-
If you were supposed to get an email from the forum but didn't (e.g. to verify your account for registration), email Wes at [email protected] or talk to me on Discord for help. Sometimes the server hits our limit of emails we can send per hour.
-
Get in our Discord chat! Discord.gg/stararmy
Beam Weapons and DRv3
- Thread starter FrostJaeger
- Start date
Apologies for the brevity of this - heading out the door atm - but perhaps a solution for beams fired over a duration of time (10 seconds, 20 seconds, continuous, etc.) would be to list their purpose and include a note saying that their purpose is "per second of contact"? It's not a perfect solution - and it's only a temporary measure that avoids the problem - but it's one that wouldn't require too much effort imo.
Fred
Retired Staff
DRv3 doesn't tell the full story of the weapon. It's part of the weapon's description.
Bones can be an important part of the human body since they support a lot; but they're utterly useless if there's no meat, flesh and nerves hanging on them, y'know?
Neither is it, on its own, a balancing tool. It's information on application. If it's prolongued application, then just work it out. I mean, that's what your imagination is for, right?
Bones can be an important part of the human body since they support a lot; but they're utterly useless if there's no meat, flesh and nerves hanging on them, y'know?
Neither is it, on its own, a balancing tool. It's information on application. If it's prolongued application, then just work it out. I mean, that's what your imagination is for, right?
Constant or Continuous beam 'during activation' or 'while active' seems like what you're looking for.
I think a solution would be to measure it as "This is the total ammount of damage done so long as the beam is on target the entire time. So if you can't keep it on target, hitting the exact same point it does less, like Fred described here
So maybe if you rake the target over the course of a fraction of a second, it's -3 tier. If you keep only sort of hit it on target (a full second or 2 on target), it's tier -2. If you hit it for almost all the time you meant to but suddenly something causes you to go off target (3-4 seconds on target), it's tier -1. And if you hit with the entire duration of the attack, 5 seconds total, it's on tier.
This keeps the narrative based form of DRv3 intact while also meeting the needs of determining damage in a definitive way. GMs can chose to describe in terms of seconds if they're feeling analytical and numbers based, or in terms of narrative if they're focusing on that.
So maybe if you rake the target over the course of a fraction of a second, it's -3 tier. If you keep only sort of hit it on target (a full second or 2 on target), it's tier -2. If you hit it for almost all the time you meant to but suddenly something causes you to go off target (3-4 seconds on target), it's tier -1. And if you hit with the entire duration of the attack, 5 seconds total, it's on tier.
This keeps the narrative based form of DRv3 intact while also meeting the needs of determining damage in a definitive way. GMs can chose to describe in terms of seconds if they're feeling analytical and numbers based, or in terms of narrative if they're focusing on that.
Toshiro
Well-Known Member
If the beam is rated at a certain strength, that strength is assumed to be its maximum for sustained, full-on contact for either the full duration of exposure for a sustained blast or a reasonable "full hit" if it's a rapid fire weapon. No beam weapon should fire continuously(indefinitely) due to heat generation and charging, unless it is severely under tier for its size, and it should be cause for a submission's rejection unless a disadvantage exists which renders it impractical or extremely niche for a specific use case. Things like dodging/grazing are GM-derived or player-derived actions rather than a true characteristic of the weapon itself and are beyond the scope of DRv3's purpose in my opinion. It reminds me of when I made a way to calculate an explosive weapon's damage with distance, but this was made optional...and why shouldn't it be? The distance a ship is from an explosion doesn't fall under the DRv3 rating of the explosive charge either.
Codifying this risks more people attempting to employ it for a stat advantage rather than for narrative effect. If they decide they're going to dodge, only on a case-by-case basis to they know what systems/locatons are grazed anyway, meaning that codifying this is of limited value at best and not worth the trouble it will cause at worst.
Also, if we do this to beam weapons, I fear that someone will insist later on a study of how each and every armor type behaves with which tier of weapon with however many seconds of exposure and other nuances ad nauseum; all while claiming that the system made here is broken until we have DPS for every single scenario.
Codifying this risks more people attempting to employ it for a stat advantage rather than for narrative effect. If they decide they're going to dodge, only on a case-by-case basis to they know what systems/locatons are grazed anyway, meaning that codifying this is of limited value at best and not worth the trouble it will cause at worst.
Also, if we do this to beam weapons, I fear that someone will insist later on a study of how each and every armor type behaves with which tier of weapon with however many seconds of exposure and other nuances ad nauseum; all while claiming that the system made here is broken until we have DPS for every single scenario.
Last edited:
Fred
Retired Staff
To voice Wes from elsewhere...
I'm in a position where I don't think there really needs to be another optional rule tacked on because the people questioning about it obviously already get it. We all seem pretty much in agreement on what ought to result from a continuous beam in-character for the most part. And beyond that, those already with their own mental picture are already ready to house rule it in tangible rules which interprets it for them... just as other GMs would interpret it elsewhere in their own flavor too.
So, what's the worry here? Across the board accuracy? You already have a good common approximation with the mental picture created with "Medium Anti-Armor Weapon".
I'm in a position where I don't think there really needs to be another optional rule tacked on because the people questioning about it obviously already get it. We all seem pretty much in agreement on what ought to result from a continuous beam in-character for the most part. And beyond that, those already with their own mental picture are already ready to house rule it in tangible rules which interprets it for them... just as other GMs would interpret it elsewhere in their own flavor too.
So, what's the worry here? Across the board accuracy? You already have a good common approximation with the mental picture created with "Medium Anti-Armor Weapon".
Toshiro
Well-Known Member
Beams are nice in that you can give them different modes. A strong, powerful blast that is long-ish in duration and subsequent charge time against big targets or for ambushes, but smaller rapid fire pulses at the cost of lower Tier for an actual firefight. I don't see an issue in interpreting the large Tier blasts as being cumulative full-on maximums rather than necessarily typical results, as beam weapons can easily have a rapid fire alternative for situations in which the maximum discharge available carries downsides.
Rizzo
Well-Known Member
I think I much rather having just one damage rating and letting the GM narrate the damage of a beam sweeping over an area. Naturally these types of weapons would be Precision weapons and if stability is not maintained damage would naturally be spread over a larger area. Play MechWarrior Online if you don't believe it, you figure out pretty quickly that you want to stay on target for the full duration of a laser burn.
I was thinking we could simply copy MWO with their laser damage system. A laser must be maintained On Target in order to deliver the full effect. So now walking have to determine is how long the laser Burns for and how much damage we want to have dealt at the end of that run before it is time to cool down and recharge.
Alternatively, I believe that damage per one second of contact is extremely viable seeing as it is very similar to how a machine gun operates. If a machine gun is held on target for one second the damage potential is extremely high compared to the damage of a single bullet. A ballistic machine gun in this situation could stand to have a greater damage output than a laser at this point. So really, it's not overpowered. Lasers would be powerful, No Doubt, but an auto Cannon have the same to have a greater damage output
I was thinking we could simply copy MWO with their laser damage system. A laser must be maintained On Target in order to deliver the full effect. So now walking have to determine is how long the laser Burns for and how much damage we want to have dealt at the end of that run before it is time to cool down and recharge.
Alternatively, I believe that damage per one second of contact is extremely viable seeing as it is very similar to how a machine gun operates. If a machine gun is held on target for one second the damage potential is extremely high compared to the damage of a single bullet. A ballistic machine gun in this situation could stand to have a greater damage output than a laser at this point. So really, it's not overpowered. Lasers would be powerful, No Doubt, but an auto Cannon have the same to have a greater damage output
Rizzo
Well-Known Member
Perhaps rather than reshuffle how we catalog damage we can account for the fire rate of higher tier weapons by ensuring a proper cooldown time. For example, a tier 10 weapon could be one second cool down for one second run time while a tier 12 weapon would have a 3-second cool time for one second running. I think this would simplify the equation
Rizzo
Well-Known Member
From a mechanical standpoint, it has to do with the immense heat generation of continuously firing weaponry. For every action there is a reaction and that tends to be heat buildup. Even the finest coolant can only absorb so much heat before it is ineffective. Therefore we might be in a position where in order to fix this problem with the optimal effect certain weapons might need to be adjusted since even those pre-existing, continuously firing weapons are no longer compatible with the website rules, not that it will matter much. We can just fix them as we find them.
Zack
Inactive Member
Just treat a continuous beam as a weapon that fires a burst of X length with 0 cool down time between bursts.
DR is supposed to be a guideline for what is acceptable in the NTSE so you can know how to design your stuff in an acceptable way. PvP balance is in the realm of player rights.
DR is supposed to be a guideline for what is acceptable in the NTSE so you can know how to design your stuff in an acceptable way. PvP balance is in the realm of player rights.
