maaltan
10/23/03 11:51 AM
164.106.112.251
|
I know this has been brought up in the past before. Probably by me. But I ask again, just to see if anyone can explain it to me in logical or convincing manner.
What is the point of Capitol Weapons?
I am a bit fuzzy on rules so if i get something wrong let me know.
Pros of cap weapons:
Orbital Bombardment
Negs of Cap weapons:
Heavy
Hot
Insignificant damage/weight/heat ratios (maybe redundant but anyway)
Expensive
Delicate
Rare
Etc.
I can mount 350 ERLL for the weight of an average NPPC or NL with 10x the damage. including fire control circutry and extra gunners and food (again bit fuzzy on exact amount but it is a significant deviation)
Also (again fuzzy on this point) I remember that capitol weapons cannot target fighters. Reg weapons can target fighters and everything else doing 10x damage
Actually on this next point I want someone to verify this for me. I remember that regular weapons can be put in point defense mode and target incoming balistc and missle fire. Just not as well as AMS. I have lost my AT2 book so i cannot verify it.
A question that is always in my gaming groups mind is "Are we missing something?" We can always mount a galaxy of fighter bays for orbital attacks. Which again is cheaper and lighter that a good array of cap weapons.
With this i reiterate, "What is the point of Cap Weapons"
Thanks
|
Cray
10/23/03 02:33 PM
147.160.1.5
|
You need to add: A standard weapon has, at best, a range of 25. A capital weapon can have a range of 50, and will usually have lower target numbers at the same range as a standard weapon. Tele-operated missiles have even better ranges.
Yeah, capital weapons have a bad damage-to-weight ratio, but they can do the job, and their ability to orbitally bombard and strike from much longer distances than standard weapons makes them worthwhile IMO.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Corsair_SG
10/23/03 03:43 PM
64.166.63.200
|
Have to agree with Cray on that one, plus nothing is as satisfying as a 400 point ounch from a NAC/40 
|
Khan_Robinette
10/23/03 07:52 PM
216.24.108.20
|
I think what Maaltan is trying to say is that in an Aerotech ship to ship combat situation the following would apply:
350 Er Large Clan Lasers have a damage value of 350 for a total of 1400 tons, minus fire control equipment of course.
The same 1400 tons will get me a Light NPPC with an attack value against ships of 7. As before this is without Fire control .
ER Large Clan Lasers can reach out to extreme range. So for every one that hits, 1 point of damage (CAP Scale) is removed.
Said L Naval PPC can reach out to long and do 7 (CAP Damage)
Granted CAP weaps are good for Orbital bombardment, but if I clear out enemy warships, dropships and fighters orbiting target planet I can then send in the Mechs and aerospace to clean up the ground.
Yes CAP weapons can do LOTS of damage to a battlefield. But think about it. If fighting for territory do oyu want to get the territory AFTER an orbital bombardment or would it be more valuable w/o an orbital bombardment.
"Teach me and I'll teach you
If you need a hand I'll give you two
Respect me and I'll respect you
Disrespect me and I will destroy you"
|
Cray
10/24/03 07:41 AM
147.160.1.5
|
In reply to:
I think what Maaltan is trying to say is that in an Aerotech ship to ship combat situation the following would apply:
ER Large Clan Lasers can reach out to extreme range. So for every one that hits, 1 point of damage (CAP Scale) is removed.
Said L Naval PPC can reach out to long and do 7 (CAP Damage)
I am aware of the damage disparity. Maaltan asked for additional points that might make capital weapons worthwhile, so I made those rather than reviewing the points Maaltan had already made.
Also, you neglected a point in your comparison of ER LLs to LNPPCs: the LNPPC's "long range" is longer than the ER LLs' "extreme range." Remember, capital weapons and standard weapons use different range scales.
AT2 standard ranges: 6/12/20/25
AT2 capital ranges: 12/24/40/50
Indeed, the capital weapons' medium range is equal to most of the standard weapons' extreme range. This is a significant benefit to target numbers and strongly affects sphere of engagement, maneuvering needs, etc.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
maaltan
10/24/03 08:26 AM
164.106.112.251
|
AHH .. a reply that doesnt start with "cause they are cool and everybody else uses them" or "man your a moron" Thanks for the useful reply Cray.
I had completly forgot (or maybe never even knew) that cap ranges used different chart.
Ok this will make me think about adding cap weapons. Although a good galaxy of interceptors might do as good a job.
What about the ability to intercept incoming fire with standard weapons? i found my at2 book and will try to look that up.
Thanks Again
Maaltan
Building warships that can burrow though planets so you dont have to. (35000 Er smalls on front arc?)
|
Khan_Robinette
10/24/03 08:32 AM
216.24.109.137
|
*Slaps head*
Sorry Cray, I tetotally forgot that. Never mind the doddering old man in the corner, he will go back to sleep again 
"Teach me and I'll teach you
If you need a hand I'll give you two
Respect me and I'll respect you
Disrespect me and I will destroy you"
|
Cray
10/24/03 10:28 AM
147.160.1.5
|
Under the "advanced point defense rule" (check optional rules section), standard weapons with "point defense" ranges can apply half their damage rating against the strength of incoming missile attacks.
I can't say how (Non-Disclosure Agreement), but the forthcoming AT2-Revised will treat Anti-Missile Systems more favorably. It'll also do good things for capital missiles, making them less the redheaded stepchildren of capital weaponry.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
maaltan
10/24/03 11:15 AM
164.106.112.251
|
A revised version. interesting. I know you are bound by laws and agreements and all that junk.
But can you tell us how much its going to change the rules? As in is it complete revamp or just tweaks on die rolls, etc.
I am especially interested in the changes in building rules.
just *wink* if im goin have to completely rebuild my fleet when these rules come out
|
Cray
10/24/03 07:42 PM
24.165.241.65
|
I can definitely say the construction rules are not being changed except to clarify rules. Basically, the construction rules are limited to what's available in the design software, "Heavy Metal Aero."
Most rules are being revised for clarity. Others are being tweaked where they were non-functional before. But this is meant to be a revision, not AT3.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Khan_Robinette
10/26/03 05:54 PM
216.24.105.186
|
Ok well that was also gonna be my question and the answer I was hoping for also.
Very Happy that the construction rules are not changing.
"Teach me and I'll teach you
If you need a hand I'll give you two
Respect me and I'll respect you
Disrespect me and I will destroy you"
|