| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16180
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:07 pm Post subject: Weapon Ranges: Uniform vs. Graduated |
 |
|
As part of a larger review of WEG stats in general, I've noticed a discrepancy in range patterns. Essentially, in most cases, a heavier weapon will have a longer range than a lighter one. This is true even in cases where the weapons are of the same type, but of different size rating, such as with light, medium or heavy blaster cannon on ground vehicles.
However, it does not carry over into starship weaponry, where all weapons of a specific type and scale category nearly always have the same range (where the exceptions are so random as to strongly suggest they are typos). A turbolaser mounted on a capital ship will nearly always have a range of 3-15/35/75, regardless of whether it is a light, single-barrel cannon mounted on a bulk freighter or a heavy battery mounted on a star destroyer.
I'm working up to a general vehicle stat re-write, as I've been doing with the starships, and I'm pretty sure that the vehicle stats have it right, in that heavier weapons should outrange lighter weapons, even when they are of the same basic type. However, I'm curious as to the opinions of the Pit denizens as to which way you prefer.
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14035
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2015 12:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
For me heavier weaponry should be equal or less in range, otherwise why ever go with the lighter weapons, just get the heavier (usually better fire control AND damage).
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cynanbloodbane
Commander
Joined: 05 Dec 2014
Posts: 410
Location: Cleveland, Go Tribe!
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | For me heavier weaponry should be equal or less in range, otherwise why ever go with the lighter weapons, just get the heavier (usually better fire control AND damage). |
Without a "power requirement" mechanic in SW D6, nothing. The reactor output of individual ships is up to each GM, but without it there are no guidelines for possible weapons upgrades.
_________________
"Yes because killing the guy you always planned on usurping and killing anyways in order to save your own kid, totally atones for murdering a roomful of innocent trusting children." The Brain |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16180
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2015 2:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | For me heavier weaponry should be equal or less in range, otherwise why ever go with the lighter weapons, just get the heavier (usually better fire control AND damage). |
So, toss out physics, because...game balance? Sorry, but I need better science than that.
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10301
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14035
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2015 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | garhkal wrote: | | For me heavier weaponry should be equal or less in range, otherwise why ever go with the lighter weapons, just get the heavier (usually better fire control AND damage). |
So, toss out physics, because...game balance? Sorry, but I need better science than that. |
But if the heavier weapon is pushing out more power (for damage/fire control) how will it also have the energy output to outrange the other weapons?
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16180
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2015 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | | Well I'd love that static ranges thing we've talked about. |
That's my preferred solution, as well. The hold-up on that is in the details. I'm chipping away at an idea for basing range difficulties on the setting instead of the scale. The other hassle is coming up with a conversion formula for switching over WEG's range system, but WEG really did make a hash of that, too...
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16180
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2015 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | But if the heavier weapon is pushing out more power (for damage/fire control) how will it also have the energy output to outrange the other weapons? |
The same way a Barrett .50 BMG outranges a .22 Marlin, or the 16" guns on a battleship outrange the 5" guns on a frigate. Just because damage and fire control are both measured in dice and pips for the purposes of the game rules does not mean they are traded off D for D in real world physics. The RAW already represents this to a degree, in that turbolasers have three times the range of standard lasers. Failure of the RAW to represent a semblance of reality is reason to change the RAW, not to alter reality to fit the RAW.
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16180
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | | Well I'd love that static ranges thing we've talked about. |
I had an epiphany on this today, but I'd like to throw the basics of the idea out there before I really start nailing it down.
Essentially, I'm wondering if it is feasible to convert the 2E/2R&E static range values into D values, which can then be modified by the 2R&E Scale Modifiers. I've always liked a lot of the 1E rules for their simplicity, and since so much of 1E uses simple D value rolls, it would seem to follow that converting the fixed values of the 2R&E system into D values would greatly simplify things.
I'm free-forming this at the moment, but for example, at Character Scale, a Hold-Out Blaster would have a Range value of 1D or so, while a Blaster Rifle would have 5D or 6D. The Range dice would be rolled with every shot as part of determining the hit, with Scale Modifiers factored in for cross-scale combat. Unless otherwise noted, the Range Dice would stay the same regardless of the environment, so that if the Laser Cannon on a Starfighter has a Range of 6D, it would stay 6D whether the combat was occurring in space, atmosphere, or on the ground. With Scale modifiers applied, of course, it would be rolling at 12D vs. Character Scale targets.
What I'm still chewing on is:-How the result of the Range Dice roll affects the To Hit roll, and whether it should be rolled before or after the To Hit roll.
-How to factor in minimum ranges, in that I've long felt that smaller scale targets should be able to get in close enough that they can not be effectively targeted by larger weapons.
-Whether or not the randomness of a Dice roll is a good fit for ranging, as in, is it a realistic approach, or will it cause excessive missed shots in situations that would not normally result in missed shots?
Thoughts?
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14035
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2016 2:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
A range dice?? So in round 1 say, i could shoot you ok with my pistol if say i rolled 13 on 3d, but next round if you stayed the same, but i rolled poorly on the range die i could miss entirely??
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16180
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2016 8:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | A range dice?? So in round 1 say, i could shoot you ok with my pistol if say i rolled 13 on 3d, but next round if you stayed the same, but i rolled poorly on the range die i could miss entirely?? |
Depends how it is structured. After all, effective range for a real world firearm is based on the probability of hitting a target, not a magic number beyond which the weapon doesn't function. If a target at Long Range is Difficult (20), and a blaster rifle has a range of 6D, it has a better than even chance of rolling 20 or higher on any given roll.
It might not even need to be rolled on every shot, just once to establish the range, but then re-rolled as the range changes.
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmanski
Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: Kansas
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2016 7:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I see the range values as the probability of each weapon to hit in each range band (short, medium, and long). A blaster rifle (3-30/100/300) can hit targets past 300m, it is simply a higher than normal difficulty. 300m is as far as a person can hit a man-sized target with the sights at difficult range. Want to shoot further than 300m? Either it's harder with the sights on the gun or attach a scope.
That's my take.
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
