| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16173
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 2:32 pm Post subject: RAW Ship & Vehicle Weapon Stats are Broken. |
 |
|
I've been working up this list as a reference. It covers the blaster and projectile weapons used by starships, airspeeders and ground vehicles in the three core sourcebooks (Star Wars Sourcebook, Rebel Alliance Sourcebook and Imperial Sourcebook), and is categorized by weapon name.All damage is adjusted to Character Scale for ease of comparison.
Range increment is 1 = 100 meters, essentially converting Speeder and Walker-scale weapon ranges into the equivalent of Space Units for ease of comparison.
Laser Cannon
- 6D+2 @ .5-3/8/15 (Combat Airspeeder)
- 5D @ .03-.5/1/2 (Imperial Speeder Bike)
- 5D @ .03-.5/1/2 (Command Speeder)
- 4D @ .5-1/2/5 (Hoverscout)
- 7D @ .5-4/9/20 (Freerunner)
- 5D @ .5-3/5/10 (Rebel Speeder Bike)
- 5D @ .03-.5/1/2 (Tramp Shuttle)
- 11D @ 1-3/12/25 (A-Wing, Y-Wing, TIE/ln)
- 12D @ 1-3/12/25 (X-Wing, TIE Interceptor)
- 9D @ 1-3/12/25 (TIE Bomber)
- 13D @ 1-3/12/25 (B-Wing)
Light Laser Cannon
- 4D+2 @ .03-.5/1/2 (ULAV)
Heavy Laser Cannon
- 10D @ .5-5/15/30 (AT-AT)
- 10D @ .5-5/10/20 (Juggernaut)
- 6D+2 @ .5-5/10/20 (Mobile Command Base)
- 8D @ .5-5/15/30 (Heavy Tracker)
Blaster Cannon
- 7D @ .5-4/9/30 (Cloud Car)
- 8D @ .5-2/10/20 (AT-ST)
- 5D+2 @ .5-3/8/1.5 (Freerunner)
"Triple Blaster" (presumably fire-linked Heavy Repeating Blasters)
- 9D @ 1-5/10/17 (Z-95)
"Auto-Blaster"
- 9D @ 1-8/25/40 (B-Wing)
Light Blaster Cannon
- 6D @ .5-3/5/10 (AT-ST)
Medium Blaster {Cannon}
- 7D @ .5-2/5/10 (AT-AT)
- 8D @ .5-2.5/7.5/15 (Juggernaut)
- 7D @ .5-2.5/7.5/15 (Compact Assault Vehicle)
- 5D @ .5-1/2.5/5 (Repulsor-Sled)
- 7D @ .5-2/5/10 (ULAV)
Heavy Blaster Cannon
- 5D @ .5-1/5/10 (Sail Barge)
- 9D @ .5-5/10/20 (Floating Fortress)
- 8D @ .5-2.5/7.5/15 (Hoverscout)
Concussion Grenade Launcher
- 7D @ .1-.5/1/2 (AT-ST)
- 12D+1 @ .5-1/2.5/5 (Juggernaut)
- 5D+1 @ .1-.5/1/2 (ULAV)
- 5D @ .1-.5/1/2 (Tramp Shuttle)
Concussion Missile Launcher
- 6D @ .5-5/1.5/3 (Hoverscout)
- 13D @ .5-1/3/7 (Z-95)
- 15D @ .5-1/3/7 (TIE Bomber)
Proton Torpedo Launcher
- 15D @ .5-1/3/7 (B-Wing, Y-Wing, X-Wing)
This comparison highlights some pretty serious differences between weapons that are nominally identical. In the Laser Cannon category alone, damage runs the gamut from 4D to 13D. If all Laser Cannon were simply called "Laser Cannon", it could be passed off as differences in size and power output, but WEG also names certain other weapons "Heavy Laser Cannon" and "Light Laser Cannon", with some damage ratings comparable to blaster pistols (see the Laser Cannon on the Hoverscout).
There are also major variations in range. Again citing the Laser Cannon, maximum ranges run the gamut from 200 meters to 2.5 kilometers.
Basically, the RAW for vehicle and weapon stats is broken.
I have some ideas for a solution, but there is no easy fix to this mess, short of (IMO) reworking all of the vehicle stats.
A solution that I am strongly considering is designing uniform weapon stats. What I mean is, rather than the mess of different ranges and damages shown under "Laser Cannon", there would be set distances and ranges for Light, Medium and Heavy Laser Cannon, such as:Light Laser Cannon
- 10D-11D @ 1-2/8/16
Medium Laser Cannon
- 11D-12D @ 1-3/12/25
Heavy Laser Cannon
- 12D-13D @ 2-4/18/36
Note: Damage would be expressed in Character-Scale, with the Scale Modifier adjusting it based on the vehicle to which it is mounted.
My ideal goal is a system where the Light Blaster Cannon is the next step up from the Heavy Repeating Blaster, much like the modern 20mm-30mm range automatic cannon are the next step up from heavy repeaters like the M2 .50 cal. Lasers would, in turn, be the next step up from that, roughly equal to small to medium caliber tank cannon from WWII, with light turbolasers being roughly equivalent to large caliber tank cannon and the DP cannon found as secondary armament on small warships.
I leave this for your consideration...
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jmanski
Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: Kansas
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
You're right, it is a nightmare and I am interested to see what you come up with. I do have one other gripe with the speeder weapon stats in that the missile weapons don't seem to do any more damage than the energy weapons: for instance the AT-ST or the Rebel ULAV. To me a missile weapon denoted heavy ordinance and as such should do more damage (possibly with a reduction of range), but this isn't the case.
Goofy WEG stats anyways....
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16173
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
As far as the concussion grenade launchers, I expect I will convert them into character scale and use them for short-range anti-personnel defense. Apart from that, the Hoverscout is the only ground vehicle equipped with a concussion missile launcher.
The mess with the stats is typical WEG kludge, with stats that were serviceable under 1E but not well thought out when upgraded to 2E. In fact, under 1E rules, all the ground vehicles were considered to be the same scale as starfighter, which greatly simplified combat.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16173
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The next big question would be what scale system to use for re-statting. Obviously, I'm partial to my own, and since it puts Starfighter in between Speeder and Walker, which simplifies having standard weapon types. However, not everyone uses my version, so remaking the stats according to the RAW would make them more useful in general...
Opinions?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmanski
Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: Kansas
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Better do it RAW so's the masses can use it more easily.
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16173
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 11:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jmanski wrote: | | Better do it RAW so's the masses can use it more easily. |
Sigh...
Yeah, you're probably right. Unfortunately, I developed my own scale system specifically because I didn't like 2R&E Scale, so it will take some mental effort to get motivated to do stats in that scale.
Honestly, I wish they'd stuck with 1E scale, where all the vehicle's had the same scale as starfighter and space transports.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14030
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2016 1:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | The next big question would be what scale system to use for re-statting. Obviously, I'm partial to my own, and since it puts Starfighter in between Speeder and Walker, which simplifies having standard weapon types. However, not everyone uses my version, so remaking the stats according to the RAW would make them more useful in general...
Opinions? |
I'd say keep the stats as is, other than adding a new scale between fighter and cap for freighters.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16173
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | I'd say keep the stats as is, other than adding a new scale between fighter and cap for freighters. |
I've already toyed around with a separate scale for freighters on my own scale system. It might work for some of the larger transports, but the light freighters function better in the gaming universe if they are Starfighter Scale.
But I'm not going to make up a third scale system (in addition to my own and 2R&E RAW and my own). It will be either one or the other.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16173
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2016 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jmanski wrote: | | Better do it RAW so's the masses can use it more easily. |
So, after putting some thought into it, I just can't get my head around re-statting everything for both the RAW and my own version, since IMO, the RAW is just too flawed in this regard to continue with. As such, I'm going to pursue re-statting the vehicles in the three core sourcebooks under my own scale system.
One thing I would like some feedback on is the range concept I mentioned above. Specifically, I'd like a GM's perspective on whether inserting a dozen or more different ranges based on whether a weapon is rated as Light, Medium or Heavy would overly complicate gameplay. I think it's appropriate from a realism perspective, but is it worth it from a pacing perspective?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10296
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2016 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | So, after putting some thought into it, I just can't get my head around re-statting everything for both the RAW and my own version, since IMO, the RAW is just too flawed in this regard to continue with. As such, I'm going to pursue re-statting the vehicles in the three core sourcebooks under my own scale system. |
Awesome! Thank you!
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | One thing I would like some feedback on is the range concept I mentioned above. Specifically, I'd like a GM's perspective on whether inserting a dozen or more different ranges based on whether a weapon is rated as Light, Medium or Heavy would overly complicate gameplay. I think it's appropriate from a realism perspective, but is it worth it from a pacing perspective? |
I read the thread and I'm not sure what range concept you are referring to above. Sorry to have to ask, but could you clarify this question, please? Thanks.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16173
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2016 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | | I read the thread and I'm not sure what range concept you are referring to above. Sorry to have to ask, but could you clarify this question, please? Thanks. |
Sorry for the confusion. What I meant was, the RAW gives the range of Laser Cannon for spacecraft as 1-3/12/25, with no variation. However, there is a wide variance of ranges for laser cannon on ground vehicles. Something I am considering is giving Laser Cannon differing ranges based on whether they are Light, Medium or Heavy. Something like this:Light Laser Cannon: 1-3/10/20
Medium Laser Cannon: 1-3/12/25
Heavy Laser Cannon: 2-5/15/30 The idea is that the more powerful a particular cannon is, the greater its range. Since people are already used to the vehicle stats having pretty wide variation in weapon ranges, it won't be too much of an adjustment if I apply this approach to the vehicles. However, the starship stats have always had uniform ranges for a given weapon, regardless of whether it was Light, Medium or Heavy.
My concern is that, if I were to apply new, differing weapon ranges to starship stats, how bad would it throw GMs off to suddenly have to remember that the laser cannon on the character's freighter may not have a range of 1-3/12/25?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JironGhrad
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 20 Jan 2016
Posts: 152
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2016 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Whill wrote: | | I read the thread and I'm not sure what range concept you are referring to above. Sorry to have to ask, but could you clarify this question, please? Thanks. |
Sorry for the confusion. What I meant was, the RAW gives the range of Laser Cannon for spacecraft as 1-3/12/25, with no variation. However, there is a wide variance of ranges for laser cannon on ground vehicles. Something I am considering is giving Laser Cannon differing ranges based on whether they are Light, Medium or Heavy. Something like this:Light Laser Cannon: 1-3/10/20
Medium Laser Cannon: 1-3/12/25
Heavy Laser Cannon: 2-5/15/30 The idea is that the more powerful a particular cannon is, the greater its range. Since people are already used to the vehicle stats having pretty wide variation in weapon ranges, it won't be too much of an adjustment if I apply this approach to the vehicles. However, the starship stats have always had uniform ranges for a given weapon, regardless of whether it was Light, Medium or Heavy.
My concern is that, if I were to apply new, differing weapon ranges to starship stats, how bad would it throw GMs off to suddenly have to remember that the laser cannon on the character's freighter may not have a range of 1-3/12/25? |
Maybe the difference is effective range. 25 might be the extreme of effective space range (since arguably a laser will go forever) because at that point it's lost sufficient energy cohesion and will cease to do damage (even though the beam continues for eternity or until it hits something else.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10296
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2016 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | Sorry for the confusion. What I meant was, the RAW gives the range of Laser Cannon for spacecraft as 1-3/12/25, with no variation. However, there is a wide variance of ranges for laser cannon on ground vehicles. Something I am considering is giving Laser Cannon differing ranges based on whether they are Light, Medium or Heavy. Something like this:Light Laser Cannon: 1-3/10/20
Medium Laser Cannon: 1-3/12/25
Heavy Laser Cannon: 2-5/15/30 The idea is that the more powerful a particular cannon is, the greater its range. Since people are already used to the vehicle stats having pretty wide variation in weapon ranges, it won't be too much of an adjustment if I apply this approach to the vehicles. However, the starship stats have always had uniform ranges for a given weapon, regardless of whether it was Light, Medium or Heavy.
My concern is that, if I were to apply new, differing weapon ranges to starship stats, how bad would it throw GMs off to suddenly have to remember that the laser cannon on the character's freighter may not have a range of 1-3/12/25? |
Please do proceed in that direction. You are applying order to chaos. That is lessening confusion, not adding to it. If a GM wants to use your general system but have variation for the character's freighter, he can still do that. You're not tying any GM's hands by applying this uniformity, so just go for it and make it the way you see fit. And thank you!
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16173
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2016 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here's the ranges I've got at the moment, based on the CRMcNeill Scale System:DESTROYER:
-Heavy Turbolaser: 3-15/35/75
-Heavy Ion Cannon: 1-10/25/50
-Heavy Warhead Launcher: 2-12/30/60
-Tractor Beam Projector: 1-5/15/30
FRIGATE
-Turbolaser: 2-10/25/50
-Ion Cannon: 1-7/17/35
-Warhead Launcher: 2-8/20/40
-Tractor Beam Projector: 1-3/10/20
STARSHIP
-Laser: 1-3/12/25
-Blaster: 1-5/10/17
-Auto-Blaster: 1-8/25/40
-Ion Blaster: 1-3/7/16
-Light Warhead Launcher: 1-4/10/20
-Tractor Beam Projector: 1-2/5/10
WALKER & SPEEDER:
-Laser
--Heavy: 2-5/15/30
--Medium: 1-3/12/25
--Light: 1-3/10/20
-Blaster
--Heavy: 2-6/12/20
--Medium: 1-5/10/17
--Light: 1-3/8/15
I'm planning on using Heavy, Medium and Light Turbolasers to distinguish between the turbolasers of differing scales (Heavy for Destroyer, Medium for Frigate and Light for Starship). The reasoning here is that, by splitting Capital Ship into two classes, I needed different weapon types for each class.
I did the same with Ion Cannon, seeing as how I needed three different levels of ion cannon to split between Destroyer, Frigate and Starship. I invented "Ion Blaster" for Starship, just to distinguish between them (although I may still use Light Ion Cannon as an interim weapon if I feel the need).
The reason I downgraded the ranges for Frigate-Scale weapons from the RAW's Capital-Scale ranges is that, if you compare the RAW's maximum weapon ranges, you will find that, in many cases, the ship's cannon actually outrange their own sensors. Reducing the ranges rectifies that.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Last edited by CRMcNeill on Wed Nov 15, 2017 11:44 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16173
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2016 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JironGhrad wrote: | | Maybe the difference is effective range. 25 might be the extreme of effective space range (since arguably a laser will go forever) because at that point it's lost sufficient energy cohesion and will cease to do damage (even though the beam continues for eternity or until it hits something else.) |
If that were the case, weapons on starfighters would outrange those of capital ships, due to their greater relative maneuverability giving them greater control over where those effectively unlimited range beams go. Yet this is not the case.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
