So Ive been looking through the EoTE CRB, and I can't find how to scale starship/vehicle scale weapons vs PCs or NPCs. Is there a rule and I just keep not seeing it?

It's 10:1.

AoR pg236, EotE 224.

Be careful, FFG decided not to frell around with vehicles so people vs vehicles can get nasty. Be ready to use narrative effects as personal weapons usually won't be able to do serious damage.

Thank you kind sirs

How do you deal with ship and vehicle weapons shooting at infantry targets? The weakest blaster cannon is going to be doling out 30 damage. It just doesn't seem feasible at all to run that kind of fight within rules.

How do you deal with ship and vehicle weapons shooting at infantry targets? The weakest blaster cannon is going to be doling out 30 damage. It just doesn't seem feasible at all to run that kind of fight within rules.

This system has a very poor interaction at the lowest end of the humanoid/vehicle interface. The heaviest of personal scale weapons are very weak against planetary scale targets while the weakest planetary scale weapons are devastating against personal scale targets. For some reason, weapons like the heavy repeating blaster cost considerably more than the planetary scale auto-blaster, making mounting the latter on your speeders a no-brainer. Once you have Silhouette 2 vehicles with armor and planetary weapons, personal scale targets are in danger of being rendered irrelevant. If you like that sort of thing, then great. If you don't, then this will be a glaring weak point in the system.

How do you deal with ship and vehicle weapons shooting at infantry targets? The weakest blaster cannon is going to be doling out 30 damage. It just doesn't seem feasible at all to run that kind of fight within rules.

sounds realistic, vehicle mounted weapons do bad things to the human body. Unfortunately we can see this in gun camera video from the latest wars overseas

How do you deal with ship and vehicle weapons shooting at infantry targets? The weakest blaster cannon is going to be doling out 30 damage. It just doesn't seem feasible at all to run that kind of fight within rules.

sounds realistic, vehicle mounted weapons do bad things to the human body. Unfortunately we can see this in gun camera video from the latest wars overseas

That might be fine if a shoulder-fired missile could knock out a Cloud Car or AT-PT, but realism should go both ways.

How do you deal with ship and vehicle weapons shooting at infantry targets? The weakest blaster cannon is going to be doling out 30 damage. It just doesn't seem feasible at all to run that kind of fight within rules.

Why should it be feasible to shoot a character with a cannon?

Some have suggested, tested, and enjoyed a 5:1 ratio for smaller vehicles like speeders and civilian craft. I resolve it within the story at my table, rules and ratios be damned.

don't forget the silhouette comparisons. A Sil 4 "transport" against a SIl 1 'Human' would be a daunting (4D) shot

I was worried my players would be doing this and included in a "weight on wheels" switch. It was quite funny when they succeeded in disabling the switch, but rolled enough threats that I said they had to manually retract/extend the landing gear.

in about 3 rounds they only got one hit, and blasted a docking bay a few times.

don't forget the silhouette comparisons. A Sil 4 "transport" against a SIl 1 'Human' would be a daunting (4D) shot

I was worried my players would be doing this and included in a "weight on wheels" switch. It was quite funny when they succeeded in disabling the switch, but rolled enough threats that I said they had to manually retract/extend the landing gear.

in about 3 rounds they only got one hit, and blasted a docking bay a few times.

Like I said, the big issue is Silhouette 2 vehicles targeting Silhouette 1 targets (people) from beyond personal scale extreme range (planetary scale Close) for only Difficulty 2.

It'll be interesting to see if they address this in the mass combat rules.

Some have suggested, tested, and enjoyed a 5:1 ratio for smaller vehicles like speeders and civilian craft. I resolve it within the story at my table, rules and ratios be damned.

I use the 5:1 ratio. There are a few other issues that have me wanting to take this a step further and have a different chart for weapons whether they are being used at the personal or vehicle scale.

Example:

The Missile Tube at personal scale is Damage 20, Crit 2, Extreme Range, with Blast 10, Breach 1. Using the 5:1 ratio, I've considered making it Damage 4, Crit 3, Short Range, Blast 2, no Breach at vehicle scale. Compare that to the Concussion Missile Launcher at vehicle scale - Damage 6, Crit 3, Blast 4, Breach 4. It makes the man launched weapon a smaller version of the launcher found on vehicles. Makes sense to me.

The Heavy Repeating Blaster at personal is Damage 15, Crit 3, Long Range, with Pierce 2, Vicious 1. At vehicle scale have it be Damage 3 (using 1/5 ratio), Crit 3, Close Range, and drop the Pierce/Vicious. That makes it identical to the Auto-Blaster which their descriptions suggest they are pretty much the same thing anyway.

I guess I'm just nasty. I do personal weapons do 1 damage, Vehicle weapons do 10, and Capital ship weapons do 100 damage. Now Capital weapons (except missile/torpedoes) also require a capital ship power source and fire only once every 6 rounds (1 turn). If you look at the movies the point defense weapons fire all the time and the big guns only fire every once on a while. They are big weapons, on big ships or immobile planetary defense, and can't really be effectively fired against individuals because of the silhouette rules. Your not putting an autoblaster on your speeder because you could not power it.

I just think the big bad star destroyer should be big and bad. If a star destroyer decided to "Nuke it from Orbit" it should be a situations where massive amounts of damage are happening. If a person takes on a tank they should be down pretty fast.

The whole idea is not to survive being shot at by a star destroyer it is to not get shot at by a star destroyer.

Well, a Tanks most dangerous opponent IRL is enemy infantry and confined spaces.

A single infantryman can easily out maneuver a tank at close range and find weak spots where a single grenade will shut the tank down. Naturally if he gets hit be any of the tank weapons he's likely in trouble, but not as much as the current rules would have you believe.

Sure, a turbo-laser is goings to kill you. Full stop, but the auto-blaster shouldn't be any worse than a man-portable HMG.

The way the current rules are set up, a .50 cal on a vehicle does 10 times more damage than a .50 cal Barret because its on a vehicle even though they use the same ammo.

I do like the more practical 1:5 ratio instead of 1:10. Still very dangerous but it allows the larger personal scale weapons to actually do some realistic damage.

Well, it's not really come up yet, but I figured that if I ever have vehicles and people interacting, that I'd translate everything into personal scale. So, a vehicle with HT of 4 and Armor 2 would instead have Wounds of 40 and Soak of 20. Breach would ignore 10 points of Soak, just like it already does, and Pierce would work as normal. So It's still *POSSIBLE* to hit and deal damage to vehicles, just not very probable.

The way it is RAW weapons that should be used vs. vehicles don't hurt them or are a nuisance (at least armored vehicles) I found this out while planning a chase using a skiff with a E-web on the back being chased by two AT-ST's, then was going to switch to rocket tubes. Still no real chance, may just make a light vehicle scale weapon instead.

They also mention how hard it is to hit a smaller target, so that seems to be a balance against the devastating power of vehicle weapons against people. Table 7-5: Silhouette Comparison, AoR p. 249, will work when comparing a speeder bike or a starfighter to an individual, I think. It even works for turbolasers, since at that point the target is probably the infrastructure, rather than the various people running around.

They also mention how hard it is to hit a smaller target, so that seems to be a balance against the devastating power of vehicle weapons against people. Table 7-5: Silhouette Comparison, AoR p. 249, will work when comparing a speeder bike or a starfighter to an individual, I think. It even works for turbolasers, since at that point the target is probably the infrastructure, rather than the various people running around.

If your vehicle is Silhouette 2 then there is no increase in difficulty to hit Silhouette 1 targets (most characters).

Well, a Tanks most dangerous opponent IRL is enemy infantry and confined spaces.

A single infantryman can easily out maneuver a tank at close range and find weak spots where a single grenade will shut the tank down. Naturally if he gets hit be any of the tank weapons he's likely in trouble, but not as much as the current rules would have you believe.

Sure, a turbo-laser is goings to kill you. Full stop, but the auto-blaster shouldn't be any worse than a man-portable HMG.

The way the current rules are set up, a .50 cal on a vehicle does 10 times more damage than a .50 cal Barret because its on a vehicle even though they use the same ammo.

I do like the more practical 1:5 ratio instead of 1:10. Still very dangerous but it allows the larger personal scale weapons to actually do some realistic damage.

I think you'll be hard-pressed to find places on the outside of a modern MBT where a "single grenade" can effectively disable it. Age of Rebellion is not designed to emulate Call of Duty.

I'm also going to take issue with your point about the .50 cal.

A vehicle mounted .50 caliber machine gun can easily be ten times as effective as a Barrett .50 caliber rifle. In this system, one attack roll does not equal one shot. A modern GAU-18 mounted on a helicopter might fire between 750 and 850 rounds per minute- something that a semi-auto Barrett M107 simply cannot do. It is worth pointing out that in this system, one attack roll is not equal to one squeeze of the trigger.

There is also a disparity in ammunition. While a Barrett M107 is probably using ball or some type of frangible ammunition, the GAU-18 mounted on a helicopter has the option of using explosive, anti-personnel, armor piercing, incendiary, or some combination of said ammunition types.

Perhaps a more apt comparison would be suggesting that an M240 is ten times as effective when mounted on a vehicle as it is when carried by an individual. Ignoring for the moment that the vehicle mounted M240 will have better accuracy and less felt-recoil by the operator, I'd probably use personal-scale damage for the weapon anyway, since it's essentially a personal scale weapon. A hand carried turbolaser (however impossible) would still do "10x" damage in personal scale.

There could also be in-universe explanations, such as the fact that a vehicle mounted weapon might have a more powerful power-source (different ammunition), faster rates of fire, or better control.

I feel that the missile tube should do Damage 2 with Blast 1, Breach 1 out to Close range. I wouldn't even mind seeing a variant missile with Damage 2 and Breach 2 but lacking Blast. However, all of those should be planetary scale values so successes can actually hurt lightly armored vehicles.

I feel that the missile tube should do Damage 2 with Blast 1, Breach 1 out to Close range. I wouldn't even mind seeing a variant missile with Damage 2 and Breach 2 but lacking Blast. However, all of those should be planetary scale values so successes can actually hurt lightly armored vehicles.

The lack of man-portable weapons capable of causing meaningful damage to vehicles is arguably an issue with this system. It's an issue, however, that I think would be more easily and more satisfactorily rectified by the inclusion of portable weapons that deal vehicle scale damage than changing how vehicles scale and personal scale interact. This is merely my opinion, of course.

The potential issue of such weapons being "too powerful" against personal scale targets could be mitigated by making the weapons difficult and prohibitively expensive to use against personal scale targets. I'm sure an AT-4 or RPG-29 (or some sort of EFP) would shred a person hit by one, but I doubt there are any militaries out there that advocate their use against infantry.

They also mention how hard it is to hit a smaller target, so that seems to be a balance against the devastating power of vehicle weapons against people. Table 7-5: Silhouette Comparison, AoR p. 249, will work when comparing a speeder bike or a starfighter to an individual, I think. It even works for turbolasers, since at that point the target is probably the infrastructure, rather than the various people running around.

If your vehicle is Silhouette 2 then there is no increase in difficulty to hit Silhouette 1 targets (most characters).

True, but a Silhouette 2 vehicle is something like a speeder, bike or otherwise? That's not so far-fetched. And their weapons are usually balanced (somewhat) to deal with that; FFG probably doesn't want speeders one-shotting PCs left and right.

They also mention how hard it is to hit a smaller target, so that seems to be a balance against the devastating power of vehicle weapons against people. Table 7-5: Silhouette Comparison, AoR p. 249, will work when comparing a speeder bike or a starfighter to an individual, I think. It even works for turbolasers, since at that point the target is probably the infrastructure, rather than the various people running around.

If your vehicle is Silhouette 2 then there is no increase in difficulty to hit Silhouette 1 targets (most characters).

True, but a Silhouette 2 vehicle is something like a speeder, bike or otherwise? That's not so far-fetched. And their weapons are usually balanced (somewhat) to deal with that; FFG probably doesn't want speeders one-shotting PCs left and right.

A speeder can carry an Auto-Blaster (planetary scale Damage 3 with Auto-Fire) for a mere 3,000 credits.