| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 2:48 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Here is where I7m getting it from:
| Madwand wrote: | | Repeating blasters: These use similar rules to fire-linked weapons. Due to the rapid fire of these weapons, they are effectively already fire-linked. Most such weapons are assumed to fire 4 shots for every 1 that a normal weapon would fire. Thus, the user may use up to 2D damage dice for attack instead. For example, an E-Web may have +2D to attack/6D damage if the user "sprays and prays", +1D/7D, or the normal "focused-fire" effect of +0D/8D. Certain weapons may have faster rates of fire at GM option. Some starship weapons are also "repeating" in this same manner. |
| Madwand wrote: | | When fire-linking weapons, every doubling of the number of linked weapons adds +1D damage or +1D fire control. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Madwand
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 06 May 2009
Posts: 57
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I understand how the confusion might have arisen, which is why I provided a specific example to show what I meant. You'll note that the E-web in the example only does at most 8D damage, not 10D. Effectively, the E-Web becomes a weapon that does 6D damage, with a 2D bonus that may be split between fire control and damage. You subtract the bonus from the RAW damage to determine the base damage of a single shot. This may have been unclear and I apologize for that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Madwand wrote: | | Effectively, the E-Web becomes a weapon that does 6D damage, with a 2D bonus that may be split between fire control and damage. |
This is how I treat the E-web (I have run my 'Autofire Dice' rule for about 10 years and they work like a charm).
The light repeaters, basically being scaled up rifles, do 5D damage with a 1D Autofire die (which can be used either for damage or to hit). Most 'automatic' blasters have 1D in Autofire dice, which represent the 'standard' autofire setting which is burst fire.
Additionally, I dont allow users to put all the Autofire dice towards damage at any ranges beyond close. At medium only half (round down) may be put into damage, at long 1/3 (meaning that only really fast firing like the Z-6 really do any extra damage). The rest is put into to-hit. This is to represent the difficulty in keeping automatic fire focused. This rule is for hand held weapons.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 3:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Madwand wrote: | | I understand how the confusion might have arisen, which is why I provided a specific example to show what I meant. You'll note that the E-web in the example only does at most 8D damage, not 10D. Effectively, the E-Web becomes a weapon that does 6D damage, with a 2D bonus that may be split between fire control and damage. You subtract the bonus from the RAW damage to determine the base damage of a single shot. This may have been unclear and I apologize for that. |
I understand, and agree with the idea od downgrading repating weapons damage ratings to account for the autfire bonus. It maes sense too. Using thier rreal world analouges, a Medium machine gun is typically firing rifle rounds.
But how then do you handle something like the Z-6 with it's very hight rate of fire? Especially since it has not be (offically) written up. Do you limit how much of it's autfoire bonus could go to damage, or just ingore the high rate of fire?
I don't mind a really high damage rating except in how it realtes to armored vehicles.
I7ve been considering swiping the armor rules from EABA for both this purpose and to help with scaling. In that RPG armor is subtracted from the damage dice before the dice are rolled. For example something with 6D armor would be impervious to weapons that did 5D damage or less (barring called shots). I think the rule might be worth considering for Star Wars. It would probabably eliminate some of the need for scaling, too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Madwand
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 06 May 2009
Posts: 57
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: |
But how then do you handle something like the Z-6 with it's very hight rate of fire? Especially since it has not be (offically) written up. Do you limit how much of it's autfoire bonus could go to damage, or just ingore the high rate of fire?
|
I've already given four possible answers to this question on the first page. To be frank, I consider the Z-6 to be a non-issue. It doesn't matter what answer you use, as long as it's vaguely plausible, balanced, and fun. From what I've seen of the weapon in action, it doesn't have anywhere close to a 166 rps fire rate anyway. Unless you fire-link a whole bunch of Z-6's together, they aren't going to be any better at armor penetration than any other similar weapon.
The problem of armor penetration or "hardness", i.e. the ability to just bounce certain attacks, isn't modeled well in Star Wars d6, and is an (arguably) major fault of the system. It leads to the bulletproof wookie syndrome, this particular problem with the Z-6, and many other issues. Frankly I don't think there is a great solution to this problem other than using a different system. Most systems DO have at least two ways of mitigating damage (damage reduction/hardness and hit points for an obvious example), SW d6 has only one, plus an injury mechanic that I feel doesn't quite measure up to the game mechanical advantages of "hit points". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 4:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Are there any official rules for the Z-6?
I havent found any, and so far the 166 shots/second is just fluff. We dont know how fast an E-web fires, so theres no way of making a fair comparison.
The basic problem is, as pointed out, that even weak blasters become tank killers with a very large RoF.
I have tried to come up with some quick and easy system for armour reducing damage instead of just adding resistance. So far no luck. The first thing youd have to do is to separate Hull and Armor on vehicles and ships. This is not an easy task, especially as most of the resistance dice will come from scale bonues. Are these armor or hull, or divided between both?
BTW, Anhanu came up with the following in another thread..
Z-6 Rotary Blaster Canon
Model: Merr-Sonn Munitons Heavy Rotary Blaster
Type: Heavy repeating blaster
Scale: Character
Skill: Blaster: Rotary blaster
Ammo: 500 (Cost 150); 5000 with separate power generator (requires a crewman)
Cost: 6,000
Availability: 4, X
Range: 3-50/150/400
Damage: 7D+1
Notes: The z-6 is truly a Heavy Blaster; the unweildly size and weight of this weapon require a minimum Strength of 3D to wield properly and cannot be lifted by someone with <2D Strength. Characters with low strength attempting to use the Z-6 do so at higher difficulty, all range increments are treated as one higher, unless the weapon is tripod mounted.
Due to the weapon's design, it is impossible to fire a single round. 5 ammo are consumed in a single shot as the weapon rapidly fires, resulting in the weapon's high damage rating.
This weapon is equipped with a Burst Mode, firing up to 166 rnd/sec. A burst may be targeted on a single target, dealing 8D damage, or may be fired in an arc, dealing regular damage against those within the firing arc. A separate skill roll (without additional MAPs) is required for each target within the burst arc. A full clip allows for three bursts. The burst mode generates significant recoil; a Moderate Strength roll is required after each burst to maintain control of the gun and fire the next round.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Madwand"] | atgxtg wrote: |
I've already given four possible answers to this question on the first page. To be frank, I consider the Z-6 to be a non-issue. It doesn't matter what answer you use, as long as it's vaguely plausible, balanced, and fun. From what I've seen of the weapon in action, it doesn't have anywhere close to a 166 rps fire rate anyway. Unless you fire-link a whole bunch of Z-6's together, they aren't going to be any better at armor penetration than any other similar weapon. |
I think it is am example of the key issue. We don't have to worry about rate of fire rules for prexisting ships and weapons, we already have workable stats for things like E-Webs and X-Wings. Where a rules would be helpful is when we deal with something new or different. And that is where a "consistient" rule needs to consistient. Oterwise, we are right back where we started.
| Madwand wrote: |
The problem of armor penetration or "hardness", i.e. the ability to just bounce certain attacks, isn't modeled well in Star Wars d6, and is an (arguably) major fault of the system. It leads to the bulletproof wookie syndrome, this particular problem with the Z-6, and many other issues. Frankly I don't think there is a great solution to this problem other than using a different system. Most systems DO have at least two ways of mitigating damage (damage reduction/hardness and hit points for an obvious example), SW d6 has only one, plus an injury mechanic that I feel doesn't quite measure up to the game mechanical advantages of "hit points". |
Yes, that is precisely the problem. It7s not your fault, the problem existed in D6 to begin with, but unfortunately, the fault will be more of an issue if using your rule varaint. It isn't much of an issue for individual weapons (repeating blasters excepted), but unforntualy it becomes a issue when we use any sort of combined fire option. Indeed, it is one of the main motivations for combining fire in the game--taking down something that is too tough for a signle character to damage.
I don't think we need to swtich system to aaddress the problem and find a workable soltution. Seperating Amror dice comes to mind, as would a rule of thumb, such as attacks that do less than a certain threshold, (say half a vechiles Hull Code, character scale) can't damage the vehicle. Or even some sort of cap on how high damage can go-either fixed number of dice or say 50%.
But I think that without adressing the problem is some manner the new combined fire variant is going to end up causing as many problems as it solves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Madwand
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 06 May 2009
Posts: 57
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 4:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | I think it is am example of the key issue. We don't have to worry about rate of fire rules for prexisting ships and weapons, we already have workable stats for things like E-Webs and X-Wings. Where a rules would be helpful is when we deal with something new or different. And that is where a "consistient" rule needs to consistient. Oterwise, we are right back where we started.
|
It's not fair to ask me for a set of rules able to handle every ridiculous weapon writeup in the game. What if the (uninformed) author had said the Z-6 fired a billion shots per second? Are we supposed to believe that insanity? No. You want a reasonable solution, use the stats for a medium repeater, but give it a higher rate of fire (4D base damage, +3D ROF) for up to 15 shots/burst. That is perfectly reasonable given the rules as they exist and what we've actually seen of the weapon in action. Chalk up the ridiculous ROF as stated to be wrong, or use any of the other perfectly plausible explanations I've already provided, and don't force me to explain every poorly-informed writeup any random author might come up with for his favorite weapon.
| atgxtg wrote: | Yes, that is precisely the problem. It7s not your fault, the problem existed in D6 to begin with, but unfortunately, the fault will be more of an issue if using your rule varaint. It isn't much of an issue for individual weapons (repeating blasters excepted), but unforntualy it becomes a issue when we use any sort of combined fire option. Indeed, it is one of the main motivations for combining fire in the game--taking down something that is too tough for a signle character to damage.
I don't think we need to swtich system to aaddress the problem and find a workable soltution. Seperating Amror dice comes to mind, as would a rule of thumb, such as attacks that do less than a certain threshold, (say half a vechiles Hull Code, character scale) can't damage the vehicle. Or even some sort of cap on how high damage can go-either fixed number of dice or say 50%.
But I think that without adressing the problem is some manner the new combined fire variant is going to end up causing as many problems as it solves. |
You set your standards too high. While it is not unreasonable to try to come up with a separate "hardness" rule for SW d6, the bar doesn't need to be so high for every possible house rule. I've already pointed out that the current rules just don't work and are terribly inconsistent. I am very confident that my suggested house rule is a great improvement on them.
I don't believe that my house rule causes any more of a problem than it solves. It actually reduces damage for large numbers of weapons because it uses a logarithmic scale rather than a linear one (as is used by most versions of the current rules). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Madwand wrote: | | It's not fair to ask me for a set of rules able to handle every ridiculous weapon writeup in the game. What if the (uninformed) author had said the Z-6 fired a billion shots per second? Are we supposed to believe that insanity? No. |
The Z-6 is based on the real world minigun, which is not usable while being carried. However, several other games ignore this fact and has man portable miniguns (Shadowrun for ex.). What these games have in common is that they also have reduced the firepower of the weapon. As it is not, the Z-6 would make every other heavy weapon obsolete if it fired 166shots/second with little recoil. The limiting factor would be ammo capacity given that a light repeater originally only has 25 'bursts' of ammo for one power pack. As normal rifles has 100 rounds of ammo, one could assume each burst fired is in reality 4 blasts(this also neatly compares to the 100 ammo of laser rifles). Lets assume we have a similar fire rate to modern firearms (as the Z-6 does so) meaning this is about a 1/2 burst (actually prob. less but this keeps things nice and even). If a 4 blast burst causes 6D damage, even calculating a 50% loss of accuracy due to recoil over the light repeater into consideration the 40 blast burst should hose down everything within range.  Also, even if assuming that the Z-6 ammo capacity equals 10 blaster packs thats enough for firing the weapon about 12 times.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Madwand
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 06 May 2009
Posts: 57
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now... emulating a minigun is certainly something these rules could do. A single round from such a weapon is probably equivalent to a single shot from a battle rifle (5D). The most common model of minigun is about 4000 rpm or 66 rps. As a "burst" can be shorter than a second, so a +5D autofire bonus would be appropriate (for between 32-63 shots/burst). This gives us a maximum of 10D character-scale damage. Miniguns are vehicle-mounted, so I'd actually make this 8D speeder-scale. Perhaps not coincidentally, you can use 2D autofire bonus to offset the scale penalty and make the weapon exactly equivalent to an E-web.
These rules seem to work pretty well when you apply them to a real weapon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Madwand wrote: | Now... emulating a minigun is certainly something these rules could do. A single round from such a weapon is probably equivalent to a single shot from a battle rifle (5D). The most common model of minigun is about 4000 rpm or 66 rps. As a "burst" can be shorter than a second, so a +5D autofire bonus would be appropriate (for between 32-63 shots/burst). This gives us a maximum of 10D character-scale damage. Miniguns are vehicle-mounted, so I'd actually make this 8D speeder-scale. Perhaps not coincidentally, you can use 2D autofire bonus to offset the scale penalty and make the weapon exactly equivalent to an E-web.
These rules seem to work pretty well when you apply them to a real weapon. |
Ah, sorry. The minigun was the wrong weapon. It should be the Microgun or 'six pack'. Not that it changes your above calculations.
Regarding the stupidity of this weapon "the average recoil force of the XM214 was about 45 kg / 99 lbs, with peak recoil being closer to 100 kg / 220 lbs, all at 4,000 rounds per minute."
Given that this is the recoil for 5.56 mm ammo on a 15 kg weapon Id say its comparable to the Z-6 (Remember that the Z-6 fires 10000 rnd/min so wed better increase the recoil significantly).
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Madwand
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 06 May 2009
Posts: 57
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The microgun isn't really man-portable either. I'd use the same calculations I used above for the minigun, with a smaller base damage for the smaller caliber. It's not an especially practical weapon, because you have to use a vehicle anyway, and if you are gonna do that, why not use the higher caliber weapon?
For a Z-6, I maintain that a medium repeater is the most practical representation of that weapon, with a ROF of +3D.
As to recoil... it's impossible to know how much recoil a blaster would have compared to a kinetic weapon. If they just fire a laser, then there would be no recoil at all. There's some kind of gas involved though, so I suppose there is a little recoil. Anyway there doesn't seem to be any consideration given to recoil in the rules no matter the weapon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 3:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Madwand wrote: | | The microgun isn't really man-portable either. |
No, but that was the though when developing the weapon. Not actually used without tripod, but 'portable' in the sense that it could be moved dismantled by a couple of soldiers. It was meant to displace the Browning M2HB heavy machinegun in that sense. Btw, I was wrong about the weight, I didnt include ammo, it weighs in at around 35 kg with ammo.
5,56mm is the most common assault rifle ammo today, so I dont think its unfair to compare it to a 5D blaster shot. Perhaps its not 'man-usable' but the minigun is even less so. The 'minigun' weapon used in Predator is for example a 'Microgun' or six pack. As we are trying to compare to a Z-6 I think that the Microgun is the correct weapon to use.
I would use the light repeating blaster and add one Autofire die, as its basically the SW version of a LMG. Also, I would make the range something like 3-25/75/150 due to the fact that its very inaccurate.
When it comes to recoil I simply used the fact that blasters produce some recoil if not much. Note that blaster dont shoot 'plain' laser beams. A 5.56mm weapon that weights in at around 15kg will have very little recoil, almost nothing. That it has an insane RoF does not differ it from the Z-6 so I think its comparable.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Regarding multiple 'weak' blaster shots against armoured targets I think its hard to find a way of representing this that keeps the system fun and easy of use. Also, the only problem with the current system is when firing large amounts of light blaster fire at armoured targets. When firing single heavy blasts, the combination of armor and hull presents no problem.
As it is now and RAW eweb is as effective at shooting out tanks as a man portable Laser cannon.. How should they differ?
Limiting the autofire bonus to damage when firing at armoured targes is what is needed. Going through every vehicle and ship seems like a enourmous job. Perhaps one could establish some default values and apply to most vehicles/ships.
-Combat Speeder, RAW Hull: 3D(Speeder). = Armor 1D, Hull 2D.
-20m Repulsor Tank, RAW Hull: 5D (Speeder). = Armor 2D, Hull 3D
This is also complicated by the very inconsistent values for Hull/Body all across the books. For example:
-15m Speeder Truck, RAW Hull: 2D+1 (Walker). = Armor 0D, Hull 2D+1.
Ie, almost the same Body as the Tank..compare to
-15m APC speeder, RAW Body: 3D(Speeder). = Armor 1D, Hull 2D.
Ie, this is supposed to be a spec force Armed Personell Carrier.
-4m Mil. Landspeeder, RAW Body: 3D+2(Speeder). = Armor 1D, Hull 2D+1
This is basically a military variant of you basic roofless speeder.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: | | R. Perhaps one could establish some default values and apply to most vehicles/ships. |
I've been messaround around with this idea, and so far the best "default rule" I have is to use half the Body/Hull STR as expressed n character scale. For instance a AT-AT (6D Body STR Walker scale), would have a 10D Body in scharacter scale. Half that is 5D, so anything that did 5D or less would "bounce" off the AT-AT.
Such a rule will make large vehicles immune to small arms fire, something that is probasbly realistic, but might be problematic for some adventure ideas. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
