Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Furluge" data-source="post: 1701859" data-attributes="member: 22770">Yeah I did know that, I just wanted to inform you about that. And yes they do succeed a lot, if luck is with them of course. Since we're only rolling one die here the results as we all now are completely random without a single curve. A string of bad rolls and that damage is going to pile up. Also I think the critical hit effects table really plays a part here. I used to play Battletech (And my Battlespace game is sitting in it's box. Poor clearly unsupported product.) and the critical hits table is something I whole-heartedly support for this. Get a critical hit, kill some crew, suddenly those damage control checks are getting harder... tipping the tide of battle some. I think the problem is you're focusing on things being killed so much. For the most parts these are naval engagements. You usually don't destroy enemies unless it's through good tactics, a well-placed shot, or a heavy concentration of fire. What's more likely to happen is that ships are forced to retreat from the battle where they'll spend months, maybe even years, drydocked for repairs, or to be scrapped to repair other items.ok, a battlecruiser needs 39 successful hits with its heavy particle beams to destroy a strike cruiser. it needs 79 successful hits to destroy another battlecruiser. (this doesn't count in extra damage from possible missile hits or critical hits, but it's also ignoring damage control.) that's just too long for me. i don't want to limit PC starship combat to fighters; i want them to get involved in capital ship fights too. and even 39 rounds of combat seems way too long for me to devote to taking out a single capital ship.Yes, the fighter wings essentially makes it so that the fighters act like a starship battery. I mean if the fighters don't /need/ that aid another, split them up for more damage. Why do you think you always see the fighter ace flying on his own out of wing? And those fighter wings still have very good damage, and a Star Carrier can launch 18 wings of assault fighters (Remember we're PL 7). If we're at bare minimum PL 7, those 18 wings can deal 324d8 total, or if they're seperate that's 1,296d8. Now There's twelve squares around a middleweight ship, that means we can fit either 12 wings or 48 individual ships. Each attack would do 72 damage average, 32 after hardness. So our wings could do 384 a round and a swarm could do 1,536 damage a round. Does that appeal to you more. Of course that won't last forever because fighters will be destroyed but the carrier would have some more fighters to replaced the destroyed ones. Just remember to think of it navally. From looking at this the starship battles to me seem to favor large engagements of fleets of ships more so than tiny one on one battles.But here's the /real/ kickerUpon looking at the attack (ranged) action it states under that action that a starship may fire one /or more/ of it's ranged weapons, and you don't need to specify the number of attacks and their targets ahead of time. If I'm reading it right (And I hope I am. Finally a system where you can fire every weapon in a round like Btech.) then our starships just got a /whole/ lot more damage dealing potential as almost all of them have at least four weapons. Perhaps that's why the damages seem low.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> Just think it's like total attack for characters except it's an attack action, not a full round action, and if you'll notice the attack bonuses for ships never go into the lowering attack bonus progression, making it seem like every attack is at full bonus.</blockquote>

Verification