NC ranges by ship type

[Bessemer]

Don't know if this has ever come up in the past, but has anyone ever wondered why a NC mounted on a BB is exactly the same as one mounted on a cruiser?
WB's and lances on BB's have better range and power over lighter classes, wouldn't the greater powerplant available for a BB allow for a more powerful linear accelerators/future gubbins?

To that end, I've been experimenting with the following NC ranges...

Cruiser- 30-90cm
cruiser (all types)-  30-120cm (125?)
Battleship- 30-150cm

I've left out CG and CL as no current classes (official or otherwise) have NC's AFAIK.

Only had a couple of games so far, but it seems to work well enough. The only hurdle I can think of so far is what this could do for points values, though I'm leaving that for now.

The only other route would be to increase the damage done by bigger ships... _{Yeah, didn't think so...}

Thoughts?

[horizon]

Grand Cruisers and battlecruisers also have 60cm lances or batteries in places, so.... that reason drops when looking at the NC.
Plus I think NC is a different kind of weapon compared to lances/batteries.
Plus a 90cm NC on cruisers means I will never use a NC variant, torps are much better then.

[Bessemer]

The range drop on cruisers does kind of Sheppard you into taking torps over NC. Not that my cruisers tends to get them anyway, much prefer the Mars for my NC needs

It just feels off that a BB can have the same weapon as a cruiser with no improvement. I hear NC's made it into RT. Do you get stat differences that could warrant meaningful changes to BFG?

[horizon]

hmm, top of my head: No. The NC is the same for all classes. However there are different patterns/shells available.
I shall look at them later.

[Lord Duggie The Mad]

I'm not sure it would make that much difference being mounted on a battleship or a cruiser .  I can't remember which one it was but I was reading one of the 40k novels a while back and the guy was writing about the mechanics of a nova cannon.  I think be described it as similar magnetic accelerator:  two stonking great big magnets (or something like that) on pendulums are swung together to impel the projectile down the barrel.  All manned by thousands of indentured workers/ratings, of course.

I think I saw it written somewhere that the projectile is tossed out somewhere near the speed of light so the muzzle velocity couldn't really be that different depending on the class of the ship. 

Perhaps you could suggest the sensor suites on a battleship are better or that being all the more massive means the recoil is less violent, hence the greater accuracy and extended range.  Personally, I would leave the ranges as they are but perhaps consider the option of allowing battleships the ability to lock-on nova cannon shots.  Still, I might try a few games with your variation and see how it goes.

Cheers,

LDTM

[Bessemer]

@LDTM
I can see your point on the near light speed bit. I originally gave CA a 20-90 range to mitigate the shorter maximum, but Horizon's right on torps being better than a 90cm max. Hell, a ship on AAF firing torps effectively has a range greater than 90cm over a full turn. How I missed that I don't know!

If you want to try these be my guest! I've been too busy for any proper gaming recently, and won't have much for the near future. Kind of the reason I threw this out here.

Amend ranges to-

Cruisers (all types)- 30cm-120 (125?)
Battlships- 30-150

[FistusMaximus]

i am actually in favor of the range difference, since it would provide two things:

-a reason why a NC armed battleship is better than a NC armed cruiser
-a good way of reducing the power of "artillery" fleets with NC spam on cheap cruisers.

two good reasons to think about introducing the range change proposed by Bessemer 

[Lord Duggie The Mad]

Bessemer:  The All ahead full trick does sound like it's worth a laugh.  I tend only to use a single nova cannon at most but when playing against the evil-toasters-of-doom I tend to chuck in two more in the form of an upgraded lunar and a dominator.  Admiral FistusMaximus might disapprove but it seems to be the only way I have a fighting chance against those metal zombies. 

If I get a chance to have a scrap I'll let you know how it pans out with your amendments

Cheers,

LDTM

[connahr]

i don't think cruiser should have shorter range NC

the projectile is fired at near light speed, so its range should effectivly be infinite as a object in space won't slow down unless acted upon by another force, but i'm not saying there should be infinte range as there is only so far that you can acuratly fire a gun

maybe battleships should be the ones to get special ammo, given they will have a larger magazine for stroging ammo than a cruiser. They could also have to roll one less D6 for scatter than cruisers, as i assume battleships have better targeting equipment

i do like NC, but i think their usefulness is limited o the opening of a battle, as fleets close the risk of hitting one of your own ships, or of the target being too close, increases

[AndrewChristlieb]

Battleships with one less d6 does sort of make sense, it should be a more stable platform.

[horizon]

Battleships with one less d6 does sort of make sense, it should be a more stable platform.

In space?

In essence: a battleship has a deviation which is 6000 km less then a cruiser on a shot that travels 150000 km.

[connahr]

well the battlship has more advanced targeting systems, which it would need for the longer ranged weapons and lances that it has. And as was said, the battleship is a more stable platform, its less likley to have been rocked about by recoil and incoming weapons fire

6,000 Km isn't really all that much in the scale of BFG, given that the stem of a base is meant to represent the 100's of Km in the imediate area of a ship

[Bessemer]

A Battleships superior sensors is kind of the angle I was going for. Yes, all NC's may have the same range, but a BB's greater detection ability would allow it to "see" further than a cruiser type ships.

I always had the impression that sensors in BFG functioned more like submarine combat, loads of background noise in the sonar (or whatever the BFG equivalent is) and the body's manning the sensors have to sort out what's what. Probably the least informed version of how sonar works but you get the gist!
A more accurate portrayal of spacial combat than Star Trek's all too convenient version IMO.

As for range, don't forget the ranges in BFG are for game balance as much as anything. A solid projectile in space has unlimited range. It'll go on forever until it hits something or gravity slows it down to a stop! Would a directed energy weapon go on forever? Can they dissipate outside of an atmosphere? OK, going way off topic, leaving that there!

[Lord Duggie The Mad]

Random stupid post of the day:  Battleships: Twin-linked nova cannons!!   Not the silly new rules but the old-school 40K 2nd edition rules

The one less D6 for battleship scatter (minimum 1D6) sounds like an elegant solution.

I imagine that solid projectile would chug along unhindered until it struck something or was pulled by gravity - hmm, nova cannon shells in gravity wells? (No, let's not even THINK about going there) - but an energy weapon I suppose would depend on how focused and coherent it remains over time.  Now that I think about it - I have exactly those same two problems!!!

[Bessemer]

Random stupid post of the day:  Battleships: Twin-linked nova cannons!!   Not the silly new rules but the old-school 40K 2nd edition rules
Oh dear god!

The one less D6 for battleship scatter (minimum 1D6) sounds like an elegant solution.
agreed

I imagine that solid projectile would chug along unhindered until it struck something or was pulled by gravity - hmm, nova cannon shells in gravity wells?
Curving NC fire?...Ok Mr LDTM, this nice man in the white coat is going to look after you until you feel better. That would be HORRENDOUS! Still, no stranger than the time we did an asteroids-style wrap-around on the board edges _{endless torpedoes....}