Autocannon DRv3

[CadetNewb]

Right now, there's currently an autocannon under review, and another autocannon that's already been approved, but they're both proving to be a bit worrying to me, and I'm under the impression that @Talarn is of the same thought. Because of that, I was hoping you'd be able to give some feedback @Fred . Given how insistent @Arieg is that they're balanced, I want to make sure my own understanding of the newer DR system is correct.

From what I can tell, with DRv3, should Offense and Defense Tiers be the same, it will take two shots to deplete the shields, and one shot to pierce the armor, as the Damage Tier is applied on a per-round/projectile basis, and not over time. This means that a weapon can actually take on something higher Tiered than its individual round/projectile's Tier through the application of more bullets/plasma bolts/beams etc.

If that's correct, am I also correct to assume that the two examples I've linked are better suited to heavy anti-vehicular and light anti-ship work than repelling Power Armor? Right now, I'm thinking that it'll pop Tier 4-6 PA in a snap. Am I overlooking something?

 

[Zack]

Welcome to the meta.

There will always be weapons that are better than other weapons. SARP rules don't put in a lot of limitations, and are structured in such a way that rapid fire weapons are far superior to single shot or continuous beam type weapons.

Not only will these weapons quickly destroy anything on their tier, they will also quickly destroy anything 3 or so tiers above them as well.

This was brought up during the original DR discussion I think.

 

[Alex Hart]

That may be a problem, because with damage like that a fire rate nerf is needed for balance in my opinion. However, the effects on targets in character and in roleplay is ultimately at the discretion of the GM.

Personally, I don't think it makes a whole lot of sense but there might be some context Im missing, so take this with a grain or two of salt as it were.

 

[FrostJaeger]

Let's examine the performance statistics of the two weapons in question, shall we?

• ML2A4 30mm Hypervelocity Rapid Cycle Plasma Cannon
  • Current Tier: Tier 7, Light Anti-Mecha
  • Maximum Rate of Fire: 36.6667 rounds/second
  • Atmospheric Usage
    • Effective Firing Range: 20,500 meters
    • Muzzle Velocity: 15,760 meters/second
    • Maximum Time-To-Target: 1.3008 seconds
  • Spacial Usage
    • Effective Firing Range: 650,000 kilometers
    • Muzzle Velocity: 224,844 kilometers/second (0.7500c)
    • Maximum Time-To-Target: 2.6548 seconds

• ONI 2.5cm Type-39 Rapid Cycle Plasma Cannon
  • Current Tier: Tier 8, Medium Anti-Mecha
  • Maximum Rate of Fire: 36.6667 rounds/second
  • Atmospheric Usage
    • Effective Performance
      • Firing Range: 10,000 meters
      • Muzzle Velocity: 6,552 meters/second
      • Maximum Time-To-Target: 1.5263 seconds
    • Maximum Performance
      • Firing Range: 18,000 meters
      • Muzzle Velocity: 6,552 meters/second
      • Maximum Time-To-Target: 2.7473 seconds
  • Spacial Usage
    • Effective Performance
      • Firing Range: 899,377 kilometers (3 light-seconds)
      • Muzzle Velocity: 224,844 kilometers/second (0.7500c)
      • Maximum Time-To-Target: 4.000 seconds
    • Maximum Performance
      • Firing Range: 2,398,336 kilometers (8 light-seconds)
      • Muzzle Velocity: 224,844 kilometers/second (0.7500c)
      • Maximum Time-To-Target: 10.6667 seconds

@CadetNewb - I agree wholeheartedly. As the above statistics clearly demonstrate, these weapons are best suited to heavy anti-vehicle and light anti-starship roles, especially (in my opinion) when one considers how extraordinarily overpowered and metagamey their performance statistics are when compared to virtually any other starship point-defense weapon currently in use.

@Zack - No offense, but welcome to the NTSE, where the "meta" - such as overpowered gunships with 324 SDR 1 weapons - gets rejected and/or nerfed down to approvable levels.

 

[Fred]

From what I can tell, with DRv3, should Offense and Defense Tiers be the same, it will take two shots to deplete the shields, and one shot to pierce the armor, as the Damage Tier is applied on a per-round/projectile basis, and not over time. This means that a weapon can actually take on something higher Tiered than its individual round/projectile's Tier through the application of more bullets/plasma bolts/beams etc.

That is correct. Much like how it is in real life, a submachinegun has huge advantages over a pistol in terms of killing power... but essentially, they both fire bullets which individually do about the same thing.

DR is not a balance system. It's a definition/nomenclature guideline.

* * *

My input:

The ONI 2.5cm Type-39 Rapid Cycle Plasma Cannon claims that it can put out of commission (cockpit hit, engine hit) an unbarriered Nodachi in a single well-placed hit. Each of those same shots will cause 7% damage to a Plumeria's barrier facing, meaning that if it brushes a Plumeria for at least 1 second worth of shots, the Plumeria will lose the equivalent of 140% barrier protection - several shots will rip through the protection and possibly inflicting 9 'light damage' hits.

If this is a heavy cruiser's turret meant to mow down smaller vessels, this could come across as reasonable. I get the sense that it's not, though. But this seems like a point-defense system for a Plumeria-sized vessel. It uses the vocabulary 'run-the-mill', which inspires in me that it should have adequate and not exceptional performance effecting point defense.

I can't tell you whether such a high rate of fire is acceptable or not (a submachinegun is 900 rounds a minute, but ammo is typically a very present concern too). I can tell you that if ships are not meant to easily fall to this thing, reducing the lethality to Heavy Anti-Armor (Tier 6) will 'better protect' ships from its lethality through mass-weapon's fire, while still allowing it to perform its job and respect its cinematic flair.

The ML2A4 30mm Hypervelocity Rapid Cycle Plasma Cannon (HRCPC) appears to be a weapon made to be the 'main gun' of a combat VTOL. In the case of the weapon displayed, it seems like the four barrels are part of a single weapon system, and fire is rotated through the four barrels out of concern for cycling heat. Performance-wise, it seems to have an even higher rate of fire, so it would do about the same damage I described on the previous weapon, but on a smaller ship like the Midori-class scout.

If the expected visuals are meant to be tearing through a similarily-sized VTOL without being that great of a threat against frigate-sized vessel, we're aiming around the Tier 5~6 ballpark as well.

 

[CadetNewb]

Ok, that's all a huge relief guys, thanks. I was starting to trip out thinking I somehow misunderstood this or something and that he was right.