12-06-2021, 05:32 PM | #121 |
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: CA
|
Re: Silly Cars
I'm not so sure. Assume a half load of HD ammo as that's the usual arena trick. Two revised HMGs with HD ammo will do 2d+6 vs 2d+2 for a VMG and take the same number of spaces. Think twin laser vs the laser. If you want to squeeze more damage per space out of a weapon then expect the weapon to be much heavier.
Designs with 4 HMGs front can still pack some decent armor (lots of examples in the vehicle builder). Of course trailers with 4 HMGs in a 4-space turret is a standard. Getting hit by 4 revised HMGs for 4d6+12 damage (26 points on average) will kill most vehicles in two sustained shots. No other weapon really compares. Example (not mine): Quadgunner -- Mid-sized, Extra-Heavy chassis, Heavy suspension, Large power plant, Heavy-Duty High-Torque Motors, Fire Extinguisher, 4 Puncture-Resistant tires, Driver w/SWC and BA and 10-pt Fireproof CA, 4 Linked Heavy Machine Guns Front each w/10 shots High-Density, Plastic Armor: F40, L30, R30, B30, T7, U8, 2 10-pt Wheelguards Back, 2 10-pt Wheelhubs Front, Acceleration 5 (x2 w/HDHTMs), Top Speed 92.5, HC 3, 5760 lbs., $19720 Last edited by juris; 12-06-2021 at 05:35 PM. |
12-07-2021, 02:47 AM | #122 | |
Join Date: Jun 2008
|
Re: Silly Cars
Quote:
10 shots is a significant limitation. You are just as able to take a VMG with only 10 shots (400lb all up) or a RR (350lb all up). If the HMG was 200lb, with 10 shots per gun they are 100lb heavier than the VMG overall. If you go HD the 10 shot VMG is 450lb, but the twin HMG is 600lb. Also consider that you are probably going to have to fire more shots as you only hit on a 7. The other issue is that if you make it too bad it starts to be overshadowed by the MG with HD ammo. If you swap out the 4 HMGs for a pair of half loaded HD VMGs the Quadgunner is 500lb lighter and over $4000 cheaper. That's 60 points of armour and a HRSWC upgrade. If any of that armour is metal, the VMG version becomes a much better car. The RR HEAT version gives you 700lb to play with. You can put 4+ points of metal on each side and pretty much blunt the HMGs. If the HMG does 2d-2 base then the Quadgunner is obviously overpowered. If it is dropped to 1d+2 then it becomes much less obvious whether it is even competitive. As with all things you can min-max, but that doesn't tell you much about balance. Last edited by swordtart; 12-08-2021 at 07:04 AM. Reason: Typo |
|
12-07-2021, 01:12 PM | #123 |
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: CA
|
Re: Silly Cars
10 shots is all you need for most arenas. Your armor won't last past 10 shots, especially if people are tagging you with 4 HMGs ;)
Swapping the HMGs for VMGs: Yes, now you have a good tire hunter, but you can't wipe someone out in two volleys. 60 points of additional armor is nice, but it'll go fast if you get hit with 4 HMGs lol Quadgunner underpowered with 2d-2 base damage? Under the current rules the Quadgunner does 8DD with a half load of HD ammo. That's insane. On average it's only 28 points, but its much more devastating against metal armor, and it's a lot swingier, so on a good round you'll do 35 points of damage or more. Nobody uses HMGs with regular ammo. 2d-2 is not good. 2DD is very good. |
12-07-2021, 01:53 PM | #124 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Silly Cars
HMG: 2 sp.; 400 lbs. full-load std. ammo; all other stats the same.
Same principle as the MML-vs.-RL: Lower cost, but less flexible.
__________________
"Dale *who*?" 79er The Jeremy Clarkson Debate Course: 1) I'm Right. 2) You're Wrong. 3) The End. |
12-08-2021, 01:12 AM | #125 |
Join Date: Jun 2008
|
Re: Silly Cars
No, Quadgunner OVERPOWERED (or more correctly the 4 HMGs) with 2d-2 base as stated.
My point was that if you drop the damage to 1d+2 base you end up with volleys of up to 4d+12 with HD ammo. That isn't massively different to 4d+4 with HD VMG, especially as the HMG will hit less often. Even if you are doing 8 more points a turn my 60 points of armour will buy me 7 more turns (compared to the damage the VMG would do - clearly lasting 7 turns is going to need some skilful manoeuvring). If it is 12 points of metal you will strip it on average after 18 turns but until then it is twice as effective against the HMGs as the VMGs as it takes damage off each shot in a volley, not each volley. If I had 12 points between me and the HD HMGs I could completely negate your first volley as each hit does a maximum of 9 points and each hit only has a 1 in 6 chance of stripping so by the time I am rolling the last hit in the volley I will definitely still have 9 points of metal left (and probably 10 or more). I can't say the same about the VMGs as they can do 14 points maximum and by the time I am resolving the second shot there is a 1 in 3 chance I would have lost a point of metal and 1/36 chance I would have lost 2 points. Average damage per volley for the HMGs is 14 + 12 or 26. Average for the VMG is 14 + 4 or 18. As you are rolling 4 dice for both, then you flatten the probability curve so that 14 is probably quite stable. Assuming we target the weakest point I will be through the 30 points of side armour of the Quadgunner in the second volley and doing 6 points on internals. If I had 3 points of metal on each of the major quadrants allowed from the weight saving it will block 12 points (3 from each shot) meaning I only lose 14-15 points on the first volley and say 15-16 points from the second volley just breaching. It would need your third volley to hit internals. On this alone it looks pretty close and I might have allowed the 250lb to stand, but remember I am effectively at +2 to hit compared to the HMG Quadgunner. I think this extra disadvantage is maybe worth 50lb per gun. Last edited by swordtart; 12-08-2021 at 07:08 AM. Reason: Lots of stuff |
12-08-2021, 03:37 AM | #126 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London, UK
|
Re: Silly Cars
Car Wars 2.5-4 Edition sorely needs a 300lb , repeat firing non-Rocket weapon desperately .
This is way we screamed 'foul' when US Edition of UACFH stated 350lbs in main text out of nowhere . So HMG , RR & Medium Laser all 350lbs ... and what weighs 300lbs ... ? To paraphrase the great Mister Phil Radley "Car Wars just doesn't work like that !" It's like pronunciation of Edinburgh , Leicester , Isle of Muff , Arkansas , Plouhkeepsie , Newfoundland , Herbs or Lieutenant : everyone thinks they are correct & unfortunately everyone's partly correct ...
__________________
Five Gauss Guns on a Camper !!! The Resident Brit . |
12-08-2021, 10:18 AM | #127 |
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: CA
|
Re: Silly Cars
Sorry misread what you were saying. We agree the current HMG is broken.
But if you make the HMG base 1d6+3 damage then you make the HMG even better than before. A half load of HD ammo (the standard as stated above) will do 1d6+4. 4 HMGs will now do an average of 30 points of damage, that's even more than the current rules! That why 1d6+2 base is the better adjustment. That's my main point. |
12-08-2021, 11:32 AM | #128 |
Join Date: Jun 2008
|
Re: Silly Cars
I originally suggested the 1d+3 as it aligned with the HAVR. I forgot in my haste to bring petty-fogging consistency that I also think that the HAVR is broken :)
Having worked through this with you, I agree that 1d+2 is the right entry point. I am still a little concerned with the weight of the gun, but to be honest I'd rather have a HMG that at least one other person agrees on and the less change the better. With a 1d+2 as a base the HD option is less worthwhile, but maybe a +2 with the benefit of a 1 space weapon is plenty. I'd still like to see a systematic approach applied so that all weapons were equally credible, but I think that ship sailed long ago. |
12-08-2021, 01:30 PM | #129 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Silly Cars
Somewhere, I have a list of weapons I ran through the formula in _ADQ 1/4_; I may need to reconstruct it.
__________________
"Dale *who*?" 79er The Jeremy Clarkson Debate Course: 1) I'm Right. 2) You're Wrong. 3) The End. |
12-10-2021, 07:19 AM | #130 |
Join Date: Jun 2008
|
Re: Silly Cars
1-4?
Do you mean the Greg Porter article on vehicle design strategy in 1-3? For some combinations of weapon average damage isn't quite enough. Sometimes maximum damage is the key (or minimum as a limitation). E.g. a pair of VSG have better average damage than single MG but together they can only do 0, 2 or 4 damage. They can never strip metal and so if they face just 2 points of metal they can fire until Christmas and never get anything through. The MG will get something through 4 times in 6 and on that 6th chance actually removes metal. Simple calculations make comparisons of different types of weapon very hard. If the weapon design were systematic it would be easier to trade capability. I.e. there would be a light, medium and heavy MG. There might be a Gatling version of each MG type that took up more weight (and maybe an extra space) but doubled the number of hits. The MG would be based on the handguns that fired the same ammunition (just as we base the classification of RL MGs on the 5.56, 7.62 and 0.5 calibres for which we have rifles). Those hand weapons would do damage to cars as well (since if a burst of a particular round can damage armour, a single round should as well). it might be 1 point, but then the burst version can be readily calculated. We would have an entirely different class of weapons for RLs, another for FTs etc. You would chose the special ability of the weapon type and then decided whether you wanted the light, ,medium or heavy version. This isn't CW though :) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|