Pulse vs Beam in LBB 2 combat
- Thread starter skyth
- Start date
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
It (the full rule) didn't make it into all editions of CT.
Pulse Lasers should be -1 to hit and roll twice for damage if you hit.
If I recall correctly. I'm not sure it's a good rule, and all I can find on a quick look is the -1 to hit (no extra damage) in Starter Traveller. While that's contrary to the text about being better able to deal damage, personally I think it fits the half price and pulsed laser vs beam laser idea better...
EDIT: Clarifying: ...if pulse lasers are -1 to hit and only a single damage roll. Though sabredog's ideas below for a single damage roll but double the effect and poorer at anti missile are interesting.
Pulse Lasers should be -1 to hit and roll twice for damage if you hit.
If I recall correctly. I'm not sure it's a good rule, and all I can find on a quick look is the -1 to hit (no extra damage) in Starter Traveller. While that's contrary to the text about being better able to deal damage, personally I think it fits the half price and pulsed laser vs beam laser idea better...
EDIT: Clarifying: ...if pulse lasers are -1 to hit and only a single damage roll. Though sabredog's ideas below for a single damage roll but double the effect and poorer at anti missile are interesting.
Last edited:
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Starter Traveller, the last version of CT ever produced, is the only one where the pulse lasers get 2 damage rolls rule is spelled out.
1st ed CT has the -1 to hit for pulse lasers but neglects the double damage, although the text suggests they do more damage.
1st ed CT has the -1 to hit for pulse lasers but neglects the double damage, although the text suggests they do more damage.
True enough...the solution I used starting with the first ed. CT has been to have pule lasers do 2 points of damage per hit. I figured they weren't like some kind of pom-pom laser like in Star Wars, but more like a rapid cycling gatling laser that hits a lot of times in a small spot causing more damage that way.
And lo, the description in Striker of pulse lasers made me seem a genius to my peers years later. Anyway, two hits on one system for a cost of -1 to hit (not to mention a cheaper weapon to boot) always seemed too good a deal so pulse lasers need an 11+ to intercept missiles, unlike beam lasers. IMTU.
The trade-off has variable value depending in exactly where your base To Hit number falls on the 2d6 Gaussian probability bell curve; if, all DMs accounted for on both sides, you are looking at 6+/7+ or less To Hit for beam/pulse respectively, the less-accurate, more-damaging, cheaper pulse laser (a/k/a/ blaster) has the edge in dealing damage efficiently, but if you are up against a really tough foe and your base To Hit after all DMs is up around 11+/12+, you are going to wish you had beams (a/k/a/ heat rays).
I stick with the as-written -1 for pulses in Anti-Missile fire; making them half as effective against incoming missiles for half the price is good enough for MTU -- I don't want to be perceived as actively discouraging their use by PC types. Especially since the second damage point (or roll, if you interpret it that way) is essentially wasted when shooting at a missile.
And of course, the pulse laser is standard equipment on a Type J precisely because doing more damage, it is more efficient at cutting into large, stationary objects at point-blank range; a selling point for some...
I'm confused....are you saying that you don't apply the -1DM to hit unless it's against missiles?
Because I agree with your first statement and the choices players face with pulse vs. beams, but I don't see how having pulse lasers fire at -1 DM against ships and missiles equally would be discouraging thier use. I've yet to meet a player who didn't want the most damaging weapon possible regardless of how all the numbers might come out on average.
BTW: maybe to reinforce your point, too, IMTU military ships carry only beam lasers in thier turrets precisely because military doctrine treats them as more of a point defense/ anti-small craft defense weapon than as an offensive weapon like missiles and PAWs. However, small craft carry pulse lasers because to them the second point of damage makes fighters a more viable weapon system (in LBB2 situations anyway). And we all know that fighter jocks are dead-eyes, unlike turret gunners, who couldn't hit the floor if they fell out of bed.
No, I use it for everything; it is just that it is effectively a bigger penalty in Anti-Missile fire because the base To Hit is already higher to begin with.
Indeed. IMTU, pulse lasers are very popular, and not at all marginalized. They are not the best choice for Anti-Missile fire, however.
I generally concur, with two exceptions.
IM(B2)TU, by default Fighters carry triple missile racks, because they require no Gunnery skill beyond Level-0, and the average 10.5 hits of damage a trio of missiles will inflict is very compelling. I also favor two-man configs, because there is room for a Loader and a half-dton of magazine in there, easily.
Secondly, a hawkeye turret Gunner is worth his/her displacement in iridium; you can load in some version of the Select software and make 'called shots' until the enemy gets the message...
Good point about a loader for the fighters, I hadn't thought of using the backseater that way....I always had him using a beam laser as a tail-gunner while the pilot fired off the missile racks. But that's a good idea: heck, Me-110 backseaters did that for the nose cannons back in WW2 so why not in the Far Future?
How many missiles does that give you, and how big are those fighters?
How many missiles does that give you, and how big are those fighters?
I use the default 10-dton model Fighter, and figure half a dton of magazine is good for 10 missiles (although 50 to 100 would not be unrealistic, but Fighters just do not last that long under B2 combat), for a loadout of 19 missiles total.
