Just looking for some input here mainly because I've loaned out some of my reference library, in T20 sandcaters improve the user's AC making him harder to hit right? But if my memory serves in earlier editions didn't sandcasters reduce damege? Lately I've thinking of houseruling them to add to the user's AR instead since I can't see how a cloud of ablative sand would obscure a ship enough to make it a harder target to hit.
Sandcasters
- Thread starter TheBrain
- Start date
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
The rulebook is a bit vague on this one. It does say that sandcasters increase the defence total by its rating, so does that mean it increases Armour Rating as well as Armour Class?
IMHO it does both.
IMHO it does both.
I like your interpretation, Sigg.
I like to encourage players to take defensive as well as offensive weaponry, and make them make tough choices. If casters are more useful, it will be a tougher decision to upgrade with a shiny new beam laser or a caster that just might save their bacon...
I like to encourage players to take defensive as well as offensive weaponry, and make them make tough choices. If casters are more useful, it will be a tougher decision to upgrade with a shiny new beam laser or a caster that just might save their bacon...
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
I would tend to agree.Originally posted by MrMorden:
I like your interpretation, Sigg.
I like to encourage players to take defensive as well as offensive weaponry, and make them make tough choices. If casters are more useful, it will be a tougher decision to upgrade with a shiny new beam laser or a caster that just might save their bacon...
So, we just switch to adding to the AR? Is that it?
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
But the whole point defense against lightspeed weapons bothers me. SO is it just a cloud around the ship for all laser attacks, until you maneuver? Or is it per individual laser?
Remember Sensors are Lightspeed so the only way you know someone is firing a laser at you is the laser arrives.
Remember Sensors are Lightspeed so the only way you know someone is firing a laser at you is the laser arrives.
It bothered me as well.
So I took the sandcasters and made them fire in a seperate phase (defensive ECM also gets done here), and made them a per ship weapon. ie. You'd select an opposing ship to block with the sandcaster before any weapons fire. Get's rid of the "OMG he's firing a laser, quick warm up the sandcasters before it gets here" aspect, becomes more a deliberate building of walls before weapon fire has occured.
So I took the sandcasters and made them fire in a seperate phase (defensive ECM also gets done here), and made them a per ship weapon. ie. You'd select an opposing ship to block with the sandcaster before any weapons fire. Get's rid of the "OMG he's firing a laser, quick warm up the sandcasters before it gets here" aspect, becomes more a deliberate building of walls before weapon fire has occured.
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
Well, far worse than any aspect of matching an STL defense against an FTL weapon you can't see in advance is the fact that Sand is deployed while the ship is under acceleration, and is likely to vanish astern in less than a few hearbeats (depending on ship-size and total acceleration).
The main discussion I always heard about this was that casters used gravitics/magnetics (or whatever) to hold the sand in place in a cloud, and the cloud was manuevered between the defender and a potential attacker. This, however, implies that the casters draw EP, which they don't.
Anyone have any ideas?
The main discussion I always heard about this was that casters used gravitics/magnetics (or whatever) to hold the sand in place in a cloud, and the cloud was manuevered between the defender and a potential attacker. This, however, implies that the casters draw EP, which they don't.
Anyone have any ideas?
I suppose that everyone has already realized that at distances of 1LS+ the relative bearing of the ships will change slowly no matter how fast they are accelerating? the sand-launching ship would have an easy time of keeping its sand between it and the opposing vessel presuming it isn't accelerating towards that vessel. and while one will never detect a lase in time to oppose it, one may presumably detect the charge buildup necessary to power it. or is that too star-trekish? "My God Jim, they're charging phasers!"
If one works from the TNE model, one detects the lock on of the Beam Pointer, which is a pre-fire pulse, and tracks sand to prevent fire from the beam pointer.
One then puts sand on a course that is stable until the sander moves away from it...
I prefer a more CT Bk2 model; put out a cloud; the cloud has a vector. If fire goes through that cloud, apply the factor of the cloud.
The sand acts just like armor vs lasers. I don't remember the effect vs missiles.
And detecting the power build up is too trekish; the beam-pointer detection at least gives you 0.2-0.4 seconds for an automated pinpoint scatter; the build up is likely to be drowned in engine noise.
One then puts sand on a course that is stable until the sander moves away from it...
I prefer a more CT Bk2 model; put out a cloud; the cloud has a vector. If fire goes through that cloud, apply the factor of the cloud.
The sand acts just like armor vs lasers. I don't remember the effect vs missiles.
And detecting the power build up is too trekish; the beam-pointer detection at least gives you 0.2-0.4 seconds for an automated pinpoint scatter; the build up is likely to be drowned in engine noise.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
I just continue to use the ship combat sequence given in LBB2/Mayday.
Sandcaster launching is done at the end of the turn (well, second last ). along with missiles.
Oddly, they have an affect on missiles in Mayday, but not in LBB2, then SS3 has sand affect missiles again.
Sandcaster launching is done at the end of the turn (well, second last
). along with missiles.Oddly, they have an affect on missiles in Mayday, but not in LBB2, then SS3 has sand affect missiles again.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
In HG Sand may prevent a missile or Laser from scoring a true hit (penetrating the defenses) but if they do actually hit then the damage is not reduced. If you think about it, the sand causes the missile to lose lock or it doesn't. The sand causes the laser to scatter and loose coherency or it doesn't. If Sand is effective you don't get hit if it isn't effective you get hit for the full damage. It isn't like armor, which gets hit and reduces damage.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
For T20 I would still do both (treat it as AR effectively) due to the AC bonus being worth squat
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Actually on the small ship level the AC bonus can be quite useful. It is when you get to the bigger ships that things fall apart.Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
For T20 I would still do both (treat it as AR effectively) due to the AC bonus being worth squat
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
I suppose that everyone has already realized that at distances of 1LS+ the relative bearing of the ships will change slowly no matter how fast they are accelerating? the sand-launching ship would have an easy time of keeping its sand between it and the opposing vessel presuming it isn't accelerating towards that vessel.</font>[/QUOTE]I can only see a casting ship's ability to keep sand "interposed" in two situations, regardless of the distance
1) During a direct stern-chase. And only the chasee will be able to do this; the chaser will not have this option available (if the chaser casts, the sand will drop behind right away). If the angle of attack is even a little off, all sand cast will immediately drop out of a useful position.
2) The casting vessel is under no acceleration other than the absolute minimum necessary to circle it's sand-cloud. (The moment it accelerates meaningfully, it leaves its sand-cloud behind.) In most tactical space combat games I have played, "speed is life" is a maxim for success, and stopping dead is a good way to get your vessel destroyed. But, aside from such comparisons to artificial combat mechanics, a stationary opponent can be left behind by a vessel that maintains its velocity. If both ships (or fleets) are all 6G, then that side that maintains its speed, I feel, retains a tremendous advantage.
In all other situations I can think of, the casted sand is left behind.
If there are other scenarios in which a casting and accelerating ship can keep itself between a non-accelerating sand-cloud and an accerlating vessel, please describe it.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Just how big are sand cannisters supposed to be anyway?
If a sand cloud is 25mm long (2500km) in a space combat turn (from CT) then the cloud can't be very dense can it?
I think I prefer the screens idea from T2300/Star Cruiser better. Wasn't this how they worked in TNE as well? Must go and check.
If a sand cloud is 25mm long (2500km) in a space combat turn (from CT) then the cloud can't be very dense can it?
I think I prefer the screens idea from T2300/Star Cruiser better. Wasn't this how they worked in TNE as well? Must go and check.
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
I'd like someone to tell me what it is that agility translates to in the real world? What's the difference between having 6G thruster plates with 0 Agility, and 6G thruster plates with 6 Agility? (Other than a big to-hit mod in HG2.) I have trouble envisioning a situation where 0 EP generating 6G thrust gets no "agility", but permanently allocating a big block of EP gets "agility", and the 6G thrust remains the same. Sorry, it never made any sense to me.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Interesting question.
In CT LBB2 there was no such thing as agility, evasion programs provided a defensive DM.
In Mayday using an evasion program lowers the usable acceleration rating of the ship by 1.
In TNE g can be spent either for maneuvering or for evasion, or a combination of both, e.g. a ship with a 5g maneuver drive may use 3g for a vector change and 2g on evasion.
In CT LBB2 there was no such thing as agility, evasion programs provided a defensive DM.
In Mayday using an evasion program lowers the usable acceleration rating of the ship by 1.
In TNE g can be spent either for maneuvering or for evasion, or a combination of both, e.g. a ship with a 5g maneuver drive may use 3g for a vector change and 2g on evasion.
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
Wow!
When you put it in those terms, sand doesn't seem like much at all.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
A 6g maneuver drive needs a power plant 6 to operate. That gives it an effective agility of 6 as well for High Guard purposes.
If EPs are used to power the weapons, reducing the power available to the maneuver drive to the equivalent of a power plant 5, then the maneuver drive can only operate as a maneuver 5, with an agility of 5.
Another way to think of agility is effective maneuver drive rating.
In CT LBB2 and first edition High Guard there was no such thing as EPs or agility. Once you move over to the second edition High Guard ship paradigm then weapons require EPs so power plants must be built larger than the maneuver drive rating or the maneuver drive rating (agility) suffers when weapons are used.
HTH.
