Jump to content



Photo

[Mathhammer] Making ship armour count


  • Please log in to reply
112 replies to this topic

#41 Voronesh

Voronesh

    Member

  • Members
  • 489 posts

Posted 14 June 2011 - 09:16 PM

Void shields work once per ship/squadron firing on them.

So it doesnt matter if you roll every strength point individually or lump them into a huge single roll. If a frigate gets hit with void shields up, itll receive number of hits - one for the void shield.

 

I really dont know what the problem is. Moribunds change nothing about void shields, they only change stuff that happens after the void shields go down. And make broadsides actually useful.



#42 Bladehate

Bladehate

    Member

  • Members
  • 363 posts

Posted 11 July 2011 - 11:27 PM

How would ramming interact with this change?

I realize the reduction in armor also reduces the ramming damage, but does this make the 2d10 from Cruiser sized ships +1d10 armored prow +1d10 power ram + Prow Armor into too strong a force?  How would it balance out?



#43 Hygric

Hygric

    Member

  • Members
  • 299 posts

Posted 24 July 2011 - 10:36 PM

Shouldn't affect raming at all, as the raming ship will do 12 less damage, but the victim will soak 12 less damage as well.

And yes, being ramed by a cruiser with power ram and armoured prow does hurt, a lot!



#44 MKX

MKX

    Member

  • Members
  • 864 posts

Posted 24 July 2011 - 11:19 PM

Hygric said:

And yes, being ramed by a cruiser with power ram and armoured prow does hurt, a lot!

Yes, but it only hurts once.



#45 Bladehate

Bladehate

    Member

  • Members
  • 363 posts

Posted 25 July 2011 - 02:48 AM

Hygric said:

Shouldn't affect raming at all, as the raming ship will do 12 less damage, but the victim will soak 12 less damage as well.

And yes, being ramed by a cruiser with power ram and armoured prow does hurt, a lot!

I guess my concern was if this makes ramming too powerful.  If the most devatating weapon in the galaxy is a battle cruiser with the aforementioned components at Flank Speed slamming into an enemy, I'm not sure that makes for compelling space battles.

In the RAW you can combine salvoes of macro batteries into attacks dealing easily 4d10 (plus the various mods) damage, or more.  So the ramming damage does not seem quite so brutal.  But with this houserule, and the removal of salvo combinations, ramming suddenly becomes one of the most destructive single attacks in the game, alongside multi-torp salvoes and direct novacannon hits.

The entire point of this change was to open the field to different weapon types and tactics.  Rather then mass-stacking Macrobatteries as the end all solution to any encounter.  I don't think it will happen in my game, but I am not sure turning the game into "who can ram who first" makes for an improvement.  There are also Ork ramships to consider...

I don't think a major overhaul of the ramming system is in order, as ramming is a very limited attack.  Its just something that I encountered in my game because my players are running around with a battle cruiser with some archeotech and machine spirit options that boost its speed.  It didn't take my players too long to figue out that a speed 7 battle cruiser rigged for ramming was very effective.  It hasn't happened yet, but I would just prefer ramming to be a fairly rare thing rather then the ultimate battle field option.



#46 ForTheEmperor

ForTheEmperor

    Member

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 25 July 2011 - 09:44 AM

Wonderfull thread!

I was just about to post my own special houserules, when I stumbled upon this topic and realised that Moribund had come up with quite similiar ideas.

Allthough we both reduced armor by 12 and tread each Makro hit seperatly vs. armour, I did some further changes to fighters and the lot.

I'd like to present my rules and discuss them :-)

 

Void shields: Shield ratings counts like toughness bonus in groundfights. I.e. shield rating of 1 will substract 1 point of damage from each and every hit with a macro and lance.

Torpedos: Substract 12 damage, vortex stay the same. Torps ignore shields, which makes them even better vs. capital ships.

Lances: Get armour penetration of 8. They would be designed to ignore armour up to the level where normal warships wont get further layers of adamantium.

Broadsides: Receive a +10 to hit Bonus and follow the Rules for full-auto-fire. I like the storm-rule of Maribund, too, but saturating fire should have a higher chance of hitting eldar.

Fighters/Fighter-Bombers/Bombers: Speed 10/9/8, bonus/malus of +10/0/-10 to hit and evade, damage vs. ships is 0 / 1d10 / 1d10+2. They generally ignore void shields once they are close enough to a ship. They can stay in combat for hours without need to resupply.

Shooting at small craft / torpedos with macros or turrets: Shooting with makros has a malus of -20 to hit. Shooting with turrets (i.e. crew value +10 for each point of turret rating) only possible at 1 VU. Shooting at small craft suffers a further -x to hit, while x is the netto-piloting value of the small craft pilots. Each succes scored to hit removes 1 torpedo or 1 wing of attack craft.

Dogfighting: Compared Piloting test by both sides. Winner destroys 1 wing of fighters for each succes. Same goes for torpedos, estimating their piloting value to 0.

-> so small craft lack in fire power vs. medium or heavy armored ships, but make up in mobility, evading hits while drawing fire plus are a quite formidable defence vs. other small craft and torpedos.

Evading hits: Just like groundcombat evasion, you roll piloting + manouvre and each succes evades 1 hit of makros or lances.

 

Rak'Gol: each natural 10 on the 1d5 (aka 1d10/2) damage dice will reduce their targets armor value by 1, due to grinding off the armour.



#47 HeavensThunderHammer

HeavensThunderHammer

    Member

  • Members
  • 155 posts

Posted 27 July 2011 - 05:32 PM

ForTheEmperor said:

Wonderfull thread!

I was just about to post my own special houserules, when I stumbled upon this topic and realised that Moribund had come up with quite similiar ideas.

Allthough we both reduced armor by 12 and tread each Makro hit seperatly vs. armour, I did some further changes to fighters and the lot.

I'd like to present my rules and discuss them :-)

 

Void shields: Shield ratings counts like toughness bonus in groundfights. I.e. shield rating of 1 will substract 1 point of damage from each and every hit with a macro and lance.

Torpedos: Substract 12 damage, vortex stay the same. Torps ignore shields, which makes them even better vs. capital ships.

Lances: Get armour penetration of 8. They would be designed to ignore armour up to the level where normal warships wont get further layers of adamantium.

Broadsides: Receive a +10 to hit Bonus and follow the Rules for full-auto-fire. I like the storm-rule of Maribund, too, but saturating fire should have a higher chance of hitting eldar.

Fighters/Fighter-Bombers/Bombers: Speed 10/9/8, bonus/malus of +10/0/-10 to hit and evade, damage vs. ships is 0 / 1d10 / 1d10+2. They generally ignore void shields once they are close enough to a ship. They can stay in combat for hours without need to resupply.

Shooting at small craft / torpedos with macros or turrets: Shooting with makros has a malus of -20 to hit. Shooting with turrets (i.e. crew value +10 for each point of turret rating) only possible at 1 VU. Shooting at small craft suffers a further -x to hit, while x is the netto-piloting value of the small craft pilots. Each succes scored to hit removes 1 torpedo or 1 wing of attack craft.

Dogfighting: Compared Piloting test by both sides. Winner destroys 1 wing of fighters for each succes. Same goes for torpedos, estimating their piloting value to 0.

-> so small craft lack in fire power vs. medium or heavy armored ships, but make up in mobility, evading hits while drawing fire plus are a quite formidable defence vs. other small craft and torpedos.

Evading hits: Just like groundcombat evasion, you roll piloting + manouvre and each succes evades 1 hit of makros or lances.

 

Rak'Gol: each natural 10 on the 1d5 (aka 1d10/2) damage dice will reduce their targets armor value by 1, due to grinding off the armour.

This looks good, but I'm not sure about Evading hits... PCs can already avoid a lot of damage from enemy ships very easily.



#48 ForTheEmperor

ForTheEmperor

    Member

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 28 July 2011 - 09:26 AM

How so? With voidshields only granting a passiv bonus on incoming macros and lances and discarding all rules for command-tests, orders and so forth I'd say that armor value and evasion skill are the only sources of damage reduction.



#49 HeavensThunderHammer

HeavensThunderHammer

    Member

  • Members
  • 155 posts

Posted 23 January 2012 - 01:51 PM

ForTheEmperor said:

How so? With voidshields only granting a passiv bonus on incoming macros and lances and discarding all rules for command-tests, orders and so forth I'd say that armor value and evasion skill are the only sources of damage reduction.

*Necro!*

I was just thinking of how easy it would be for a PC to then max out their pilot and the ship's evasion to be dodging massively accurate macrobattery fire every turn.



#50 Twigzy

Twigzy

    Member

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 14 February 2012 - 03:09 PM

Not sure whether to make a seperate thread, but its the same topic.

 

I was considering a way to make lances better than macro cannons, at least in most ship to ship combat. I was thinking of something a bit simpler though, and that was just preventing the combining of macro volleys. ie: if a sword frigate fires on something, the ships armor would count against both of its macro batteries.

Would this work? or would a ships armor be too high on average? I haven't had a chance to play much rogue trader, so i'm not sure how many modifiers both PC's and NPC ships tend to end up stacking.

 

thoughts?


  • Drachdhar likes this

#51 Errant

Errant

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,180 posts

Posted 14 February 2012 - 06:28 PM

Still doesn't make lances better than macrocannons. Even comparing one macrocannon to one lance, the macrocannon is substantially better by RAW, assuming PC skill levels. Removing the ability to combine shots is just a nerf to lower-skilled gunners, ie NPCs.



#52 Hygric

Hygric

    Member

  • Members
  • 299 posts

Posted 14 February 2012 - 06:55 PM

HeavensThunderHammer said:

*Necro!*

 

 

Bah! Back in my day a thread-omancer wasn't content unless the thread was at least 2 years old!

On a serious note, the dozens of fights I have tested these rules mods with it works great.  It adds much more of a cinematic feel to the combat as well in my opinion.

My condensed version that I will be inflicting on my players in my new RT campaign:

• Armour stats on all vessels are reduced by 12, to a minimum of 0.
• Macrocannon and bomber damage is resolved one hit at a time with the reduced armour rating counting against every hit, not stacked into one massive amount.
• Stygies class macrocannon penetrator rounds only reduce armour for hits from that weapon, not all macrocannon hits in that salvo.
• All broadsides have their strength reduced to 3, but gain the Storm quality.
• All lance class weapons gain the Tearing quality.
• Lance batteries score additional hits per 2 degrees of success, not 3.
• All torpedoes (except vortex) reduce the damage they do by 12.
• Rak’Gol Howler class macrocannon reduce armour rating temporarily by 1 per hit from that weapon.  Note that this is per weapon, not per ship firing.
 

Yes, I do want lances to be a truly terrifying weapon.  I want the pc's to poop themselves at the sight of a Gothic class, and have a heart attack at the sight of a Star Dragon.



#53 Red Bart

Red Bart

    Member

  • Members
  • 87 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 03:29 AM

Hygric said:

My condensed version that I will be inflicting on my players in my new RT campaign:

• Armour stats on all vessels are reduced by 12, to a minimum of 0.
• Macrocannon and bomber damage is resolved one hit at a time with the reduced armour rating counting against every hit, not stacked into one massive amount.
• Stygies class macrocannon penetrator rounds only reduce armour for hits from that weapon, not all macrocannon hits in that salvo.
• All broadsides have their strength reduced to 3, but gain the Storm quality.
• All lance class weapons gain the Tearing quality.
• Lance batteries score additional hits per 2 degrees of success, not 3.
• All torpedoes (except vortex) reduce the damage they do by 12.
• Rak’Gol Howler class macrocannon reduce armour rating temporarily by 1 per hit from that weapon.  Note that this is per weapon, not per ship firing.

I like these rules, but could you clarify if you are allowing salvos or not? From your second rule I would think you don't allow salvos, but from your third rule it would appear that you do allow them.

What are your thoughts on the Star-flare lance (the one that reduces the DoS needed for additional hits from 3 to 2)?



#54 Larkin

Larkin

    Member

  • Members
  • 319 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 06:50 AM

Red Bart said:

Hygric said:

 

My condensed version that I will be inflicting on my players in my new RT campaign:

• Armour stats on all vessels are reduced by 12, to a minimum of 0.
• Macrocannon and bomber damage is resolved one hit at a time with the reduced armour rating counting against every hit, not stacked into one massive amount.
• Stygies class macrocannon penetrator rounds only reduce armour for hits from that weapon, not all macrocannon hits in that salvo.
• All broadsides have their strength reduced to 3, but gain the Storm quality.
• All lance class weapons gain the Tearing quality.
• Lance batteries score additional hits per 2 degrees of success, not 3.
• All torpedoes (except vortex) reduce the damage they do by 12.
• Rak’Gol Howler class macrocannon reduce armour rating temporarily by 1 per hit from that weapon.  Note that this is per weapon, not per ship firing.

 

I like these rules, but could you clarify if you are allowing salvos or not? From your second rule I would think you don't allow salvos, but from your third rule it would appear that you do allow them.

What are your thoughts on the Star-flare lance (the one that reduces the DoS needed for additional hits from 3 to 2)?

Salvos are decoupled in this system. Each individual hit is resolved against armour.

For the Star-flare lance it would hit on every DoS.



#55 Red Bart

Red Bart

    Member

  • Members
  • 87 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 07:45 AM

Larkin said:

 

Salvos are decoupled in this system. Each individual hit is resolved against armour.

For the Star-flare lance it would hit on every DoS.

Wouldn't that make the Star-flare lance a bit too overpowered though? Wouldn't it be better to drop that rule and give it a +10 to hit instead? It already has a strength of 3, so it surpasses the other lances anyway.



#56 Larkin

Larkin

    Member

  • Members
  • 319 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 02:20 PM

 Not that I've noticed honestly. I've been experimenting with various combat mods and at one point we did lances hits same as macro hits. And yes, the lance kills ships, that's the point.

A +10 wouldn't be amiss though, as that gets you halfway to another hit anyway.



#57 TiLT

TiLT

    Member

  • Members
  • 175 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 08:27 PM

Having read this thread, I get the impression that this whole issue has been overcomplicated dramatically. There's a simple rule to make macrobatteries less powerful (reduce armor), and then a whole bunch of additional rules to fix the problems this causes for other weapons. I went with a simpler solution for my game: Reduce the armor for macrobattery attacks ONLY. There's no reason to make any changes to the other parts of the combat rules IMO. As for unusual stuff like the Rak'Gol cannons, I just revert to the standard rules for those attacks.  

Why make things complicated when they can be easy?

 



#58 Sutekh

Sutekh

    Member

  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 28 June 2012 - 07:58 PM

TiLT said:

Having read this thread, I get the impression that this whole issue has been overcomplicated dramatically. There's a simple rule to make macrobatteries less powerful (reduce armor), and then a whole bunch of additional rules to fix the problems this causes for other weapons. I went with a simpler solution for my game: Reduce the armor for macrobattery attacks ONLY. There's no reason to make any changes to the other parts of the combat rules IMO. As for unusual stuff like the Rak'Gol cannons, I just revert to the standard rules for those attacks.  

Why make things complicated when they can be easy?

Yeah. I've been wondering if simply removing salvo and adding +12 to macrobattery damage, and making broadsides strength 3 with Storm quality wouldn't give basically the same results without the need to modify a lot of other weapons.



#59 Cornwallis

Cornwallis

    Member

  • Members
  • 101 posts

Posted 28 July 2012 - 10:25 AM

Sutekh said:

TiLT said:

 

Having read this thread, I get the impression that this whole issue has been overcomplicated dramatically. There's a simple rule to make macrobatteries less powerful (reduce armor), and then a whole bunch of additional rules to fix the problems this causes for other weapons. I went with a simpler solution for my game: Reduce the armor for macrobattery attacks ONLY. There's no reason to make any changes to the other parts of the combat rules IMO. As for unusual stuff like the Rak'Gol cannons, I just revert to the standard rules for those attacks.  

Why make things complicated when they can be easy?

 

 

Yeah. I've been wondering if simply removing salvo and adding +12 to macrobattery damage, and making broadsides strength 3 with Storm quality wouldn't give basically the same results without the need to modify a lot of other weapons.

agreed. simple is better



#60 Nameless2all

Nameless2all

    Member

  • Members
  • 757 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 02:18 PM

I like the idea of just adding +12 damage to all macrobatteries, but alas I've came upon a dilemma.  A cruiser, with Void armour and Armour Plating.  So say now the cruiser has an armour rating of 25.  With the advanced Pyros Melta-cannons combined with the +12 dam, this nets it only a max of 26 damage.  So, if you somehow do max, you will only inflict 1 damage to the cruiser…… 

 

Now, if you add +1d10+5, you get a max of 29, and a Transports armour can still take some hits if the roll is bad.    Or you can say certain weapons do +2d10 (like the Pyros, so a max can be 34), while almost all others do +1d10+5.  Just an idea.


For a collection of fan created material, please refer to the link below. Some of it was edited/created by myself and friends, while most is other fan material. Happy gaming people.https://drive.google.com<p>-"May your endeavors always be prosperous, though they may not always be profitable."





© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS