Revision: Weapon Use Ratings

Rules questions, suggestions, and discussion

Moderators: IVhorseman, Pwnerade

Postby youaredoome0 » Mon May 26, 2008 10:01 am

But then the damage is from whatever is being launched, which could be anything from bombs to a space capsule. Now that I think about it, the launcher could be used to fire vehicles with troops large distances.
Ballistix is definitely something that would be cool. Ever heard of Project Babylon?
At some point I just might make a meaningful contribution.
TROLOLO
youaredoome0
Officer
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:50 am

Postby IVhorseman » Mon May 26, 2008 11:47 am

nyagh, i go to mexico for a week and all THIS happens? oi vey...

i somewhat enjoy this, but additive still seems like it's missing something. what about just a lower multiplier instead? like 2x size for ranged weapons (but at least 3" in the case of a size 1 gun)? with this, we've got our size 5 guns at a UR of 10: still somewhat doable, but you'd need a critical success even for a hero to nail a minifig dead-on. damage is still 5d6, and i believe 3x size would be acceptable for range (with a minimum range of 6"), giving a size 5 gun 15" of range (just out of reach of minifig's rifles).

melee weapons also suffer under this additive rule: you've got a size 3 sword dealing 3d6 damage at a UR of 4, whereas the rulebook example "striking a minifig with the energy sword of a giant mech" says 8 (this is also far more effective than large CC weapons, like halberds). i don't really use CC in battles though, so i'll leave this fine-tuning to you to figure out.

and then something else i've occasionally wondered, is there really any reason to cap weapon sizes at 5? a lot of guns built are far bigger (the pirate mast/artillery cannon, for example, is 8" long), and for some reason, size just cuts off at 5. is there any particular reason for this? or was it yet another attempt to steer players away from over doing large guns?
User avatar
IVhorseman
If she don't want the brick, she won't get the dick
 
Posts: 6302
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:12 pm
Location: The Abyss

Postby Tzan » Mon May 26, 2008 12:12 pm

There is a way to factor range into cost. So not just size, but size and range.

A normal fig walks 5"
A weapon with range 15" could attack 3 times before being hit by a melee weapon, so do a x3 range cost.

A tank main gun should cost a lot more than a sword. A tank can take out a whole squad of melee guys and thats ok. With a massive main gun cost the enemy can field many more melee guys.

This also helps create a cost difference between 3" swords and 3" guns.

( I havent really read all the rules fully so just guessing here )
Last edited by Tzan on Mon May 26, 2008 12:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Tzan
Pooplord
 
Posts: 4775
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 4:41 pm
Location: Boston

Postby IVhorseman » Mon May 26, 2008 12:14 pm

Tzan wrote:A tank main gun should cost a lot more than a sword. A tank can take out a whole squad of melee guys and thats ok. With a massive main gun cost the enemy can field many more melee guys.


with overkill, so can a sword. also, explosive ranged shots are the only way to easily damage several figs, and they're already more expensive.
User avatar
IVhorseman
If she don't want the brick, she won't get the dick
 
Posts: 6302
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:12 pm
Location: The Abyss

Postby Houndis » Sat Jun 14, 2008 2:04 pm

Why this thread has been left to die when the problem is not solved? Now, after a long vacation from these forums, I shall return and wake this sleeping beauty.

So, what do we have here? Special Creations' Weapons too easy compared to their strenght? Have no fear, for I am here!

I have no idea for the others, but I believe these are the two most important. 'x' equals size.

Melee Weapons
Cost 2x
UR 2x
Dmg xd6
(Yeah, those are what they used to be. What can I say? I think that they were ideal.)

Guns
Cost 3x
Rng 3x+3
UR 2.5x (rounded upwards)
Dmg xd6

As you can see, now the range of a size 5 Gun is exactly the same as the range of the sniper rifle, 18".

Now the stats of Guns at size 1, 3 and 5:

1"
Cost: 3 CP
Range: 6"
Use: 3
Damage: 1d6

3"
Cost: 6 CP
Range: 9"
Use: 8
Damage: 3d6

5"
Cost: 15 CP
Range: 18"
Use: 13
Damage: 5d6

Those have better range and bigger UR than what is in the rules now. The range is quite effective and not too great and the UR is smaller than what it used to be (3x).
Elämän tie läpi varjojen vie.
~Terapia
<><
User avatar
Houndis
Officer
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 5:21 am
Location: Finland

Postby IVhorseman » Sat Jun 14, 2008 2:08 pm

i think 2x for UR works perfectly fine and is easier than 2.5x, but i prefer your 3x+3 damage, as well.

remember, i don't think we're trying to make giant guns by any means BAD. they're by far the coolest weapons on the field, and should be as effective as they are awesome. just not too ridiculously overpowered is all.
User avatar
IVhorseman
If she don't want the brick, she won't get the dick
 
Posts: 6302
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:12 pm
Location: The Abyss

Postby Houndis » Sat Jun 14, 2008 2:34 pm

IVhorseman wrote:i think 2x for UR works perfectly fine and is easier than 2.5x, but i prefer your 3x+3 damage, as well.

remember, i don't think we're trying to make giant guns by any means BAD. they're by far the coolest weapons on the field, and should be as effective as they are awesome. just not too ridiculously overpowered is all.

Yeah, I thought that someone would say that 2.5x is a bit hard, but I still believe that 2x is way too easy. Unless you raise the cost to 4x.

Giant guns are great, I should know (I used a 5" artillery cannon against enemy castle, none could do anything about it. I just blew the whole shit down.), but they can get too good if you're not careful. That's way I like to make big guns cost as much as possible without overprizing them.
Elämän tie läpi varjojen vie.
~Terapia
<><
User avatar
Houndis
Officer
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 5:21 am
Location: Finland

Postby IVhorseman » Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:45 pm

a UR of 10 for a size 5 gun sounds perfectly reasonable to me. remember that these guns aren't EXPLOSIVE, so if you miss by the slightest amount, you don't do even a single point of damage. at this UR, a standard minifig has a 1/12 chance of hitting another minifig, which sounds about right to me. at UR of 13, you've got a 1/36 chance of that happening.
User avatar
IVhorseman
If she don't want the brick, she won't get the dick
 
Posts: 6302
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:12 pm
Location: The Abyss

Postby Timedude » Sun Jun 15, 2008 8:24 am

I've got a quick question/request: Could you give us a list of all the revisions you've made? Cause I was just looking through the weapons revisions, and notice you changed the 'Minds' section too. And added d12 and such in addition to d10 and d6. So, is that all? Cause my printout of the rule book is looking very outdated at the moment....

Timedude
-TheSnackist
AKA Timedude
AKA Your New Benefecent Ruler (Lesser Games Division)
stubby wrote:What the hell! Timedude is here??

:? Well all I can say is,
8) it's about . . . time . . .
:csi:
User avatar
Timedude
Cannon Fodder
 
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 5:00 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Postby piltogg » Sun Jun 15, 2008 1:49 pm

Rayhawk wrote:All right, I've gone ahead and added a "Heavy Explosives" subsection to Chapter 7.3.

Explosion example to be added later when I'm back in the same city as my Lego supply; I want to show what a nice big explosion does to a castle wall with defenders on top.




this seems familiar

Image
Image
User avatar
piltogg
Clown-Face Bologna
 
Posts: 2428
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 6:16 pm
Location: Fictional Deutschland

Postby Houndis » Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:43 pm

Well, maybe 2x for UR is better. At least easier.

But then I'd say that boost the cost for 4x minimum. Otherwise it's way too cheap. But at least the range is not too superior anymore :)
Elämän tie läpi varjojen vie.
~Terapia
<><
User avatar
Houndis
Officer
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 5:21 am
Location: Finland

Postby IVhorseman » Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:59 pm

Houndis wrote:But then I'd say that boost the cost for 4x minimum. Otherwise it's way too cheap. But at least the range is not too superior anymore :)


I'm down.
User avatar
IVhorseman
If she don't want the brick, she won't get the dick
 
Posts: 6302
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:12 pm
Location: The Abyss

Postby Houndis » Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:25 pm

IVhorseman wrote:I'm down.

Was?

You know, I was not born speaking English.
Elämän tie läpi varjojen vie.
~Terapia
<><
User avatar
Houndis
Officer
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 5:21 am
Location: Finland

Postby IVhorseman » Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:28 pm

it means "i agree with your plan, and am willing to go along with it".
User avatar
IVhorseman
If she don't want the brick, she won't get the dick
 
Posts: 6302
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:12 pm
Location: The Abyss

Postby Houndis » Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:32 pm

IVhorseman wrote:it means "i agree with your plan, and am willing to go along with it".

Oh, I see now. Thank you for explanation :)
Elämän tie läpi varjojen vie.
~Terapia
<><
User avatar
Houndis
Officer
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 5:21 am
Location: Finland

PreviousNext

Return to The Rulebook

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 3 guests