Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony
If it takes three hits to destroy a SM+6 ship with a SM+6 major battery, it should also take three hits to destroy a SM+10 ship with a SM+10 major battery. It's possible 'three' is wrong in both cases, but you shouldn't wind up with a case where it takes 3 SM+6 hits to kill the SM+6 ship and 15 SM+10 hits to kill the SM+10 ship, which is what happens if you use the Path of Cunning rule.
|
I'd say that's a good design goal*, but it's not the only legitimate one. One where vehicles become proportionally more vulnerable the larger they are may encourage smaller vehicles (like fighters) and/or result in large vehicles using proportionally smaller (but more numerous) weapons than the smaller vehicles (perhaps your SM+6 fighters typically have Spinal Mounts, while your SM+10 capital ships typically favor Medium Batteries), and weapons for use against smaller vehicles are still useful against larger ones. In the opposite case - as would occur with the
Path of Cunning rules - you may see larger vehicles being more favored, and they may well have dedicated anti-fighter weapons that are largely insufficient to damage other capital ships (and the fighters have difficulty damaging the capital ships as well, potentially encouraging them to serve as boarding vessels). So it may well depend on what works best for you setting.
*Looking at things purely from a gamist perspective; I'm not qualified to say which - if any - scheme would be
realistic.