Ares Thunderstruck Gauss Rifle, question |
Ares Thunderstruck Gauss Rifle, question |
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?
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
Mar 14 2008, 02:42 AM
Post
#3
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
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) |
|
|
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... |
|
|
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! |
|
|
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...
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
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. |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
Mar 14 2008, 05:43 AM
Post
#10
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,556 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Seattle Member No.: 98 |
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). |
|
|
Mar 14 2008, 06:21 AM
Post
#11
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 343 Joined: 30-January 06 Member No.: 8,212 |
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. |
|
|
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 |
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) |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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 |
...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? |
|
|
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 |
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. |
|
|
Mar 14 2008, 04:56 PM
Post
#17
|
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
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. |
|
|
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 |
|
|
Mar 14 2008, 05:25 PM
Post
#19
|
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
|
|
|
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 |
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. |
|
|
Mar 14 2008, 06:07 PM
Post
#21
|
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
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. |
|
|
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 |
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) . |
|
|
Mar 14 2008, 06:46 PM
Post
#23
|
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
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. |
|
|
Mar 14 2008, 06:47 PM
Post
#24
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 343 Joined: 30-January 06 Member No.: 8,212 |
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. |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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.