Short story

Just saw the Star Wars: Squadrons reveal, and during the reveal, there is a case of a couple TIE bombers assaulting a CR-90 where a sustained laser from two of the bombers annihilated the corvette. Whether it is a composite beam or not its impossible to tell, but something tells me this weapon will replace the physical ordinance due to having the need for a larger reactor.

Gonna start tinkering with stats and make a special name variant to distinguish it from the standard bomber.

Anyone got any suggestions or thoughts? Anyone else hyped for a dedicated starfighter game?

Here is the trailer if you have yet to see it!

First draft of beam weapon. Balancing in accordance to gameplay rules has not yet been fully taken into account, just an attempt to replicate what was shown on screen

TIE/tn "Titan" Assault Bomber

(Uses all the same stats for the frame (speed, sil, WT, etc), replacing the missiles/proton bombs with the following)

Heavy Assault Beam Laser Cannon

Damage: 13

Range: Close

Crit: 2

Qualities: Auto-fire, Breach 3, Inaccurate 2, Slow Firing 3

I think Auto-Fire is a bit much, especially when linked with Slow Firing.

I don't think we've seen enough to actually stat anything like this yet, and you're putting something more powerful than a heavy turbolaser on a TIE, which seems a bit much.

1 hour ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

I think Auto-Fire is a bit much, especially when linked with Slow Firing.

It is meant to simulate the look of a composite beam weapon. It also is present on the composite beam cannon of the Onager, which has Slow Firing 2.

1 hour ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

I don't think we've seen enough to actually stat anything like this yet, and you're putting something more powerful than a heavy turbolaser on a TIE, which seems a bit much.

You're right in the fact we haven't seen a whole lot, but that's why it's a first draft.
As for it being too powerful, I would like to point out that the standard complement of proton bombs is equal in damage to a heavy turbolaser, simply because of its ridiculously high breach rating, rather than just a high base damage.

However, when I did make this without looking at the stats for a heavy turbolaser and may dial the damage back in favor of a higher Breach rating.

2 hours ago, GameboyAK said:

It is meant to simulate the look of a composite beam weapon. It also is present on the composite beam cannon of the Onager, which has Slow Firing 2.

Fair enough. I'm not familiar with that statblock aside from your mass driver thread. I suppose it would be related to the fact that the beam lasts long enough that you can cut into several targets or rake across the hull of a single target, though I would argue that the former is unlikely and the latter is best included in the base statblock sans Auto-Fire.

2 hours ago, GameboyAK said:

As for it being too powerful, I would like to point out that the standard complement of proton bombs is equal in damage to a heavy turbolaser, simply because of its ridiculously high breach rating, rather than just a high base damage.

Proton Bombs have restricted usefulness and do not have Auto-Fire, plus they have a very high Breach rating and lower damage. Proton Bombs are also prone to overpenetration of most targets, as Breach 8 is more than most vessels have armor (Dam+Breach=12 vs. CR90). Further, the question is not so much straight damage, but how justified the damage is. The Proton Bomb is both narratively and in damage a scaled-up Proton Torpedo. To make a WWII comparison, it's the difference between the HVAR (High Velocity Aircraft Rocket) dumbfire rockets, and 500-pound (or even larger) gravity bombs.

To me, this feels like putting a 16-inch battleship cannon on an SBD Dauntless. I don't think it makes a ton of sense, and I didn't think it made a ton of sense when Rebels did it (though it's been a while since I watched that episode, and there may have been more justification than I remember). A point for it in Rebels is that the B-Wing is more heavily armed with more and heavier laser cannons. Seeing it pretty much one-shot an Aquitens is absurd and should certainly not be in the game.
One my main narrative objections is the power draw, which is tremendous for a turbolaser and would be tremendous for this. Take size of the Venator's turbolasers for example. Doesn't even reach this damage, but is significantly larger than an entire TIE/sa. Say most of that size is "administrative" and not part of the actual weapon system. Well, the barrel itself is still huge, and larger than a TIE/sa

I'd suggest either cutting damage way down, or dropping off Auto-Fire. Possibly also increasing its Critical Rating. A lot of little hits, or one big hit. I'd tend towards a lot of little hits as it rakes across the ship's hull.

Yes, I'd also go for high Breach, Low Damage.
If you want to pair it with Auto-Fire, even lower Damage.

High Breach will make even very low Damage a problem and maybe when paired with Auto-Fire might replicate a Beam raking across the enemy ship best.

Why not vicious instead of autofire? It's precision weaponry.

As we're trying to represent the feel of a continuous beam rather than blasts, I would make it have a new option.

Continuous Beam - If attacking the same vehicle you successfully hit the previous turn, ignore up to TWO Defense on the attack.

Coming from several star-fighter computer games, I would be tempted to increase the difficulty of additional rounds after the first if vehicles are moving at different speeds.

It may complicate things but to include Rimsen's suggestion, I would say Vicious increases by 1 each successful round after the first.

Considering the nebulous amount of time rounds can take in this game, I am not sure that you need a special rule for that sort of thing.

On 6/15/2020 at 6:50 PM, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

To me, this feels like putting a 16-inch battleship cannon on an SBD Dauntless. I don't think it makes a ton of sense, and I didn't think it made a ton of sense when Rebels did it (though it's been a while since I watched that episode, and there may have been more justification than I remember). A point for it in Rebels is that the B-Wing is more heavily armed with more and heavier laser cannons. Seeing it pretty much one-shot an Aquitens is absurd and should certainly not be in the game.
One my main narrative objections is the power draw, which is tremendous for a turbolaser and would be tremendous for this. Take size of the Venator's turbolasers for example. Doesn't even reach this damage, but is significantly larger than an entire TIE/sa. Say most of that size is "administrative" and not part of the actual weapon system. Well, the barrel itself is still huge, and larger than a TIE/sa

On 6/16/2020 at 9:39 AM, Fl1nt said:

Yes, I'd also go for high Breach, Low Damage.
If you want to pair it with Auto-Fire, even lower Damage.

On 6/18/2020 at 4:50 AM, Rimsen said:

Why not vicious instead of autofire? It's precision weaponry.

On 6/22/2020 at 5:33 AM, Varlie said:

As we're trying to represent the feel of a continuous beam rather than blasts, I would make it have a new option.

On 6/23/2020 at 3:39 AM, kaosoe said:

Considering the nebulous amount of time rounds can take in this game, I am not sure that you need a special rule for that sort of thing

I appreciate all the input, everyone. Makes little tasks like this far more enjoyable.

That being said, I suppose now should be the time to clearly define the goal of this particular weapon.

A) Overall game balance while coinciding with greater general lore

B) Achieve flavor feel of what was shown on screen either narratively or mechanically depending upon A

C) Make it a viable option outside the other two anti-capital ship weapons without making it a good choice for anti-starfighter combat

With those in mind, let's get down to business.. to defeat the scum (sorry, I had to)

After much deliberation, I have come to agree with the @P-47 Thunderbolt that the first draft has too much base damage, thanks to some loose testing with three grades of pilots. However, while we don't know exactly how this weapon functions (yet), I think it would be safe to assume that the bomb bay in the second pod is replaced with a reactor for this weapon (which begs the question, can power for this reactor be diverted to other areas of the ship?).

This means that it has to choose its loadout prior to taking off, choosing between this weapon, proton torpedoes, proton bombs, or concussion missiles. Each weapon has a specific role, with concussion missiles being mult-role in fighting either starfighters or capital ships, proton bombs being designed for hard to breach surface targets, and proton torpedoes for raw destructive power that can be guided for harder to make shots.

So what makes this weapon viable in comparison to the rest? Well, there's several ways we can look at it, but some number crunching is required. I like to divide things into Damage Per Round (DPR)(single success with no threat or advantages) and Potential Damage (PD)(Single success while activating any Linked/Autofire qualities in a single round) in a vacuum and then an ideal target for a ship of this class. Obviously this misses out on a lot of nuances, like shields and pilot skill, etc, but it gives a good baseline as it accounts for Slow Firing.

Vacuum

Concussion Missiles (Slow Firing 1, Linked 1): DPR - 3.5 / PD - 14

Proton Bombs (None): DPR - 8 / PD - 8

Proton Torpedoes (Slow Firing 1, Linked 1): DPR - 4.5 / PD - 16

This paints a pretty clear picture that Proton Bombs are designed to be more consistent and used in repeated strikes (as bombs should be) and twin missiles/torpedo launchers have more overall burst, requiring short strafes (which makes sense). Now for a target, I've chosen the already mentioned CR90, which has an Armor rating of 5.

CR90 Corvette (Armor - 5)

Concussion Missiles (Breach 4): DPR - 3 / PD - 12

Proton Bombs (Breach 8): No change

Proton Torpedoes (Breach 6): No change

Obviously, only the concussion missiles see any changes to their numbers as the Armor outclassed its Breach rating. We wont see anything change for any proton weapons until we look at a true cruiser, such as the MC80 Liberty Type Mon Cal Cruiser.

MC80 Liberty Type (Armor - 9)

Concussion Missiles: DPR - 1 / PD - 4

Proton Bombs: DPR - 7 / PD - 7

Proton Torpedoes: DPR - 1.5 / PD - 6

And with that, I think we have a pretty decent idea of what this composite beam weapon should be capable of in terms of keeping it in line with the rest of the weapon options, especially if we're going to be incorporating any sort of Auto Fire or Slow Firing.

Any thoughts so far before I start getting too deep into Version 2?

24 minutes ago, GameboyAK said:

B) Achieve flavor feel of what was shown on screen either narratively or mechanically depending upon A

This is the only thing I really take issue with. We haven't seen nearly enough of what it can do and under what circumstances. I am also skeptical about translating stats from a video game like Squadrons or Battlefront II.

I'll still provide feedback on whatever you come up with though.

19 minutes ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

This is the only thing I really take issue with. We haven't seen nearly enough of what it can do and under what circumstances. I am also skeptical about translating stats from a video game like Squadrons or Battlefront II.

And I can understand what you mean, but I mean more the "beam laser that is used to damage a capital ship in a more efficient/unique way to other weapons" theme rather than the concrete two-shotting a full health CR90