Yet another G'Quon idea

[Da Boss]

:idea:

how about

the Narn laser systems can be used in two modes - normal and overload

if fired in Normal mode it has 4AD 18" range DD, Beam, F arc

If fired in Overload mode it it has 8AD, 30" range, DD, Beam, B arc but gains the slow-loading trait until the end of the turn after it fires in.

maybe even have the same for the Drazi................ :?:

anyway just an idea - Just like a Plasma Pistol - opps wrong board :wink:


don't know why I bother really, bloody ungrateful narn, mass driver the ungrateful sods I say

 

[Shadow Queen]

not a bad idea

 

[H]

mmmm.. no. . I don't think so, but my money is on the powers that be saying no anyway. the "overload" mode essentially gives you what we have pre p+p, an average 4 dice a turn 30" boresight beam!

 

[katadder]

sounds like a plan to me lol. would annoy narns though as the brakiri get that but in forward arc although at only 18" range.

 

[H]

i do have to ask why most of Da Boss's G'Quan ideas involve 18" ;-)
obvious range envy from the ole pointy haired ones.

 

[Da Boss]

The idea was to give a bit of flexibiity and power if you can get the shot

I was thinking
Turn 1 you are the most likely to get the big shot at 8AD at something
turn 2 CBD and emine
Turn 3 if close, back to 4AD but F arc or if not hit try and get something with the 8AD beam

towards the end the 8AD beam shot may well come into play again

ah well just an idea - its not like my Centauri or Shadows have to worry about such things :wink:

 

[Da Boss]

i do have to ask why most of Da Boss's G'Quan ideas involve 18" ;-)
obvious range envy from the ole pointy haired ones.

seemed the average range for F arc non Elder (Drakh, Minbari) beams (Brakiri, Centauri - should also be Abbai range)

plus it keeps the 30" range on the big beam shot?

Also remember I did suggest just sticking it upto 8AD beam - even if dropping the other wepaons etc.............

 

[katadder]

i agree abbai should be upto that range but perhaps that would be too much as we are bigging them up in another thread

 

[H]

The idea was to give a bit of flexibiity and power if you can get the shot

I was thinking
Turn 1 you are the most likely to get the big shot at 8AD at something
turn 2 CBD and emine
Turn 3 if close, back to 4AD but F arc or if not hit try and get something with the 8AD beam

towards the end the 8AD beam shot may well come into play again

ah well just an idea - its not like my Centauri or Shadows have to worry about such things :wink:

I see the reasoning to an extent, but I hate slow loading weapons especially in conjuntion with closed blast doors!
I still think canon is dual beam fore for the G'Quan, give it the only twin linked beam in the game ;-)

 

[katadder]

what 4AD but TL on 1st rolls? would be interesting maybe.

 

[Burger]

Twin-linking a beam (rerolls on first roll only, naturally!) actually makes it 50% more efficient.
So 4AD would give average of 6 hits.
Why not just make it 6AD normal beam :lol:

 

[katadder]

yeah but then its not differant differant but producing the same results is what alot of gaming is about, ruleswise anyway

 

[H]

well obviously re-rollson anything BUT the first one would be a bit gross
and yeah, it's just somethign different Burger me ole mucker, as there has been a very strong grumble from certain elements when a 6 dice beam is suggested

 

[Da Boss]

has there - don't recall it?

I think they should just have lots of spoons as suggested elsewhere.....

a 6AD G'Quon seems sensible - or the TL variant if it actually works the same...................

 

[Foxmeister]

mmmm.. no. . I don't think so, but my money is on the powers that be saying no anyway. the "overload" mode essentially gives you what we have pre p+p, an average 4 dice a turn 30" boresight beam!

Actually, it's probably slightly better than that. Given you won't be able to get a "decent" boresight off consistenly due to init sinks, you'll be using the 4AD F arc beam most of the time, but when that tasty target is on bore.......

However, as you say, it's unlikely to float with the PTB!

Regards,

Dave

 

[Foxmeister]

I think they should just have lots of spoons as suggested elsewhere.....

Will the Spoons be Twin-Linked and Precise? Actually, wouldn't that just be a Spork?

Regards,

Dave

 

[AdrianH]

especially in conjuntion with closed blast doors!
I still think canon is dual beam fore for the G'Quan, give it the only twin linked beam in the game ;-)

The Omega and Hyperion also have dual beams. And it's anyone's guess what the non-canon ships have. Which means once the Narn have twin-linked beams, everyone will want them - remember the energy mines.

Some time ago at the beginning of a "Star Trek" role-playing game, the player with a Vulcan character was trying to decide on the character's name. We reasoned that Vulcan male names tend to begin with "S" and end with "K", e.g. Spock, Surak, Sarek. We suggested "Spork". It stuck. :lol:

Meanwhile, back to the topic, and I agree with making the G'Quan's beam 6 AD, putting it level with the Omega's main weapon. Maybe put the energy mine back to slow-loading. And upgrade the G'Lan's secondaries to double-damage; this is the G'Quan variant optimised for close range fighting, so finish the optimising.

 

[Lord David the Denied]

Urgh. The last thing we need is more energy mines. I think they should all be one shot. Someone told me the Dag'Kar would be buggered without reloading mines, but really it'd only be on a level playing field with everyone else's bombardment ships. The Apollo or Elutarian don't have reloading energy mines and no one claims they're rubbish.

 

[Foxmeister]

The Apollo or Elutarian don't have reloading energy mines and no one claims they're rubbish.

What does that have to do with it? That's an apples and oranges comparison!

Reduce the Dag'Kars e-mine to O/S and it has one weapon system (a O/S system that can't crit does not count IMHO), which is markedly inferior to both the Apollo and Elutarians primaries, and no secondaries whatsoever. It's also Hull 4 vs Hull 6 for both of these vessels. The Dag'Kar would have to be reworked in order to work in a O/S e-mine world, because no one would take it as is.

There's nothing wrong with e-mines per se - the problem is that there are just too many races being given access to them.

Regards,

Dave

 

[Tolwyn]

Indeed, the Dag'Kar is fine as she is. What I dislike is that many other races get weapons with the Energy Mine trait, it would have been enough if Narn and Brakiri had them.