Weapon Penetration

[robject]

I'm ranking weapon penetration values. I guess that means how good a weapon is at defeating armor, as a game play factor (that means I'm not thinking about meson guns, which blithely bypass armor).

I'm comparing five weapons: plasma guns, fusion guns, beam lasers, pulse lasers, and particle accelerators. For ease of comparison, I'm lumping plasma and fusion together, and also lumping the lasers together, yielding a poll with only 6 entries.

There is likely to be overlap, so please post additional suggestions. Thanks!

 

[atpollard]

If Particle Accelerators shoot Charged Particles (like electrons) then it might be a 'lightning gun'. The basic armor is 'hard steel' followed by 'crystal iron' followed by the 'superdense' armors (which could also be iron based).

I was just imagining the effectiveness of a steel breastplate at stopping a lightning bolt. :toast:?

 

[robject]

Offhand, based on to-hit values from High Guard, it looks as though beams (laser and plasma) have roughly the same pen, and they have slightly better pen than PAs. Anyone have a different suggestion?

 

[atpollard]

I want to achieve a USP 4 at TL 14, my weapon choices are:

• 1 x Fusion Gun requiring 1 dTon and 2 EP
• 3 x Beam Lasers requiring 1 dTons and 3 EP
• 4 x Plasma Guns requiring 4 dTons and 4 EP
• 6 x Pulse Lasers requiring 2 dTons and 6 EP
• 6 x PA requiring 30 dTons and 30 EP

 

[infojunky]

Offhand, based on to-hit values from High Guard, it looks as though beams (laser and plasma) have roughly the same pen, and they have slightly better pen than PAs. Anyone have a different suggestion?

Right off the bat, the to-hit numbers aren't a indicator of penetration, and neither is the USP value for that matter. We need the rest of the question to give a more concise answer.

 

[boomslang]

Right off the bat, the to-hit numbers aren't a indicator of penetration, and neither is the USP value for that matter. We need the rest of the question to give a more concise answer.

Actually, the tradition is that pulse lasers (a/k/a/ "blasters") penetrate better than beam lasers (a/k/a/ "heat rays") but are more difficult to hit with.

Under very early editions of LBB2, pulse lasers took an additional -1 To Hit DM (making them roughly half as likely to hit any given target as a beam laser), but when they did manage to hit, they got not one, but two damage rolls. This tidbit got omitted from later editions of the rules (although an oblique reference to pulse lasers inflicting more damage and beam lasers being more accurate survives in the text), but a vestige of it appears in HG2, where pulse laser factors do not increase as fast as beam laser factors do when grouping into batteries, but pulse lasers are allowed a wicked (additional) -2 DM when rolling Surface damage effects under that system...

Thus, pulse lasers do in fact penetrate better than beam lasers, but they are harder to hit with, so it evens out when the dust settles.

See also How to Build a Laser Death Ray for more fun facts & info on the engineering tip, yo...

 

[aramis]

Actually, the final printed version of CT also had the -1 to hit and double damage: Starter Traveller.

Neither my Deluxe Traveller nor my Traveller Book showed the double damage.

 

[whartung]

Mind, in TNE, all lasers do is penetrate. They're the ultimate penetrators in that system.

 

[mike wightman]

First edition CT doesn't give pulse lasers 2 damage rolls, only the -1 to hit. The extra damage only saw print in Starter Traveller.

 

[boomslang]

First edition CT doesn't give pulse lasers 2 damage rolls, only the -1 to hit. The extra damage only saw print in Starter Traveller.

Bizarrely, I think the extra damage is in the first printing of the first edition, but not later printings of the first edition... I'm talking "all the way back to the days when Jump drives did not require powerplants" early printings...

 

[aramis]

Keep in mind, prior to 1981, every printing seems to have been different...

 

[sabredog]

Bizarrely, I think the extra damage is in the first printing of the first edition, but not later printings of the first edition... I'm talking "all the way back to the days when Jump drives did not require powerplants" early printings...

What it says here in the first 1977 edition of Book 2 (mine is literally falling apart) is that pulse lasers hit at minus one. They are also cheaper. There is no mention of extra damage. They are described as a less expensive alternative to the more powerful beam lasers. I've always wondered why they are still cheaper than beams but do more damage nowadays.

In the '81 reprint it says that they hit at -1, and do extra damage, but I see no mention of how much extra damage. I'm not sure if it says anything different in The Traveller Book. Maybe that's were the "hit twice" rule comes from?

 

[boomslang]

I'm not sure if it says anything different in The Traveller Book. Maybe that's were the "hit twice" rule comes from?

No, by the time of TTB, it's been omitted/edited/dropped out.

Does your old LBB2 require powerplants only to run the m-drive, and not the j-drive? That's how far back you have to look...

 

[mike wightman]

Yes I have the version where power plants aren't needed for jump drives - there are quite a few other differences between the original version of CT copyright 1977 (I have two copies) and the revised version copyright 1981 (I have three copies) - and nowhere does it mention extra damage, only the -1 to hit.

Starter edition, the final incarnation of CT, is the only ruleset where the extra damage is enumerated rather than being hinted at.

 

[The Hinterworlds Rambler]

I work in manufacturing, and see Lasers and Plasma Cutters penetrating materials for a large part of my day. I saw a laser cutter that made short work of 2" thick bulletproof plexiglass (Perspex) in a few minutes.

The Plasma cutter, can rip thru an inch of steel or stainless steel like its paper. The Fabricators are able to make intricate hand cuts and everything. When we need precision parts, we either get them cut by a waterjet machine, or a precision plasma cutter.

I always pictured a PA as being a nasty weapon. Affecting targets on a molecular and atomic level. Not exactly disintegration, but close enough to wish for it. The old JTAS article about C-PAWS was a good one back in the day.

 

[robject]

No, by the time of TTB, it's been omitted/edited/dropped out.

Only partially edited out, I think?