Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	Archive through June 29, 2002	25		06/29 01:03pm

Jim,
Then add the splash damage to the facing shield.
That should add up the average damage about 2-4 points.
But I don't think the PPC should have a splash.

Just my 2 cents.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, June 30, 2002 - 08:51 am: Edit

Here's and idea.

Have two standard pulses in standard and 3 in overload, but allow each pulse to benot the next impulse but the impulse after that, with the splash inflicted on the facing sheild the impulse after the pulse.

Thus a standard blast is still 4 impulses and an overload is still 6 impulses.

Just call the splash damage, lagg damage or follow on damage or some such.

By Richard Sherman (Rich) on Sunday, June 30, 2002 - 03:14 pm: Edit

A simpler, but definitely unofficial, solution would be to use a "house-rule" allowing very limited deployment of the PPD an a SC4 ship. Our group has a DDP, which is a DD with the forward F-torps replaced by a single PPD, and the probe launcher replaced with 2 APR (just like the DDL does). Called a "Pulsar Destroyer," it was limited production, and only used in echelons. The DDP is restricted in that it can NEVER operate alone; it is always accompanied by at least 2 other SC4 warships. Additionally, there is usually no more than one in a fleet (very rarely two, but only in formations of more than six warships).

The DDP is designed to operate behind a gunline, often standing with larger PPD-armed warships in the second or third row of an echelon. YIS is 177. BPV is 104.

This ship has been used by our group and works quite well. It is interesting to play in conjunction with 2 FF, and makes a tight little group at 250 BPV.

NOTE: rules stipulate that no SC4 ship can mount the PPD. This ship would form the one and ONLY exception to that rule. Other ISC ships (or Orions, for that matter) cannot mount the PPD on a SC4 hull.

Our group made this singular exception because of a seeming incongruity (in our minds) regarding the type of weapons (hellbore, plasma-G, and ESG) which appear quite large in size, and yet can still be mounted, in one fashion or another, on several different SC4 hull types. Besides, the DDP can and does serve a very useful purpose in smaller to medium-sized ISC formations, and we think it's cool!

By David A Slatter (Davidas) on Monday, July 01, 2002 - 05:43 am: Edit

Just for the record, I think the PPC is a potentially good weapon to introduce. I will obviously need tweaking, but the concept is sound under the restrictions ppl have already outlined.

As an addition, a full ISC fleet will have, say 6 FF/DD in the gunline, 4 SC/CL/CC in the second with the DN at the back. Under current doctrine, only - what is it? two or three of the rearward ships can have PPDs. For proper operations, ALL of them should have PPDs or some varient (except the scout). Sticking a ship armed with plas-Ss on the second line is like throwing a ship away - its ineffectual. There should be a case for allowing remaining ships in the second line to have PPCs if they wish.

By David A Slatter (Davidas) on Monday, July 01, 2002 - 08:14 am: Edit

OOps. I didn't mean that "I" will need tweaking, I meant "it" will need tweaking...
Ouch...

By Mark Kuyper (Mark_K) on Monday, July 01, 2002 - 12:40 pm: Edit

Suggestion on deployment restriction.
No ship can have a PPC if their is a ship of a larger size class present. PPCs also follow leader restriction.

After reading through this thread, I can definitly see PPC armed ships running about. Not for front line use, but as 'security' type ships assigned to garrison/patrol duty.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, January 17, 2006 - 02:44 pm: Edit

This is another topic onder consideration for Extreme Measures module.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, January 17, 2006 - 05:34 pm: Edit

Jim Davies (Mudfoot):

Do you want to modify, change or restate your proposal? its been what? almost 3 years since you last posted to this thread...have you had a change of heart?