d20 Future - Weapon Batteries... Underpowered?

[genshou]

Do you think the weapon battery rules in d20 Future are an underpowered option? I do.

I'm working on some mathematical analysis to post later tonight, but feel free to share your thoughts in the meantime.

 

[genshou]

Disclaimer: In order to accurately calculate expected damage, I would need to compare hardness with every possible damage die roll individually. The formula listed assumes you are using the rules variant that all weapons simply deal average damage each attack. The actual damage values come out a bit higher if you actually use the die rolls.

PL 7 Upgraded Bulk Freighter vs. Strike Cruiser
Bulk freighter stats:
Defense: 7
Hardness: 30
Weapons and Attack:
Battery of 4 fusion beams +0 ranged (10d8/19-20)
Relevant Defensive Systems: Point-defense system

Strike cruiser stats:
Defense: 11
Hardness: 40
Weapons and Attack:
Battery of 4 antimatter guns +4 ranged (10d8/19-20) and
Battery of 3 plasma missiles -2 ranged (18d8/18-20)
Relevant Defense Systems: Light fortification, magnetic field, particle field, point-defense system.

Clearly, this battle is one-sided to the extreme. But extremes are good. Extremes let us see how the system breaks down at its furthest edges.

When attacking the strike cruiser, the bulk freighter hits on a roll of 15 or higher (because of the strike cruiser’s particle field). Let’s ignore the rolls of 19-20 for now as we’ll calculate their effect on expected damage later. Thus, a successful, non-threat hit has a 20% chance of occurring. A fusion beam deals an average of 45 damage (-40 for hardness), so that’s 5 damage on 20% of rounds, or 1 expected damage per round from rolls between 15 and 18 that may occur on that round.

Now let’s look at threats. On a threat, 70% of attack rolls will be normal (as they will miss the particle-field-adjusted AC of 15). The other 30% might be a critical hit, but let’s take into account the strike cruiser’s 25% chance to turn a critical hit into a regular hit via its light fortification. That means that 77.5% of threats (which threats are 10% of all attack rolls) will be regular hits ((45-40)*0.0775=0.3875), and 22.5% of threats (which threats are 10% of all attack rolls) will be critical hits ((90-40)*.0225=1.125). Adding these two expected damage values to our first gives us our total, below.

So, we can expect the bulk freighter to deal 2.5125 damage per round to the strike cruiser… hardly scratching the paint, and easily negated by the occasional damage control check.

Let’s try the same thing, but get RID of the batteries and just make them be individual weapons (hell, they’re cheaper that way anyway). This changes the ship’s partial statistics block as follows:
Weapons and Attack:
4 fusion beams -3 ranged (10d8)

Now that I’ve shown an example of where my numbers come from, I’m going to use a simpler and more concise format.

Bulk Freighter
Notes: Particle field decreases attack bonuses by 4 for energy weapons. Light fortification converts 25% of critical hits to regular hits.
Fusion beam (Qty: 4)
Roll 1-17: 0 damage
Roll 18-19 (10%): (45-40)*0.1=0.5 damage
Roll 20 (5%): 0.221875+0.28125=0.503125 damage
Subroll 1-17 (85% of 5% plus 25% of 15% of 5%=4.4375%): (45-40)*0.044375=0.221875 damage
Subroll 18-20 (75% of 15% of 5%=0.5625%): (90-40)*0.005625=0.28125 damage
Total Expected Damage: 4(0.5+0.503125)=4.0125 damage

Clearly, it doesn’t do much good either way for the poor bulk freighter, but this is after all a rather one-sided battle. When we get to the next fight example, we’ll see how a PL 6 bulk freighter’s heavy lasers mounted in a battery play out against a military-upgraded escort ship (the strongest of the ultralight craft vs. the weakest of the mediumweight… how appropriate). For now, let’s look at the other side of the coin.

Our poor bulk freighter is about to get shredded…

Strike Cruiser
Notes: Point-defense automatically negates 20% of missiles.
Antimatter gun (Qty: 1 battery of 4)
Roll 1-2: 0 damage
Roll 3-18 (80%): (45-30)*0.8=12 damage
Roll 19-20 (10%): 0.15+5.4=5.55
Subroll 1-2 (10% of 10%=1%): (45-30)*.01=0.15 damage
Subroll 3-20 (90% of 10%=9%): (90-30)*.09=5.4 damage
Total Expected Damage: 1(12+5.55)=17.55 damage

Plasma missile (Qty: 1 battery of 3)
Roll 1-8: 0 damage
Roll 9-17 (80% of 45%=36%): (81-30)*.36=18.36 damage
Roll 18-20 (15%): 2.448+9.504=11.952 damage
Subroll 1-8 (80% of 40% of 15%=4.8%): (81-30)*.048=2.448 damage
Subroll 9-20 (80% of 60% of 15%=7.2%): (162-30)*.072=9.504 damage
Total Expected Damage: 1(18.36+11.952)=30.312 damage

Total Overall Expected Damage: 17.55+30.312=47.862

Ouch! But could this warship be beating on this poor, lone, defenseless merchant vessel with even more ferocity if its weapons were not placed in batteries? Let’s find out.

Strike Cruiser
Notes: Point-defense automatically negates 20% of missiles. Attack roll for antimatter gun reduced to +1. Attack roll for plasma missile reduced to -4.
Antimatter gun (Qty: 4)
Roll 1-5: 0 damage
Roll 6-19 (70%): (45-30)*.7=10.5 damage
Roll 20 (5%): 0.1875+2.25=2.4375 damage
Subroll 1-5 (25% of 5%=1.25%): (45-30)*0.0125=0.1875 damage
Subroll 6-20 (75% of 5%=3.75%): (90-30)*0.0375=2.25 damage
Total Expected Damage: 4(10.5+2.4375)=51.75 damage

Plasma missile (Qty: 3)
Roll 1-10: 0 damage
Roll 11-18 (80% of 40%=32%): (81-30)*0.32=16.32 damage
Roll 19-20 (10%): 2.04+5.28=7.32 damage
Subroll 1-10 (80% of 50% of 10%=4%): (81-30)*0.04=2.04 damage
Subroll 11-20 (80% of 50% of 10%=4%): (162-30)*0.04=5.28 damage
Total Expected Damage: 3(16.32+7.32)=70.92 damage

Total Overall Expected Damage: 51.75+70.92=122.67

All I have to say about this is… HOLY SON OF A FREAKIN’ HALIBUT-FISHMONGER! Why would anyone EVER put weapons in batteries?!

Clearly, this is not analysis the d20 Future designers put forth the effort to produce. Next I'll compare a PL 6 bulk freighter (by the book except that the weapons will be in a battery instead of fire-linked) against an escort with military-level PL 6 technology.

 

[Morgenstern]

Not sure if it affects your premise, but you are calculating you "average damage after applying hardness" wrong. The average damage will be noticably higher than subtracting the hardness from the average (the damage you computed would be right if the ship healed 40 points every time it was struck...), but because subtracting 40 from every value less than 40 hits a cap (0), the average is not reduced symetrically.

 

[Morgenstern]

Looking at it, corrected damages favor indivudual fire even more .

Given the amount of math telling us that -2 to each attack is absolutely worth it for an additional attack in most cases, it's not at all surprising that 3 extra attacks is totally worth taking a -3 on each of them.

Sounds like the bonus to hit from putting weapons into banks should probably by +2 per additonal weapon, not +1, just to maintain the most basic consistancy with the rest of the system .

If the bank of 4 hits, does it do multiple hits? That would also even things out a bit. Even increasing the critical multiplier a little would help.

 

[Morgenstern]

Does it take a separate action to fire each weapon if they aren't in banks? Maybe most ships don't have enough gunners to make all the rolls?

 

[genshou]

Not sure if it affects your premise, but you are calculating you "average damage after applying hardness" wrong. The average damage will be noticably higher than subtracting the hardness from the average (the damage you computed would be right if the ship healed 40 points every time it was struck...), but because subtracting 40 from every value less than 40 hits a cap (0), the average is not reduced symetrically.

Whoops, that's what I get for posting something like this after midnight. Will fix that eventually.

 

[genshou]

Does it take a separate action to fire each weapon if they aren't in banks? Maybe most ships don't have enough gunners to make all the rolls?

Firing a starship weapon is not quite like using a bow or a gun. In fact, the character making the attack roll may not even be in a "turret" to begin with (larger ships have dedicated weapon stations on the bridge from which an officer can direct fire against targets and let the computers do the hard stuff).

For a starship, attacking with all the starship's weapons is a single attack action. For a character, attacking with a single starship weapon (or a weapon battery or grouping of fire-linked weapons) is a single attack action, but when the chief gunner wants a certain weapon to fire multiple times as per the gunner's iterative attacks, that character still makes a single attack action but that is the only weapon that fires that round.

Usually fire-linking weapons or putting them in batteries is best with smaller ships with fewer crew available to be gunners, but anyone with an attack action to burn that round can take the role of a gunner if they are at a properly equipped station. For instance, a copilot might occasionally man the needle driver in a smaller vessel, leaving the pilot free to fly, the engineer free to repair, and the gunner free to use the fire-linked neutron guns.

 

[genshou]

Looking at it, corrected damages favor indivudual fire even more .

Given the amount of math telling us that -2 to each attack is absolutely worth it for an additional attack in most cases, it's not at all surprising that 3 extra attacks is totally worth taking a -3 on each of them.

Sounds like the bonus to hit from putting weapons into banks should probably by +2 per additonal weapon, not +1, just to maintain the most basic consistancy with the rest of the system .

If the bank of 4 hits, does it do multiple hits? That would also even things out a bit. Even increasing the critical multiplier a little would help.

I'm writing this out in an attempt to make sure I didn't make any glaring errors (which I unfortunately did) as I intend to use this calculation format for number-crunching of a house rule regarding battery fire, which gives the increased threat range but otherwise follows the Star Wars mechanic. In this alternate mechanic for battery fire, the more you beat the opponent's Defense by, the more weapons in the battery end up hitting. Critical hits are especially nasty...

 

[ukgpublishing]

I must admit that I am one of the people who don't use batteries for exactly the reasons stated above. Personally, I find the weapon damages of d20f too low in many cases.

I have been playing with a system designed to bring back the true feeling of space combat that is lacking in the current rules set.

One of the areas is the main gun theme. I want to replace the system of having x weapon deal xdx damage to having a series of weapon sizes such as small, medium, large and main gun. The damage would be proportionate to the type of weapon and the number of weapons slots taken up would also be linked to the size.

Its still a theory in process at the moment, thoughts?

 

[philreed]

Have you taken a look at Future: Overwhelming Firepower? It was written to specifically address the weapon issues with the future SRD starships.

Looking for a way to make your starship battleships more like real-world battleships? Want your battle cruiser to have more firepower than a scoutship? Looking to equip your dreadnought with batteries of massive guns and arrays or missile racks?

Then look no further.

In this 24-page PDF you'll find:
-Complete rules and designer notes for arming your starships with more and larger weapons of every kind, all based on and integrated with the Future SRD rules.
-Additional optional rules for such things as firing broadsides and laying multiple mines, all easily integrated into the existing Future SRD rules.
-A one-page rule summary that you can print out and refer to instead of having to hunt through the PDF.
-Complete statistics for all PL 6 and PL 7 weapons from the Future SRD modified using the rules in this PDF; the conversion math has been done for you.
-A step-by-step design guide of a battle cruiser made using the rules and showing all of the attack options and weapon systems.