Spreading Torpedo:

When firing at a target at long range it is possible to choose to widen the spread of the torpedo. The result will increase the chance that one will impact while giving up the chance that all impact.

When firing a spread of torpedoes, the to hit roll is modified by –1 for each torpedo over the first in the spread. Only one dice is rolled, if a hit is achieved, only one torpedo impacts. For example, a spread of three torpedoes will give a –2 to hit and does 8 pt if it impacts. If torpedoes have different impact strength, determine randomly with even chance the torpedo which actually hit.

If mixing proximity and normal torpedoes, determine the chance of hitting with normal torpedo, if a hit is achieved proceed as above including the proximity torpedo in the determination, if the hit miss by only one point, then one of the proximity torpedo has hit.

Option :

_ use this system with all “miss or hit” weapon
(well I think that PPD, dis device should be excluded)
_ forbid this system size 5 or smaller target (the target are so small that spreading the fire will not help)

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, November 23, 2004 - 01:14 pm: Edit

I'm assuming you mean photon torpedoes? If so, it's creative; not sure it's necessary, but at least there is a penalty. My concern would be fleet actions, where a large number could be brought to bear.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Tuesday, November 23, 2004 - 01:29 pm: Edit

Actually, from what he has posted, he means it as a general firing option for all direct-fire "hit-or-miss" weapons, except for the PPD and DD, as a sort of opposite to the narrow salvo firing option.

That said, it is an interesting proposal; it would provide an option for those circumstances where you absolutely need at least one torp to hit, as in many circumstances you could fire enough torps to make it an auto-hit for one torp (two photons from range two, three disruptors from range eight, etc.).

I wouldn't be too concerned about the fleet thing:

1. I don't think this is something intended to be coordinated on a fleet basis; you can't narrow-salvo a fleet's weapons as a single unit, so I doubt you could spread-salvo a fleet's weapons as a single unit (and even if you could, it would result in a whopping one torp hit).
2. Even under the best of circumstances, it would result in only one automatic torp hit from each ship in your fleet, and if they are close enough to get those auto-hits, they would have statistically better results just rolling for each torp on its own.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, November 23, 2004 - 01:58 pm: Edit

What happens when you have combo salvos.

Say I fire a spread of one normal photon and two proximity photons. Which one of the three hits?

TO be clear, it -1 to the die roll for each torp in the salvo after the first. A hit result score only one torpedo hit?

By Jean-Baptiste LONGOUR (Skanvak) on Tuesday, November 23, 2004 - 03:28 pm: Edit

Loren, yes you have correctly understand the rule.

The cas you express was adressed in the original ppost. The torpedo that hit is RANDOMLY determined that is 1-2 the norm and 3-6 one prox. UNLESS the hit missed by only one point (for example the normal torp need 1-3 to hit and you 4) then it is one of the prox that hit.

MR, JO : I designed the rule with the photon torp in mind but actually I still wonder to which weapon it could/should be extended. Definetly the bolted torp should be included but they are a grey zone with the disruptor, rail gun...

This rule is to give some tactical option to direct-fire weapon. And because it sound like a consistent firing option.

Thanks for the comment, they are welcome.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, November 23, 2004 - 09:06 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

I'm assuming you mean photon torpedoes? If so, it's creative; not sure it's necessary, but at least there is a penalty. My concern would be fleet actions, where a large number could be brought to bear.

---

By Robert Snook (Verdick) on Tuesday, November 23, 2004 - 11:55 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

Can I narrow Salvo Disruptor pairs using the wides spread?...It would give the SP killing ability to the Klingons and Lyrans and Kzintis as well.

---

By Paul Stovell (Pauls) on Wednesday, November 24, 2004 - 07:40 am: Edit

I rather like this although it doubt this piece of chrome will be added to the huge rulebook that is SFB. I would like to see the rule banning its use against small targets if it were included. At interesting wording would be that it couldn't be used against a target that was counting a small target modifier.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Thursday, November 25, 2004 - 06:50 am: Edit

MJC

While it may make no difference firing a spread at R30 compared to normal fire using standard torps in a no-EW environment, it will make masses of difference in a heavy-EW environment.

This rule will only really be used when you are converting a situation where you have no chance at all of hitting into a least something of a chance. Even on a 1 in 6 to hit, it is just as good to roll X dice as to roll one and spread - you simply get a more predictable result using a spread. On anything equal to or better than 2 in 6, you should not use a spread.

The argument is slightly different for a 2D6 to hit roll, but the basic concept is the same - only use the spread when you have virtually no, or no, chance of hitting normally.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Thursday, November 25, 2004 - 07:00 am: Edit

PS

I am against this rule as it will significantly weaken bases, which often rely on EW to make long-range fleet fire ineffective. This will nullify those efforts, so the Phas-4 would need to be improved to compensate.

By William Curtis Soder (Ghyuka) on Sunday, November 28, 2004 - 03:33 pm: Edit

Perhaps changing the number of torpedos to gain the adjustment to fit more on the EW scale. 1 torpedo for +1, 3 torpedoes for a +2, 6 torpedos for a +3, etc. This prevents it from being to abused as well as more of a disadvantage for a guarenteed hit. Also I feel as each ship should only be able to perform a weapons spread individually.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 12:42 am: Edit

If we make it too weak, no one will use it.
If can make it exactly as damaging as regular fire only differnt ( See R9-12 proxy Photons for details ) then it'll be a good rule.

By William Curtis Soder (Ghyuka) on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 04:39 pm: Edit

MJC, I am not trying to cripple this idea. I actually like this one. I remember a group I played with toying with something very similar. I am simply pointing out other avenues for it to progress. The Proximity Photon comparison is probably the best current rule to compare this to but there are a couple of restrictions the Proximity Photon has compared to this rule.
1) Proxies must be allocated. You cannot look at the chart and decide 'hmmm, this is a better die roll'.
2) Proxies have a minimum range.
3) Proxies cannot be used with overloads.
4) Proxies have a set die roll modifier and set damage rating to gain that modifier.
As this rule is, it will limit tactical decisions as well as eliminate the random factor of a die roll if taken to the extreme.
As an extreme example take a ship with heavily damaged shields jacking up his ECM to 6 and running under erratic maneuvers (yes, I know a player who'd do it even with perfect shields). This rule could effectively negate those 12 points of power without a single cost paid during allocation short of holding cost for torpedos. Let alone, he can dial his bonus to fit his situation immediatly instead of having to play out his tactics by allocation.
What I had suggested makes to increasingly harder to get a die roll shift as most die shifts in the game are.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 06:13 pm: Edit

Well, that's an okay price by me.

Remember to get past the ten ECM your guy is generating he need to generate 6 ECCM and fire three Photons ( if he's a Fed DW ) or all four if he's a Fed CARa+.
Now if he's firing at R8, with his DW then he's gone from a regular 1 in six chance to hit to a 3 in six chance to hit and then if he hits he tops out at 8 points of damage.
If he fired from the CARa+ he goes from a Nil in six chance to a 3 in six chance but against can inflict a maximum of 8 damage. And if he added just 2 additional ECCM with BTTYs then he'ld go from a one in six chance of hitting ( actually a 1 minus 5⁴ divided by 6⁴ ( 671 in 1296 ) chance of getting at least one hit ) with an average damage of 5.33 points, to having a four in six chance of getting at one hit ( and one only ( unlike the 1 in 1296 of all four hitting in a typical spread ) which in turn yeilds and average damage of 5.33 points.
All in all the penalty of one negative shift point per Photon is quite fair.


Even when using Proxies at R30 a regular 4 in 6 shance could become a 6 in 6 chance by firing a spread of three ( or more but that would be eastedful ) but rather than having an average of 8 points of damage ( with an 8 in 27 chance of doing the full 12 and a one in 27 chance of doing nothing ) it would have an average of just 4 with no chance of anything but the average.
So the rule as is is pretty penalising as is.

By Jean-Baptiste LONGOUR (Skanvak) on Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - 12:30 pm: Edit

Ghuyka,

I think that the decision to spread fire should be made the same way EW shift with BTTY are made, so the spread will not be too much of an EW counter.

Now that is one of the raeson the spread should perhaps not be extended to disruptor, because Ph Torp need 2 turn to reload. So sacrificing a photon shot cost more time than a disruptor shot.

MjC, thanks for the maths very comprehensive.

By William Curtis Soder (Ghyuka) on Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - 02:14 pm: Edit

Jean-Baptiste,
I had suggested it costing increasing amounts of torpedos to gain additional shifts because it follows the EW shift more closely.
Simply choosing to spread fire during the change EW step with reserve power wouldn't change the problem of adjusting the die roll on the fly against your opponent who cannot counter it. Perhaps having to allocate your spread of fire during energy allocation may be a good solution.

As for the disruptor, I'm not sure yet. The disruptor and photon are two of the most balanced weapons against each other. The photon takes two turns to arm but does a set amount of damage at any range. The disruptor has some more effective range brackets but damage decreases with range and can fire every turn. I'd say that if the photon gained this function, the disruptor should but that it wouldn't be able to use UIM and/or DERFACS with it.