Approved Submission [Nepleslia] Na-YF/A-6X(A) "Scythe" Stealth Fighter/Interceptor

While I think the patch goes a ways toward addressing this, the reason I approved the weapon is because I considered the element of scale.

Scale isn't mentioned anywhere in DR. Using scale, an SDR2 weapon on a starfighter might hurt a starship bigger than it, but it's a Starship-class weapon fired from an Armor-class unit. It's going to hurt a starship, but it's going to do what I'd consider localized/proportional damage. Sort of like a Mindy using its Aether Saber Rifle to slice into the armor of a starship — it does damage above its class, but the harm is too small to actually damage the target the same way a deck gun or shipborne cannon would.

Scale, essentially, is a natural GM tool I never considered necessary to codify. A GM knows a torpedo fired from a bomber is meant to hurt a starship; it's the heavy rocket of X-wing vs. TIE Fighter. An SDR2 cannon on a starfighter is meant to hurt a starship in a more proportional manner — maybe it knocks out a vital system in one shot, or can poke a hole in a capital vessel's armor with some work.

@Wes is right; fighters shouldn't be able to waste starships, especially hardened military vessels or dominant capital ships. But scale doesn't threaten that.

I agree. It still won't waste starships. Even if they swarm one and are allowed to keep attacking it, that wouldn't be called getting wasted either. That'd be called proper tactics. Even a small starship with an SP of 10 will need to take multiple attack runs from a single fighter to not only deal with its armor, but hull as well. And in that instance, it's most likely a very light patrol craft or even a transport. Basically the things fighters are most likely to be sent after anyways. It's not like it has the punch of half a dozen or more anti-ship torpedoes either. As far as I'm concerned, it's an allotment of damage output.

Again, there's not much difference between having two ADR 5/SDR 1 guns or just one SDR 2 gun.

In WWII the German airforce found a way to build the Henschel H129with a 75mm autocannon, believed to be the largest caliber autocannon ever installed on an aircraft, It delivered a mighty punch. Tankers feared it but fighter pilots had few troubles. It was powerful for sure, but in a dogfight it was heavy, cumbersome, and slow. Dead because it could neither hit other plane nor evade it.

I can imagine that any weapon pushing SDR 2 has got to be heavy. Seeing as its delivering more firepower to its target it'll demand more power to fire. More heat, greater EM signature, stuff like that doesn't seem like it really belongs on a stealth fighter. An artillery piece like this should be built around its weapons and it just doesn't seem like that's the case.

this submission appears to be what I've heard called once the Ace of all trades. it's great at dog fighting, it's stealthy, it's super powerful...
Respectfully I think this ship is just a little overkill.

EDIT: to clarify, I'm not against having a fighter craft with a very big gun. Laymen call them attackers and they are quite effective in their role. I just don't think it should have so many Pros in its court. I say this because if we in the setting could create weapons of war that have all pros and no cons we would quickly find that there is no contest. without a struggle or a conflict it would get very boring.

I feel bad for mucking up this thread more, but it's where the conversation is...

Doshii Jun said:

Scale isn't mentioned anywhere in DR...

Scale, essentially, is a natural GM tool I never considered necessary to codify.

Click to expand...

Scale is mentioned, though. That's why both DR and SP have matching Personnel, Armor, and Starship categories. With a few exceptions, DR and SP (both classified under the "damage rating" rules) must align with the same category. When DRs were still a new thing, people seemed to intuitively understand how it was supposed to work. Those that didn't understand were simply told by a reviewer. Thus, exceptions to the rule only ever existed because a tech reviewer—Wes, you, Exhack, Cadet, etc—allowed it. I cannot fathom why "no, do something else like this to make it work" should not be good enough for both reviewer and submitter.

So, like, why codify it when we can just behave like we used to? Why be legalistic when the DR page says, right at the top, "The Damage Rating (DR) system is a guideline, not an absolute rule. Actual effects of weapons on ships and such are, in the end, based on the judgments of the Game Master"? Making more rules that are guidelines that some people think are actual rules just seems like more of a headache.

That said, if we are moving toward harder rules, I fully support @Wes' idea about reviewers getting to impartially assign DR values. This seems like an exceedingly easy job for anyone with a good knowledge of site lore and would cut down on whatever tech drama actually exists.

raz said:

So, like, why codify it when we can just behave like we used to? Why be legalistic when the DR page says, right at the top, "The Damage Rating (DR) system is a guideline, not an absolute rule. Actual effects of weapons on ships and such are, in the end, based on the judgments of the Game Master"? Making more rules that are guidelines that some people think are actual rules just seems like more of a headache.

Click to expand...

Not the scale I had in mind, but I understand what you're talking about.

As for why we can't go back to the way things were? Because reviewers are not trusted.

I have to agree. It would skew things in favor of whoever is doing the reviewing, and make the tech-maker have less control over their creation, placing them in a more helpless position. The way things are now however, anything that looks OP doesn't have to be approved and often isn't. But more importantly - much, much more importantly - there's opportunity for dialog. A chance to sit down and talk about it and work things out. Even as a reviewer, I don't want to have to simply tell someone how powerful their weapons are, and have it end there. It's even counter productive since it stifles RP.

Regarding the submission itself though, you gotta consider that the Scythe has tossed off most of its armor; it'd normally be justified having 20-25 SP for its hull.

@CadetNewb, where are you on this submission?

In all honestly @Doshii Jun I would approve it as-is. However, if Wes insists, we'll have to work with @Gunhand4171 to retool it if he's still interested.

@Wes, I've re-reviewed the weapon attached to this submission. If the submitter (or the adopters of the submission) change it to where it needs to be, that submission will be approved.

I can place this submission on hold until then, Cadette can take it up as is or you can order a retooling. What's you're feelings?

Tell me what needs to be fixed and I will fix it

I would prefer as-is; it's not game breaking Doshii.

If Wes insists however, what you'll have to do Gunhand, is remove the SDR 2 weapon and, in its place, put on two SDR 1 weapons. Also - and I apologize ahead of time - after taking a moment to let that sink in, I have to say this situation looks worse when put into text.

We're waiting on @Wes then.

CadetNewb said:

I would prefer as-is; it's not game breaking Doshii.

If Wes insists however, what you'll have to do Gunhand, is remove the SDR 2 weapon and, in its place, put on two SDR 1 weapons. Also - and I apologize ahead of time - after taking a moment to let that sink in, I have to say this situation looks worse when put into text.

Click to expand...

Do that then, if you must.

I have nerfed the Zenith Cannons to SDR 1. Is this acceptable?

Approved!