Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-18-2018, 11:27 AM   #71
Michael Thayne
 
Michael Thayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Default Re: [Spaceships] Missile shield vs. ramming: two questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
The problem with missiles is mostly that they don't scale the same way as beams, for reasons that are not entirely obvious. In general 7-10mm should be considered SM+0 for projectiles.
Is 11-15mm then SM+1? And <does some extrapolating> the 16cm missiles from Spaceships are SM+7? Does that mean the wounding multiplier is x1/3?
Michael Thayne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2018, 11:44 AM   #72
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: [Spaceships] Missile shield vs. ramming: two questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Thayne View Post
Is 11-15mm then SM+1? And <does some extrapolating> the 16cm missiles from Spaceships are SM+7? Does that mean the wounding multiplier is x1/3?
Well, that's for piercing damage. I don't recall what damage type missiles in Spaceships are.
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2018, 12:58 PM   #73
Michael Thayne
 
Michael Thayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Default Re: [Spaceships] Missile shield vs. ramming: two questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
Well, that's for piercing damage. I don't recall what damage type missiles in Spaceships are.
Strangely, kinetic attacks in Spaceships don't seem to have any damage type listed. I guess I would treat it as crushing, since crushing is the type that normally has no special effects.

ETA: In this thread it was previously noted that this is unclear, but also that pi++ and cr both have a x1 wounding multiplier vs. unliving.
Michael Thayne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2018, 02:47 PM   #74
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: [Spaceships] Missile shield vs. ramming: two questions

Well, pi++ is 15-20mm in that scheme, so 16 cm winds up as a 1/7.
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2018, 04:17 PM   #75
Agemegos
 
Agemegos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oz
Default Re: [Spaceships] Missile shield vs. ramming: two questions

It's probably worth looking into the physics of damage, because at collison speeds above a mile per second most warheads are going to act like explosives or shaped charges, not like penetrators. They'll punch a small, slightly over-calibre hole in the face of the armour (or in the first layer of standoff armour (Whipple plating) and then spread out as they go in.

As for beams, producing widers spots for more damage is not a strategy that I've heard discussed. Rather, talk always seems to be of producing the minimum possible spot size to get the highest beam intensity and most violent interactions possible (drilling, explsive spalling) withou having beam intensities on the objective mirror that cause damamge there. I guess that once you reach a spot intensity high enough to achieve the most desireable effects you could increase spot size in line with objective size. I'm just not sure that that's fruitful if the mechanism of damage is to induce explosive evaporation of the target.
__________________
copyright Brett Evill
FLAT BLACK discussion group at tekeli.li
On-line texts at flatblack.wikidot.com
Agemegos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2018, 04:26 PM   #76
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: [Spaceships] Missile shield vs. ramming: two questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agemegos View Post
As for beams, producing widers spots for more damage is not a strategy that I've heard discussed.
It's not really a strategy, it's a somewhat unwanted side effect (there tends to be a limit on practical aspect ratio for drilled holes). Also, the way Spaceships scales beam damage (cube root of beam energy) means it must be generating wider holes at higher beam energies.
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2018, 05:17 PM   #77
Michael Thayne
 
Michael Thayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Default Re: [Spaceships] Missile shield vs. ramming: two questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
Well, pi++ is 15-20mm in that scheme, so 16 cm winds up as a 1/7.
Ahah, I forgot to factor in Unliving, which is a flat -2 to piercing type, right? 16cm = pi+8, so that's -2 from relative size with an additional -2 from Unliving, so effectively pi-4? I think I understand the system now.

Would an SM+4 ramming ship–if you treated it as a piercing attack–have a relative size of pi+6 vs. an SM+10 ship? Reasoning: size of a projectile is WM-12, so reversing that, WM is SM plus 12. So the absolute WM of an SM+4 drone is pi+16, and the relative size is pi+6?

EDIT: For the ramming drone, I guess that would be pi+4 once you factored in Unliving.
Michael Thayne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2018, 05:22 PM   #78
Agemegos
 
Agemegos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oz
Default Re: [Spaceships] Missile shield vs. ramming: two questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
It's not really a strategy, it's a somewhat unwanted side effect (there tends to be a limit on practical aspect ratio for drilled holes).
Just so. Beam spreading is an unwanted side effect, not a fast route to increased damage.

Quote:
Also, the way Spaceships scales beam damage (cube root of beam energy) means it must be generating wider holes at higher beam energies.
Right, so be careful about applying a "hole width" multiplier to a base damage that already reflects hole width.
__________________
copyright Brett Evill
FLAT BLACK discussion group at tekeli.li
On-line texts at flatblack.wikidot.com
Agemegos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2018, 05:30 PM   #79
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: [Spaceships] Missile shield vs. ramming: two questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agemegos View Post
Right, so be careful about applying a "hole width" multiplier to a base damage that already reflects hole width.
Damage types other than piercing do not have hole width modifiers, and should. At the same penetration, a wider hole is certainly more destructive.
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2018, 05:30 PM   #80
Michael Thayne
 
Michael Thayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Default Re: [Spaceships] Missile shield vs. ramming: two questions

Testing my understanding of this system by applying it to the ASATs vs. Gibraltar scenario:

At a relative velocity of 80 mps, the 16cm missiles inflict 6dx320 damage, largely trivializing the Gibraltar's 45 dDR. But, the Gibraltar gets a x1/30 wounding multiplier, so the missiles only inflict an average of 224 points of damage. That's enough to disable a system, but not destroy the Gibraltar in one hit. Rolling damage for each hit individually, you'd need 12-13 hits on average. And with the "Multiple Hits" rule from Anthony's article, you'd need 30+ hits from one salvo.

Did I do that right?
Michael Thayne is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
combat, spaceships

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.