The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

Resolving the Lancer / Tartan Confusion
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Ships, Vehicles, Equipment, and Tech -> Resolving the Lancer / Tartan Confusion Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 2:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Confused

I'm still not quite sure what any of you are talking about, and frankly, I'm not going to spend any more time trying to figure it out.

I use the x2 = +1D method to generate coordination and fire-linking bonuses. In this instance, a single Cataphract with two proton torpedo launchers fire-linked in the Front arc would receive a +1D bonus that could be applied to either Damage or Fire Control. A group of 4 Cataphracts combining fire at a single target would receive an additional +2D modifier, for a total of +3D (4 ships = 1 x 2 x 2 = 2 +1D bonuses), for a combined Damage total of 12D, which means they are a threat to most Star Destroyers and similar craft.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 213
Location: Vienna, Austria

PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 2:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
Confused

I'm still not quite sure what any of you are talking about, and frankly, I'm not going to spend any more time trying to figure it out.

I use the x2 = +1D method to generate coordination and fire-linking bonuses. In this instance, a single Cataphract with two proton torpedo launchers fire-linked in the Front arc would receive a +1D bonus that could be applied to either Damage or Fire Control. A group of 4 Cataphracts combining fire at a single target would receive an additional +2D modifier, for a total of +3D (4 ships = 1 x 2 x 2 = 2 +1D bonuses), for a combined Damage total of 12D, which means they are a threat to most Star Destroyers and similar craft.


What happens if i have 3 Cataphracts? Nothing? The Bonus like i have 2?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.rancorpit.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=157825#157825
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 213
Location: Vienna, Austria

PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 10:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
http://www.rancorpit.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=157825#157825

Thanks but frankly this System is way to complicated to be good
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 10:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

denderan marajain wrote:
CRMcNeill wrote:
http://www.rancorpit.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=157825#157825

Thanks but frankly this System is way to complicated to be good

Well, bye.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 213
Location: Vienna, Austria

PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 11:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
denderan marajain wrote:
CRMcNeill wrote:
http://www.rancorpit.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=157825#157825

Thanks but frankly this System is way to complicated to be good

Well, bye.


The System (Fire-Linked) from the 1st Edition is much better and simpler.
This System, what you are preferring, ist much more complicated without added value
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 3:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Simpler, yes; better, no.

It's a passable system at low levels, but gets ridiculous as the numbers being linked or coordinated increase. For instance, using the 1E method when combining the fire of the 20 forward heavy turbolasers on an ISD II generates a bonus of +19D (20 - 1) for a combined total damage of 29D, 1D more than a full power shot from the Death Star's superlaser when adjusted for scale.

So, what's needed is a system that provides tangible bonuses at low level while preventing the bonuses from scaling up too rapidly as the number of persons / weapons being coordinated increases. The "x2 = +1D" method provides just that.

And since Fire Linking is just another term for Coordination, it makes sense to have a single rule that works for both.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 213
Location: Vienna, Austria

PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 3:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
Simpler, yes; better, no.

It's a passable system at low levels, but gets ridiculous as the numbers being linked or coordinated increase. For instance, using the 1E method when combining the fire of the 20 forward heavy turbolasers on an ISD II generates a bonus of +19D (20 - 1) for a combined total damage of 29D, 1D more than a full power shot from the Death Star's superlaser when adjusted for scale.

So, what's needed is a system that provides tangible bonuses at low level while preventing the bonuses from scaling up too rapidly as the number of persons / weapons being coordinated increases. The "x2 = +1D" method provides just that.

And since Fire Linking is just another term for Coordination, it makes sense to have a single rule that works for both.


I begin to understand where our different views are coming from

For me there are two different things

First:

Fire-Linked is only possible for one Weapon
This Weapon can be a single Laser Cannon or double, triple and so on
This weapon fires simultaniously (= Fire Linked)

Personally i draw the line by a quad weapon. More than quad is impossible

Second:

The coordination of two or more Weapons is another Thing. They can not shoot as simultaniously as a fire linked weapon and you Need the Command skill in order to take Advantage of the Bonus. I call it Combined Fire

If you are interested in my HR As far as this subject is concerned let me know Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2017 10:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think you are more apt to find interest in your house rule if you post it as its own topic. I'm already pretty well committed to my own system, as it has been used as a baseline for the vast majority of the stats I've written. I'm in disagreement on both of your previous points: IMU, weapons can be fire-linked above quad, so long as one is willing to pay a much higher price for the added complexity; and the baseline for laser cannon does not support your version of fire-linking bonuses, as all Starfighter mounted laser cannon inflict 4D, dual laser cannon inflict 5D and Quad-cannon inflict 6D, whereas under your system, a quad-laser would be at +3D over a basic laser cannon.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 213
Location: Vienna, Austria

PostPosted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 9:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
I think you are more apt to find interest in your house rule if you post it as its own topic. I'm already pretty well committed to my own system, as it has been used as a baseline for the vast majority of the stats I've written. I'm in disagreement on both of your previous points: IMU, weapons can be fire-linked above quad, so long as one is willing to pay a much higher price for the added complexity; and the baseline for laser cannon does not support your version of fire-linking bonuses, as all Starfighter mounted laser cannon inflict 4D, dual laser cannon inflict 5D and Quad-cannon inflict 6D, whereas under your system, a quad-laser would be at +3D over a basic laser cannon.


I am not talking about House rules CRMCNeill i am talking about my Interpretation of RAW because they are not clear as they should be
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 2:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Then, since this discussion has gone entirely off-topic, I suggest you either make posts about the ship stats I posted, or go start your own conversation in the Official Rules section about your interpretation of the Fire Control rules, and then allow those who are interested to reply as they will.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2017 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

EDIT: Added a new variant, the Outrider-Class Scout Frigate, to the stat post
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Sutehp
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 1797
Location: Washington, DC (AKA Inside the Beltway)

PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2017 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Copied and pasted onto my Soldier-class docfile and uploaded the updated docfile to my Star Wars D6 Stats folder in my Google Docs linked in my signature.

A pleasure as always, CRM.
_________________
Sutehp's RPG Goodies
Only some of it is for D6 Star Wars.
Just repurchased the X-Wing and Tie Fighter flight sim games. I forgot how much I missed them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Inquisitor1138
Captain
Captain


Joined: 28 Nov 2021
Posts: 590
Location: Hoth. Or Ilum...

PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2022 4:00 am    Post subject: Good points! Reply with quote

I came searching for Corellian Star Destroyers, then spent 3-4 hrs devouring this thread.
Plenty of good points & neat ideas here!

I was reconciling the divergent stats for the Tartan as 3 different ships with similar design elements & mission profiles. Sadly my notes for them are MIA, and i'll be redoing from scratch.
I like what you did, expanding the Lancer into the Soldier-series; i am thinking i will adopt/adapt them for my new SWU.
Since my solution differs from CRMcNeill's, i'll be making a new thread for them so as not to clutter this one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Ships, Vehicles, Equipment, and Tech All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0