IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

6 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Ares Thunderstruck Gauss Rifle, question
jago668
post Mar 14 2008, 02:16 AM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 343
Joined: 30-January 06
Member No.: 8,212



What is everyones thoughts on this thing? Should it halve the armor of the target before applying the AP like its big brother?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post Mar 14 2008, 02:40 AM
Post #2


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



jesus god, no. it's already semi-automatic.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jaid
post Mar 14 2008, 02:42 AM
Post #3


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,089
Joined: 4-October 05
Member No.: 7,813



QUOTE (mfb @ Mar 13 2008, 09:40 PM) *
jesus god, no. it's already semi-automatic.

iirc, the general 'concern' is that if you don't, it's basically like the sniper rifle, except more expensive, (possibly not quite as good? too lazy to open book), but a whole heck of a lot cooler sounding =P

the question, of course, is whether all that money is worth the coolness (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
krakjen
post Mar 14 2008, 02:50 AM
Post #4


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 280
Joined: 21-November 07
From: Shadows of France
Member No.: 14,312



Personally, I would/will use the halving-armor-before-AP rules as it allows to justify the high price and availability of the rifle and its ammo.
Of course, come will say they are justified simply by the gun being fragging awesome...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post Mar 14 2008, 02:53 AM
Post #5


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



it's a point less DP and a point more AP than a standard assault cannon. so not as good. and... eh, now that i look, changing from SS to SA only costs 300 bucks (which is pretty ridiculous, considering the huge cost of going from BF to FA).

so, yeah. it's underpowered and costs too much. it's the anti-Slivergun!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
krakjen
post Mar 14 2008, 03:00 AM
Post #6


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 280
Joined: 21-November 07
From: Shadows of France
Member No.: 14,312



Yeah but using the same rule as its heavy variant would make it more bucks-worthy and a potential good AV/borg weapon without being overpowered...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Crusher Bob
post Mar 14 2008, 03:19 AM
Post #7


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,598
Joined: 15-March 03
From: Hong Kong
Member No.: 4,253



Now that SR directly models AP values, it's a much better patch to up the PA value rather than halve armor.

Assuming it now does 9(-7) (compared to the assault cannons 10(-6), you could try something like 8(-12). This makes it do the same basic 'damage' as the assault cannon, but it has more utility against vehicles because it penetrates armor much better.

For example, vs a citymaster (body 16, armor 20) the assault cannon needs 5 hits to penetrate the city masters armor. The 1337 erazer gun would only need one hit to damage the city master.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kyoto Kid
post Mar 14 2008, 03:41 AM
Post #8


Bushido Cowgirl
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,782
Joined: 8-July 05
From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats
Member No.: 7,490



...the FN-AAL Gyrojet has the same issue, neat sounding gun, but a Warhawk is just as good if not better for a number of reasons, the foremost of which being it's cost (even with the Large Cylinder option) and skill requirement.

Neither weapon can be silenced (well, the Warhawk could be...at 10x the cost of the weapon) so the only two advantages the GyroJet has are it has a 10 round clip, can fire semi auto, and can be used underwater (I have yet to deal with that in a campaign). The Warhawk requires only pistols skill, the GyroJet, Exotic Ranged Weapons. This puts the GJ in the "why bother" category. In 3rd ed it was awesome (even though it required Special Weapons skill) because it had the best damage code of any pistol sized weapon. (12M) and with Plus rounds became an AV weapon. In 4th Plus rounds are no better than standard explosive ammo yet are 4x the cost and an availability on par with APDS

for its cost, availability, and skill requirement, were I to stat out the GJ it would have a base DV of 8, with a -2 AP and plus rounds would be +1DV with a -2/-4 AP. After all these are supposed to be miniature explosive rocket rounds.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shinobi Killfist
post Mar 14 2008, 05:12 AM
Post #9


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,431
Joined: 3-December 03
Member No.: 5,872



What wait the big brother of this gun 1/2s the armor first then takes off the AP. I kmnow I hate reading PDFs but how did I miss that in my copy. My Troll needs heavy weapons skill now dang it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shrike30
post Mar 14 2008, 05:43 AM
Post #10


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,556
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Seattle
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (mfb @ Mar 13 2008, 06:40 PM) *
jesus god, no. it's already semi-automatic.


The Barrett is semiauto, suppressed, and with APDS loaded (at about 1/5 the cost per round of the thunderstruck, not even counting the cost of power clips) it comes in with -5 more points of AP. It's also cheaper, easier to get, and uses Longarms (more commonly found than Heavy Weapons). I really do not see a balance problem coming from the Gauss Rifle penetrating armor better than it already does (that is to say, not all that well).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jago668
post Mar 14 2008, 06:21 AM
Post #11


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 343
Joined: 30-January 06
Member No.: 8,212



QUOTE (Shinobi Killfist @ Mar 14 2008, 01:12 AM) *
What wait the big brother of this gun 1/2s the armor first then takes off the AP. I kmnow I hate reading PDFs but how did I miss that in my copy. My Troll needs heavy weapons skill now dang it.


Yeah on page 123 (124 for the stat line), the Aztechnology gauss cannon halves armor before applying the AP mod. Which is why I asked what people thought about letting the smaller do the same. It didn't seem that bad to me, but I wanted to see what other people thought as well.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mäx
post Mar 14 2008, 09:25 AM
Post #12


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,803
Joined: 3-February 08
From: Finland
Member No.: 15,628



QUOTE (mfb @ Mar 14 2008, 04:53 AM) *
it's a point less DP and a point more AP than a standard assault cannon. so not as good. and... eh, now that i look, changing from SS to SA only costs 300 bucks (which is pretty ridiculous, considering the huge cost of going from BF to FA).

so, yeah. it's underpowered and costs too much. it's the anti-Slivergun!


Going from BF to FA cost the same 300 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) it's only adding BF or FA to SS or SA gun that costs huge amounts of money. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fuchs
post Mar 14 2008, 10:05 AM
Post #13


Dragon
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,328
Joined: 28-November 05
From: Zuerich
Member No.: 8,014



Shouldn't be a problem in my campaign - I mostly treat those heavy weapons as "if you hit it, it's dead" deals. Incidentally, our campaign's gunbunny will be working on acquiring one of those gauss rifles soon.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ryu
post Mar 14 2008, 10:07 AM
Post #14


Awakened Asset
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,464
Joined: 9-April 05
From: AGS, North German League
Member No.: 7,309



It should get the 1/2 mod. Those who find that too much might use the -4 as minimum AP value. So ballistic 16 would be reduced to 8, ballistic 5 to 1. If it does not get the 1/2, it should have a better AP value.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Blade
post Mar 14 2008, 10:22 AM
Post #15


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,009
Joined: 25-September 06
From: Paris, France
Member No.: 9,466



QUOTE (Kyoto Kid @ Mar 14 2008, 04:41 AM) *
...the FN-AAL Gyrojet has the same issue, neat sounding gun, but a Warhawk is just as good if not better for a number of reasons, the foremost of which being it's cost (even with the Large Cylinder option) and skill requirement.

Neither weapon can be silenced (well, the Warhawk could be...at 10x the cost of the weapon) so the only two advantages the GyroJet has are it has a 10 round clip, can fire semi auto, and can be used underwater (I have yet to deal with that in a campaign). The Warhawk requires only pistols skill, the GyroJet, Exotic Ranged Weapons. This puts the GJ in the "why bother" category. In 3rd ed it was awesome (even though it required Special Weapons skill) because it had the best damage code of any pistol sized weapon. (12M) and with Plus rounds became an AV weapon. In 4th Plus rounds are no better than standard explosive ammo yet are 4x the cost and an availability on par with APDS

for its cost, availability, and skill requirement, were I to stat out the GJ it would have a base DV of 8, with a -2 AP and plus rounds would be +1DV with a -2/-4 AP. After all these are supposed to be miniature explosive rocket rounds.



I haven't checked the rules, but can't you have guided minirockets with the gyrojet?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ryu
post Mar 14 2008, 11:17 AM
Post #16


Awakened Asset
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,464
Joined: 9-April 05
From: AGS, North German League
Member No.: 7,309



QUOTE (Blade @ Mar 14 2008, 11:22 AM) *
I haven't checked the rules, but can't you have guided minirockets with the gyrojet?


Nope, only "explosive" rockets or tracer rockets. Still, with a base DV of 6/-1, and an underwater +1DV, it has a place. Underwater combat is super-rare, but a weapon that can be submerged without second thought has its merits. The game-breaker here is the needed Exotic Weapon skill. It´s not worth a skill of its own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Moon-Hawk
post Mar 14 2008, 04:56 PM
Post #17


Genuine Artificial Intelligence
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,019
Joined: 12-June 03
Member No.: 4,715



QUOTE (Mäx @ Mar 14 2008, 04:25 AM) *
Going from BF to FA cost the same 300 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) it's only adding BF or FA to SS or SA gun that costs huge amounts of money. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

As I understand it that's realistic.
BF is just FA that has extra complexity that makes it stop automatically after 3 rounds. BF is the most technically/mechanically difficult fire mode.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Blog
post Mar 14 2008, 05:22 PM
Post #18


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 124
Joined: 23-December 02
Member No.: 3,782



My GM just had these hit the market a few game days ago; Big embarasment as a WHOLE shipment got hijacked in the middle of the day. But yet he houseruled it to half armor before applying AP; otherwise there would be no point to buy one when an Assault cannon can do the same at a much reduced cost and less aquire time.

Sadly my current character isnt into heavy weapons. Then again i'd most likely go for vehicle mount for the AOE (^.^)b
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rotbart van Dain...
post Mar 14 2008, 05:25 PM
Post #19


Hoppelhäschen 5000
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,807
Joined: 3-January 04
Member No.: 5,951



QUOTE (mfb @ Mar 14 2008, 03:40 AM) *
jesus god, no. it's already semi-automatic.

Of course it should halve armor like the other gaus cannons - not only for rule consistency:
The Barrett is just as good, otherwise and can use better ammunition.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Malicant
post Mar 14 2008, 05:53 PM
Post #20


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,173
Joined: 27-July 05
From: some backwater node
Member No.: 7,520



QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Mar 14 2008, 06:25 PM) *
Of course it should halve armor like the other gaus cannons - not only for rule consistency:

Then it also should only fire in SS mode.
And it should stop being a first generation, leaps away from really being what it is supposed to be, portable gauss weapon.

I really don't see the problem with the Thunderstruck is. It's new, it's not optimized and of course it's overpriced. I don't think it should pack the same punch as the vehicle or ship (!) mounted versions.
Maybe in SotA 2075 or SR5 they will start being uber-awesome, but if you have a kinetic weapon that halves every armor for lulz costing below 10k (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) you're asking every player to get one. And you will start coating everything in smart armor, because of frustration.
Sometimes balance is more important than consitency, which wasn't even broken, since this is the first generation portable gauss rifle. It sucks. Deal with it.

I still love that weapon. I want to use it, I want to sleep with it (IMG:style_emoticons/default/love.gif) , but I don't want it to rock more that it does right now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rotbart van Dain...
post Mar 14 2008, 06:07 PM
Post #21


Hoppelhäschen 5000
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,807
Joined: 3-January 04
Member No.: 5,951



QUOTE (Malicant @ Mar 14 2008, 06:53 PM) *
Then it also should only fire in SS mode.
And it should stop being a first generation, leaps away from really being what it is supposed to be, portable gauss weapon.

While fireing mode is weapon-specific, Damage effects aren't... and thus should not be different in this case.

Flame/Laser/Electro weapons halve armor, no matter whether they are mounted, portable, or early prototypes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Malicant
post Mar 14 2008, 06:28 PM
Post #22


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,173
Joined: 27-July 05
From: some backwater node
Member No.: 7,520



QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Mar 14 2008, 07:07 PM) *
While fireing mode is weapon-specific, Damage effects aren't... and thus should not be different in this case.

Big Gauss Weapons have a huge magnet supplied by tons of energy. The Thunderstruck has a small magnet supplied by a tiny battery. Also, since it is fireing semi automatic it's magnets don't charge up to their full potential, which could most likely not even be reached with such a tiny powersource. I really don't have a problem with it not being as efficient and powerful as the big ones.

Seriously, it super easy to explain why it makes sense for the Thunderstruck to sucks.

QUOTE
Flame/Laser/Electro weapons halve armor, no matter whether they are mounted, portable, or early prototypes.

Elemental effects halve armor not because they are ultra fast, but because armor is not designed to stop those. Also, first generation portable lasers were HUGE and really expensive. Like 3 million (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) expensive, or something. Don't have my olde books anymore.

So, if you want to go the halve armor route, be consistent to the bitter end: SS, a huge energy backpack, and the piece costing 50-100k (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) .
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rotbart van Dain...
post Mar 14 2008, 06:46 PM
Post #23


Hoppelhäschen 5000
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,807
Joined: 3-January 04
Member No.: 5,951



QUOTE (Malicant @ Mar 14 2008, 07:28 PM) *
Big Gauss Weapons have a huge magnet supplied by tons of energy.

Even the Ship Laser that can destroy sattelites can be powered by a backpack battery for three shots.

So 'it draws too much energy' is a moot point - especially since vehicle gauss weapons have not energy consumption requirement.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jago668
post Mar 14 2008, 06:47 PM
Post #24


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 343
Joined: 30-January 06
Member No.: 8,212



QUOTE (Malicant @ Mar 14 2008, 01:53 PM) *
costing below 10k (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)


Just a correction. It does not cost below 10k, it is 13k nyar.

Also it looks like your biggest argument is that it pops vehicles really well. Against people it isn't any more effective than a barret firing either av or apds ammo. Consider the average target is only going to run up to about 10 ballistic armor. Halve it and subtract 4 puts you at 1 armor. A barret with apds is going to put that down to a 2. All that at much less the cost (74% gun, and around 28% ammo) that is completely ignoring the little bit extra cost of battery packs.

The very largest discrepancy would show up only against very heavily armored targets. The highest armor for a vehicle in the books is I think 20. So you would see that drop to 6 with the gauss, and 10 with the baret firing av rounds. Or something crazy like walking tank trolls with huge amounts of armor.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rotbart van Dain...
post Mar 14 2008, 06:53 PM
Post #25


Hoppelhäschen 5000
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,807
Joined: 3-January 04
Member No.: 5,951



A Barrett firing AV ammo has DV 9 AP -10 against vehicles - a Thunderstruck has DV 9 AP -4.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

6 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 06:19 PM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.