASMA S F/S
PLASMA S F/P
PLASMA F CLUSTER S/A (three plasma Fs, only one from the cluster can be fired at a ship each turn but any number can be fired at fighters or PFs or drones)
PLASMA F CLUSTER P/A
P1 FH 2AD
P1 F/P 2AD
P1 F/S 2AD
P1 T 2AD
P3 SH 3AD
P3 PH 3AD

Its hardly helpless at close range since it has Gorn like plasma arcs and if you get behind the gun line they can just fire Plasma Fs all day without reloading. :lol:

The above is a CC I assume, no that is no so bad up close, as it has the Plasma S. But even there you are looking, more or less, at a BCH equivalent. A Gorn BCH packs 16 AD of plasma, so relatively it is weak if you get that close. And again, as you note it is the gun line in front of it that coves its ass. Though note the 'fire plasma all day' depends on the gun line, FFs have no rear plasma.

Whilst we don't know, and it's all just speculation at the moment, I'd expect a good ISC fleet to be spending as many points on non PPD ships as they do on PPD ships. Certainly in FC where I've played a few large 1000pt games with ISC, I've found the PPD heavy force is not as good as the one that drops a PPD or 2 for those plasma S. Of course the plasma works very very differently in FC, and a lot of the ability to dictate enemy movement with plasma is missing in ACTA. I can't help but think the way plasma works in this game is going to be the biggest issue in getting the ISC to work as per the fluff. Dealing with some Plama F on the gun line and an odd S from behind is not particularly hard in ACTA, not in the same way it can be in SFB/FC. ACTA plasma is relying much more on a critical mass to overwhelm defensive fire, it works with Gorn/Rom who have that plamsa mass, but the much lesser amounts that the ISC have may be problematic for them as it is disproportionately eaiser to deal with.

 

[Finlos]

I also am now convinced on the Multihit 3. 8) I think the range should be 30" instead of 36" maximum however. We're already going to have disruptor fleets howling, why make it worse?

So then, PPD: 4AD; 30" range; Accurate +2, Multihit 3, Precise, Reload.

I included precise simply because it is a beam that washes over half the ship, it's bound to cause a critical somewhere :wink:

I had a bit of a radical thought: Why not increase the myopic zone to 8"? (This number was not chosen at random) It negates the need for overloads (which I agree they don't need in this game), emphasizes the need for a gunline(s) and makes, I think, for a more tactical game. I can see the CC and, for larger games, the DNT becoming extremely popular flagships if this is the case.

 

[Myrm]

May I add a proposal here.

First principles here since its my first foray - Essentially to me the PPD in SFB had two main features. One was the multiple pulses over several impulses leading to increased chances to hit for some damage - it was very likely that the weapon would eventually hit and do some damage. The second was the splash effect. Minor but not totally insignificant.

My problem with translating the PPD in ACtA is the fact that you have time compression 32 impulses of SFB in one turn of ACtA - that squashes the biggest unique feature of the PPD into being a single point of resolution (how FC has handled that with the 8 impulse turn HAS to be a major starting point of investigation as to how to handle this). Also the other neat point of the PPD, the splash damage is comparatively minor compared to hellbores or enveloping plasma, but not at short range and how do we handle that in a single shield rating game.

For me the do the pulse hits, how many hit after wavelock and how much damage does that equate to is a lot of rolling of random events in SFB that has to be somehow translated down a smaller number of random rolls in ACTA (for sanity if nothing else). The odds are very high that some damage will be scored but damage is pretty variable depending on how many pulse you get a lock on with and how much time the target stays within a short range.

FOr me that screams Accurate of some degree, and a rolled multihit for abstracting all the rolls to hit, wavelocks, pulses, enemy manouvring etc (D6 or D3). Devastating is possible given that the multiple volleys effect of SFB tended to score several of the many once per volley type hits that were otherwise protected - so for me it fits.

Now the splash damage, its relatively constant - so to an extent a reasonable amount of damage - it might be that it could justify a kill zone was my first thought but I rejected that as the damage form it is constant as you go away from the shooter, and essentially its more shield damage so a high damage weapon actually fits the bill. In fact the more I looked at it the whole splash damage to me means the weapon actually would retain efficacy in ACtA over range.

Effectiveness drops of from around range 25 hexes which is comparable to a disruptor.

Now overload for me is perfectly viable under this system - and simply I would make it an overloadable weapon.

So for me PPD comes out as this.
PPD Range 24", 1AD, Accurate +2, Multihit D6, Devastating 1

For me I would use a PPD like this.

 

[Keeper Nilbog]

The 'Multihit D6' damage for a single PPD doesn't reall model the amount of damage it can do if you get a full/near full lock. That would give the weapon an average damage of 3.5 (the same as 1 drone under ActA). As the primary weapon weapon system, unless it leaks (which plasma generally doesn't - bolting being an exception) the only effect it's going to have is the slowly rub off shields - and 2 P-1's in killzone would do a better job (average 4 damage, with leaks).

I still like the idea of each pulse being an AD, so if you hit with most of your AD, you hit with more pulses and got wavelock earlier. I wouldn't agree with a 'multihit D6' for that view of the weapon and do feel that precise maybe a better model than devastating (more chance of a critical, and automatic hull damage - if concerned over this, instead of leaking on a '6', maybe it could do an auto critical (to model the wave passing over/through the target). Still prefer precise though.