Golan Space Defense Stations, problem with turbolaser ranges

[ZzaphodD]

And something about the power of a Golan II

Golan II platforms were used to defend more valuable targets, like the Imperial shipyards in the Bilbringi system. At the Battle of Bilbringi, it took the combined efforts of Rogue Squadron and two New Republic assault frigates to neutralize one Golan II.


And also a size comparison

_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course..

[vanir]

Also worth considering taking the visual appearance of the ISD models used in the filmwork at face value.
Visually the only really big laser cannon emplacements are four twin turrets each along the sides of the superstructure, and one smaller quad turbolaser turret in each of the side trenches (plus another at the main hangar underneath).
Visually, all the Golans are far better armed than any ISD-I irrespective of what stats are actually written for each.

The Avenger class/ISD-II (Vader's personal flagship) is supposed to be a special case and has eight twin bank, quad turbolaser turrets as shown on the film model for a 64 turbolaser broadside on the front quarter. A true battlecruiser, it's not capable of surviving a broadside from its own guns, no starship can. Plus being individually smaller guns than the regular ISD they would track quicker and more accurately, for a higher fire control rating, and despite having less base damage per gun, so many more of them has a net gain in damage. It's a death machine.

Technically a battleship is defined by the ability to survive a broadside from your own guns, the ISD-I is like this (it wouldn't want more than one). I don't think you want to be in a Golan or anything else when an Avenger class ISD-II rolls up, you want to be out of the area. I think only SpaceDreadnaughts and planetary shielding should be able to stand up to those, they're single purpose fleet warfare battlecruisers meant for desintegrating entire cruiser squadrons. But I don't think very many Avenger class/ISD-II are supposed to be in the Imperial Navy (Vader's is lead ship in the class), they're a special modification/refit for a specific task, I believe the idea was to show the ISD was a ubiquitous battleship structure and individual examples could have a variety of equipment fit and weaponry.

For various reasons I'd posit something like capital scale 4D hull for the Golan I with 2D shields, 6D hull for the Golan II with 4D shields and for the Golan III 7D+2 hull with 5D shields minimum (plus backups)...personally I'd go 8D shields being a heavy battlestation.

You could handle an ISD-I task force like that, but I'd say if Vader's Avenger ISD rolls up you've got far bigger problems than wondering if you could take on three of them.

But consider also the Golan weaponry. I trashed the WEG ISD stats and rewrote weapons banks which match the visual models (eight twin turret main guns, rear pair are ion guns, so arcs are: 12 heavy laser cannons front, 6 left, 6 right, damage is way bumped to reflect their massive size so they're like 10D guns...), yet you compare with the big turrets on the Golan-III, 20 left, 20 right, 10 front, 10 back and they're all as big turret emplacements as the ISD main guns, huge, I say about 10D apeice...

Who needs to survive broadsides if the enemy gets desintegrated before it can let one off?

[garhkal]

[CRMcNeill]

[garhkal]

[CRMcNeill]

[jmanski]

I'd say split the weapons into two, half for one side and half for the other.
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect?

[CRMcNeill]

[lurker]

[CRMcNeill]

There's something to be said for that technique. Perhaps there should be a rule for increasing damage rolls from a sustained bombardment against unshielded targets.

The way the RAW on combining fire works is that you get a bonus by having multiple weapons firing simultaneously at the same target. To get the bonus, the commander of the unit makes a Command skill roll, ordering his subordinates to combine their fire at a single target. If he is successful, a bonus is generated based on the number of weapons combining their fire.

For example, if a squadron of X-Wings were attacking a Nebulon-B frigate (Hull 3D+2, Shields 2D, scale modifier +6D), their best weapon would be their proton torpedo launchers. However, a single proton torpedo is unlikely to inflict major damage on the frigate, even if it is unshielded (9D damage versus 9D+2 hull with the scale modifier added in). It becomes even less likely if the frigate is shielded, as the scale modifier is added to the shields and the hull, so if the frigate can get even +1 of shields into a fire arc (Very Difficult Capital Ship Shields roll to get shields in all four arcs), the frigate's soak jumps from 9D+2 to 16D. If the starfighters are attacking en masse from a single fire arc, the frigate can concentrate its shields against them for a total of 17D+2. No single starfighter has the punch to get through that.

However, since the starfighters are combining their fire, they also get a bonus, equal to +1 pip for every weapon fired, or +1D for every three weapons fired. Since a squadron of 12 X-Wings can mass fire 24 proton torpedoes simultaneously, their damage jumps from 9D to 15D (+6D for combining fire with 24 torpedoes). It's still not quite enough to break through the frigate's full power shields, but you can see the possibilities. The best tactical option for the starfighter squadron would be to break up into multiple flights and swarm the frigate from multiple directions simultaneously, forcing the frigate to split its shields to cover multiple arcs (and increasing the difficulty of the frigate's Shields skill rolls, thereby increasing the chance that an arc will be left unprotected by a failed roll).

It doesn't just boost damage either; a commander could order his troops to barrage fire into the general vicinity of the target, hoping for a random hit, so that the combined fire bonus would be added to the gunner's To Hit rolls instead of Damage.

Does that help?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index

[garhkal]

That's how R&e does it... IIRC base 2e had it that the bonus was added to both to hit and damage..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[jmanski]

I like the idea of choosing To Hit or Damage, not adding to both.
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect?

[Fallon Kell]

My considered opinion is that if a Golan III platform is to perform as it did in The Last Command, it should have extremely powerful defenses, somewhere in the 10D/8D neighborhood crmcneill talked about, with longer range, lower damage turbolasers than an ISD, and a withering array of proton torpedoes and laser cannons for point defense against ships of all sizes.

The longer range guns would force a group of ISDs to stay out of gun range and act as a carrier launching starfighter attacks, or dive in full and enter a slugging match at a disadvantage. The lower damage and higher soak would protract the fight, which is something helpful for a defensive platform to do. The close-in weapons would keep the platform from being shredded by starfighters, and lengthen the fight by keeping the ISDs at arm's length.
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier

Complete Starship Construction System

[CRMcNeill]

Under the 2R&E rules, a 20% increase in range requires a Very Difficult Capital Ship Weapons Repair roll, plus 20% of the cost of the basic weapon, but results in a range increase from 3-15/36/75 to 4-18/44/90 (fractions rounded up to the nearest whole number). That greatly increases the threat range, so a Golan thus equipped would be able to hit the ISDs outside of their maximum firing range.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index

[garhkal]