What are Poundal Drones?

By Matthew J. Francois (Francois42) on Friday, April 19, 2002 - 01:26 pm: Edit

If memory serves me correctly, it was a proposal by mjc in which a drone could have external armor without speed reduction, but with a range reduction...

-Francois
francois@purdue.edu

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, April 19, 2002 - 10:41 pm: Edit

Yeah.

They could have any of the other external options if they ever come out, also.


Basically they couple the FASTER BURNING concept of the Type II drone with M & F motors to create; drones that can carry external modules but move asthough they weren't carrying those external modules.

They'ld cost a bit of BPV, have some other limitations ( no extended range ) and had the Endurance of a Type II or Type V drone, i.e. 2 turns not 3.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, November 19, 2004 - 03:13 am: Edit

---

Quote:

Yes it is or the speed restrictions wouldn't be there in the first place.

Note that there's a whole topic on this and space doesn't need to be taken up here with an idea that isn't necessarily even X-technology.

I'm done with this.

---

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Friday, November 19, 2004 - 12:51 pm: Edit

MJC: You ignore the changes in critical thresholds. Increasing the damage that needs to be done to each drone can completely disrupt defenses. The internally armored drones lose a lot of damage; your drone only loses a seldom used extra turn of duration and costs just more BPV. Make a miscalculation against an internally armored drone swarm and probably lose a shield; make a similar miscalculation against a poundal and suffer very heavy damage. Holding additional weapons in reserve just in case there is a super-drone coming in considerably weakens ones offense.

I did a few quick tests of poundals launched by Kzinti BC against a Lyran CA+p. Using the same tactics, the poundals made the Kzinti win the vast majority of the time. Using anti-poundal defensive tactics turned the Lyran into a ineffectual fighting unit. The poundal would need such a substantial increase in BPV to account for its exceeding defensive capabilites of many opponents that the poundal could not be afforded.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, November 19, 2004 - 01:16 pm: Edit

...which is why you can't just throw BPV at a system like this and expect it to balance.

There are always critical thresholds, especially in a game like SFB.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, November 19, 2004 - 01:58 pm: Edit

What I have not seen on this thread (yet) is a strong case explaining Why Poundal Drones are needed.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, November 19, 2004 - 06:31 pm: Edit

I understand the critical threshold in so far as a type IVF-Xa (24/8/26-3) can be killed by 2Ph-1s automatically and a type VF-XA has a 13 in 36 chance of those same two Ph-1s killing it...but I'm curious as to why the extra BPV won't cause the opponant ( when the Poundal is used in large numbers ) to have a better ship with a few more point defense phasers.

Also there are a few defenses that remain under the threashold...you can free up a lot of Ph-1s but pointing R1 overloaded Disurpotrs ( sure there's a penalty ) at the poundal drones and still kill them ( those that you hit ).
And since drones kill drones the poundal drone should be able to be killed. One thing to remember about limited drones is that they can't just keep going and going and going...it might even be worth one's while to Weasel one's way through a full flight of Poundal drones because one won't be seeing a full spread of them for quite a while.

If the heatshield costs 3 BPV on top of the cost of the other parts then the drones that a Kzinti cruiser could launch ( Kzinti CA ) would be four of them for a total of 20 BPV. At 145 BPV plus the BPV of the other drones the Lyrans can buy a pretty nifty ship with some pretty good drone defenses.

---

Quote:

What I have not seen on this thread (yet) is a strong case explaining Why Poundal Drones are needed.

---

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Friday, November 19, 2004 - 11:48 pm: Edit

MJC: Holding more phasers and heavy weapons in reserve just in case one drone is a poundal has an adverse impact on the typical path of victory: inflicting damage to the other ship.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, November 20, 2004 - 12:16 am: Edit

MJC: You didnt answer the premise, as to why the poundal is needed.

Your "best reason" is a hope that the opponent will use more of his labs to ID the drones? its a nice bonus, but it is not a justification for adopting the poundals as a new weapons system.

It would appear the disadvantage of using poundals instead of more conventional drone choices is too much.

Cheaper to buy more drones of the existing types.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, November 20, 2004 - 08:11 pm: Edit

Well to some extent, the ALL NEW, ALL DIFFERENT aspect as to the game.

The technicaly reason behind it would be that the type II and V drone manufactures would want it before they get pushed out of the market.

The balance issue is the big question. You get a better drone but at the cost of having a higher BPV which in turn allow the opponahnt to buy better drone defense systems...where the balance is is SVC's guess.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Saturday, November 20, 2004 - 08:48 pm: Edit

It isn't all new, and all different. You're taking one existing option (armored drones) and replacing it's current penalty (slow speed) with another penalty (less endurance) that isn't anywhere near so limiting. Top speed armored drones aren't something you can just add in and pay for with a BPV adjustment.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, November 21, 2004 - 06:59 am: Edit

The trouble witha premise of why, is you can then ask, WHY ARE THE XORKS NEEDED?
Because it'ld be FUN to have something different.


On the Threshold thing.

If Poundal drones are limited ( as external armour would be ) then a Kzinti CA in Y178 ( the Year Fast drones become limited ) could have either four type IIF-XA drones or two type VF-XA drones.
Now if I have a Fed CARa with four 12 point photons, how would my defense work???

I am willing to consider that since a type IF-XA drone is a speed 12 drone that a type IIF-XA drone should be limited to speed 20, I.O.W. that for single spaced drones only the first half space of external module can be ignored for the drone speed calculation...but lets pretend the type IIF-XAs are 12/8/32 drones.

If four type IIF-XA drone are launched at me:-
Since I have 8 labs and have had bad experiances with swordfish drones I try to ID at R2. If I I.D. one or more I'll have several options.
• Fire off my Photons at R2...sure it's a heck of an investment but these are the most B.A.M.F. drones the Kzinti's got...Firing through the penalty I have a 50% chance to hit and thus kill two of them. The final two get killed off with pairs of Ph-1s at R1.
• Alternately I could fire three pairs of Ph-1s at R1 and tractor the other drone.
• Or I could tractor two of them and kill two with pairs of Ph-1s.

If under attack from two VF-XA and two IVM my defenses could be as follows ( assuming I also try to ID the drones at R2 ):-
• Fire pairs of Photons at the Poundal drones ( again it's a heavy price to pay ) and with a 50% chance of a hit there's a 9 in 16 chance of none of the poundal drones getting through. Then I'ld fire pairs of Ph-3s ( downfired Ph-1s ) to kill the type IVM drones and tractor any poundal survivors.
• Tractor the Poundal drones at R1 and kill the type IVMs with Pairs of Phaser-3 shots.
• Just for a change, tractor the IVM drones and kill the poundal drones at R1 with a Ph-1 shot and a pair of Ph-3 shots, each. Thus freeing up the Heavies to be fired at the Kzinti.
• If traveling fast enough one could dodge the IVMs and tractor the VF-XAs and have all weapons free to fire at the Kzinti.


All of the above could be added by T-bombs, SS and even WWs...and don't mention counter drone fire or ADDs.

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Sunday, November 21, 2004 - 09:52 pm: Edit

I'd be happy to play these rules against MJC, provided he's in a Gorn and I'm in an equal BPV Kzin. My DW against his BDD perhaps, I'll make up the BPV difference in speciality drones.

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Sunday, November 21, 2004 - 09:58 pm: Edit

MJC: All new different ideas are not necessarily fun. Some will be fun; others will be game breaking killers of fun. Several people have indicated why the poundal is a game breaking killer of fun. Instead of waving the flag of newness, maybe you can present an example of an actual game you played where the addition of poundal drones greatly increased the fun level.

I will point to some holes in your analysis:

First: you use ships that the poundal will be less effective against. Making the attacker a single Kzinti ship against a large opponent with many labs artificially reduces the poundal's abilities. Try adding poundals to a large Kzinti carrier fleet in combat against an equivalent Lyran force (which can only ID about 1/4 of all Kzinti drones). Effectiveness should be considered based on when the weapon is the most effective.

Second: A Fed player would have to be insane to fire half its photons in a defensive role against drones. That all but ensures the Fed will be defeated by a Kzinti who gets a couple of turns of close range fire without facing a full photon spread.

Third: Your analysis excludes the effects of other seeking weapons launched by the ship carrying poundals plus any other actions the defending ship might take. Expecting the defending ship to have tractors available specifically against the poundal drones means that those tractors could not have been used against other drones that turn or to recover a shuttle or to have done any other useful tactical purpose.

It is not enough to point out what a new weapon does by itself; how the new weapon acts in conjunction with all the other systems determines its real impact. Ignoring the times the new weapon is strong to highlight when it is weak distorts the value not proves it to be balanced.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, November 21, 2004 - 11:00 pm: Edit

A.H.:

After the Year the Plasma Shotgun got invented, don't you think you'ld rather be the Gorn!?!


R.W.:

Try adding poundals to a large Kzinti carrier fleet in combat against an equivalent Lyran force (which can only ID about 1/4 of all Kzinti drones). Effectiveness should be considered based on when the weapon is the most effective.
Okay, you got me there, in a fleet battle poundal drones may be too much.

Expecting the defending ship to have tractors available specifically against the poundal drones means that those tractors could not have been used against other drones that turn or to recover a shuttle or to have done any other useful tactical purpose.
Now there I ought disagree. At a certain point the Kzinti has overwhelmed the opponant to such a point that the opponant finds HET & T-bomb or WWs or other ALL OUT DEFENSE options become availible and getting into debates about all option of defense are a little like talking to a child who responds to all statments with BUT WHY.

If the Defender is doing EVERYTHING plus defending against a full spread of limited availibility drones, the Defender to some extent deserves to get a face full of damage. If a Kzinti CA launches simply four type IVF drones ( a year latter when IVFs are Restricted rather than limited ) and the Fed CARa chooses to not fire Photons because he'ld be nuts to do so and he used one tractor to pull a shuttle aboard and is holding the other incase the Kzinti tries to tractor him during his close photon appraoch; doesn't he deserve to take the IVF drone he can't kill with phasers on his shield #1...isn't that a fair outcome for tying his own hands together!?!
One can only really analyse from the point of a standard attack run or else one runs into a 590 page calculation and an even large statement of possible outcomes.

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Monday, November 22, 2004 - 08:15 pm: Edit

MJC: I think this idea is not just broken but badly broken. Beat me three times out of five as the Gorn and I'll have to revise my opinion. I'm in Canberra at the moment, so not all that far for you to travel if you want to give it a try.