06-26-2019, 09:06 PM | #11 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Some questions on Spaceships
Given that the Star Hawk only has one pilot I would consign the idea that its X-Ray lasers are separate batteries to errata. It would be impossible to target those weapons individually.
|
06-26-2019, 09:39 PM | #12 | |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Some questions on Spaceships
Quote:
What it is is a larger-scale rules issue where the authors, either negligently or knowingly, wrote content that clearly isn't based on the rules as actually published. Maybe, like Stormcrow, they don't think that rules text is meant to be taken 'rigidly'.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
|
06-26-2019, 11:13 PM | #13 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Some questions on Spaceships
|
06-26-2019, 11:35 PM | #14 | |||
Join Date: Aug 2018
|
Re: Some questions on Spaceships
Quote:
Also, why the lack of variety of missiles? Afaik the only choice I have is barrel size and "nuke, super or neither" (disregarding warp, which seems not to behave like missiles). What if I want ion missiles that stun ships, more penetration, or different range? Maybe even different speeds depending on ammo. I could, of course, just go in and add/change it, but then I'd have to open the can of worms of adjusting costs, etc, which I'd rather wait with. Quote:
Accepting this accepting this phenomena, however, incurs other headaches. Are then the Spaceship rules balanced with regards to weapon types, DR and HP? I dont see the other weapons change depending on their "relative speed", so that makes me wonder if I need to start out by outlining a few basic ship types and see what their move ranges are and thus what the most likely scale will be, and then go back to swap/plug in their weapon holes. What I'm opting for is a solid foundation of beam weapons, with the occasional missile, but how would you start out if this is decided from the start as opposed to "finding it out" along the way? I could, of course, start meddling with costs, etc, but I'd prefer to keep it "as vanilla as possible". Quote:
Also, would you treat this as a higher RoF or make separate attack rolls, and (if separate attacks) would you Dodge only once and let MoS surplus cover more than one attack or Dodge once per attack? |
|||
06-27-2019, 12:49 AM | #15 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
|
Re: Some questions on Spaceships
Consistency with the rest of the rules would make such a grouping work like any others - they are all lumped together in one attack, with a rate of fire equal to the total RoF of all the guns added together. See SS, p.57-58 "Rate of Fire".
I don't see any reason why multiple major batteries can't be grouped together like this. Then again, I'm cool with ships being designed with some or all of a medium (or smaller) battery's guns being placed into a turret and all being fired together. Naturally such a set-up would prohibit those guns from engaging separate targets.
__________________
Rupert Boleyn "A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history." |
06-27-2019, 08:07 AM | #16 | |||
☣
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Southeast NC
|
Re: Some questions on Spaceships
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
RyanW - Actually one normal sized guy in three tiny trenchcoats. |
|||
06-27-2019, 08:10 AM | #17 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ronkonkoma, NY
|
Re: Some questions on Spaceships
Quote:
I think the idea of fixed mounts changed between the Basic Set and Spaceships. In the Basic Set, you aim the weapon by aiming the vehicle, rolling the lower of your Gunner skill and your vehicle control skill. In Spaceships, there's no sign of using Piloting to aim a fixed-mount weapon: you just roll Gunner or Artillery, and "superior focusing or stabilization systems give fixed mounts better range and fire control (a +2 to hit)." There's also no indication that multiple fixed mounts can't fire at different targets; over the course of a space combat turn surely the ship can reorient itself enough to aim at multiple targets facing the same hull section. My guess is that the rules for using fixed mounts in Spaceships are simplified from the Basic Set to avoid the complications of comparing weapon skill with control skill and to avoid the assumption that the pilot is also the one firing the weapon. The fix would be to go back to using the lower of Piloting or weapon skill and to assume that all fixed mounts in the same hull section fire on the same target regardless of what battery they're in. I still don't think the Spaceships rules were meant to stand up to intense scrutiny. They were written to cover a very broad range of possibilities in as generic a way as possible and in as short a format as possible. Some interpretation is called for and even expected. |
|
06-27-2019, 09:12 AM | #18 | |||||
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Some questions on Spaceships
Either they use them one at a time, making the presence of 4 major batteries fairly pointless and negating the explicitly-noted power issues of the design, or they operate on some kind of houserules contrary to the text of Spaceships. I'm pretty sure, as I said, that the second is what the author of that ship intended.
Quote:
Little variety is in large part because Spaceships, and Spaceships missiles in particular, draw a lot on reality and not very much on Star Wars. An 'ion missile' has no real referents. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
|||||
06-27-2019, 09:57 AM | #19 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ronkonkoma, NY
|
Re: Some questions on Spaceships
Quote:
And yet not even Spinal Batteries have rules related to Piloting. And if you dedicate enough systems in your ship to have multiple spinal batteries pointing in the same direction, you can and must still, by a strict interpretation of the rules, fire them independently. Again, that may, given the long space combat turns, mean that the ship is changing its facing enough to fire at multiple target one after the other, but then you give up the idea of all your fixed mount batteries firing at the same target simultaneously. If you want to stick to the rules and have multiple fixed mount weapons fire simultaneously, then you MUST put them in a single, less-powerful battery. The least change you can enact to make it work is to assume that, like Habitats, Hangars, Open Spaces, Armor, Fuel Tank, and Jump Gate systems, you can combine weapon systems into larger, "single" systems. This is especially true when talking about the Starhawk: it's a generic version of an X-Wing Fighter, and Spaceships page 31 explicitly tells us we can "combine several systems into one" to better fit a fictional spaceship into the rules. |
|
06-27-2019, 12:28 PM | #20 | |||
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Some questions on Spaceships
Quote:
Quote:
Even if the gun was aimed by turning the ship, frankly, Piloting wouldn't enter into it - it's a minuscule angular adjustment that's completely trivial to tell a computer to do (though not necessarily trivial for the computerized maneuver system to execute) and impossible to do manually. The part where Piloting factors into the use of fixed weapons is in placing the ship so that they are oriented to bear on the target. Quote:
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
|||
Tags |
spaceships |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|