Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
Ok, question. Why does the old, obsolete, out-of-service assault laser have a better range than the modern, cutting-edge battle laser?
War in the Twenty-First Century
- Thread starter Nerroth
- Start date
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
Da Boss said:Could argue one is a minibeam so less power needed the other is a beam - more power - shorter range?
If it was a mini-beam it wouldn't have the beam trait, would it?
My idea behind the weapon was that the Centauri first used the Assault Laser for its good range and medicore damage, but later adapted the Battle Laser as this weapons offered a higher possible damage output in concert with the new developed Ion Cannons. The loss in range was deemed acceptable.
If it was a mini-beam it wouldn't have the beam trait, would it?
Being corrected. Hence the comments about mini-beam (making it a light laser cannon with a better rate of fire) as compared to a beam.
That also helps differentiate it from the Orieni Laser Lance, and the subsequent Centauri weapons developed from it. I think the mini beam is a good idea, and it helps avoid a return to the beam-team of doom that direct converions produced in 1st edition.
The mini-beam team is effective (and very reliable) but less obscene.
Being corrected. Hence the comments about mini-beam (making it a light laser cannon with a better rate of fire) as compared to a beam.
That also helps differentiate it from the Orieni Laser Lance, and the subsequent Centauri weapons developed from it. I think the mini beam is a good idea, and it helps avoid a return to the beam-team of doom that direct converions produced in 1st edition.
The mini-beam team is effective (and very reliable) but less obscene.
The AP was a holdover from the fact that these were 1st edition statlines.
And yes, Concentrate All Fire! with an assault laser is nasty. Sustained rapid fire with a pulse laser should be. :twisted:
On the other hand, Orieni ships usually pack super AP missiles, which are arguably just as nasty as they can hit on 3's or even 2's - at the expense of reload times or amunition limits.
Both fleets lack much in the way of hull breakers but precise weapons are fairly common; ships are likely to go down from massed criticals rather than being blown apart. The Storm Front is one of the worst candidates for this. I've dropped it to 10 AD on the racks, but it's still likely to do 3 criticals if it drops the lot. That's fairly high odds of hitting something important.
And yes, Concentrate All Fire! with an assault laser is nasty. Sustained rapid fire with a pulse laser should be. :twisted:
On the other hand, Orieni ships usually pack super AP missiles, which are arguably just as nasty as they can hit on 3's or even 2's - at the expense of reload times or amunition limits.
Both fleets lack much in the way of hull breakers but precise weapons are fairly common; ships are likely to go down from massed criticals rather than being blown apart. The Storm Front is one of the worst candidates for this. I've dropped it to 10 AD on the racks, but it's still likely to do 3 criticals if it drops the lot. That's fairly high odds of hitting something important.
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
Tolwyn said:
can we rename this please? I wouldn't want a Centauri ship class named after a Tottenham footballer!
the only thing with missiles is that they can be intercepted - where as minibeams can not.
True - but then the missiles have a longer reach and the ships usually have more of them. The 24-missile alpha strike off the Paragon, for example.
Looking at the hull pictures in WOTCR...
Jenas = Maximus
Celerian = Primus (warcruiser clearly being proto-battlecruiser)
Similarly, the Optine:
rather looks like the modern Octurian
The others are new; twentieth century Centuari naval architects have a whole 'batwing chic' thing going.
True - but then the missiles have a longer reach and the ships usually have more of them. The 24-missile alpha strike off the Paragon, for example.
Looking at the hull pictures in WOTCR...
Jenas = Maximus
Celerian = Primus (warcruiser clearly being proto-battlecruiser)
Similarly, the Optine:
rather looks like the modern Octurian
The others are new; twentieth century Centuari naval architects have a whole 'batwing chic' thing going.
I was wondering - has anyone considered an updated version of the maps seen in WCR, giving them the kind of ACTA design seen in current Mongoose works?
For that matter, could it be possible to see a map which reflected the various devastated and abandoned systems left in the borderlands between the 'modern' Orieni Empire and the shrunken Centauri Republic in the current ACTA setting?
For that matter, could it be possible to see a map which reflected the various devastated and abandoned systems left in the borderlands between the 'modern' Orieni Empire and the shrunken Centauri Republic in the current ACTA setting?
Do-able. The obvious question is the list of devastated systems and the list of systems reconquered....
So that's
Neutral Territory: Usuuth
Centauri Territory: Xothan, Fetslak, Sivorn & Thormast
Orieni Territory: Arkada, Otac, & Phalonak
are all now dead worlds, along with a couple of normal colonies. Someone take their pick.
So that's
Neutral Territory: Usuuth
Centauri Territory: Xothan, Fetslak, Sivorn & Thormast
Orieni Territory: Arkada, Otac, & Phalonak
are all now dead worlds, along with a couple of normal colonies. Someone take their pick.
Well, bear in mind that there is at least enough left on Usuuthir to allow the Empire to help them re-build by the time of TGC - so it would be devastated, yes, but not exterminated entirely.
I think there are details of colony worlds blasted in the actual WCR history section, too - plus there may be former colonies or subject world left behind by the Centauri in the contractions of the 22nd and 23rd centuries.
I think there are details of colony worlds blasted in the actual WCR history section, too - plus there may be former colonies or subject world left behind by the Centauri in the contractions of the 22nd and 23rd centuries.
