WP Stagnation

[AlexeiTimoshenko]

4) relative to-hit numbers.

CAM's will have an advantage if I'm reading the rules correctly. They don't suffer the to hit penalties from (XO) racks. They also have greater range than IDEW's until HT 10.

[tmul4050]

I not saying that these beamhawks are more effective or as effective as sbmhawks, but I can see a race researching and deploying these. If an IDEW can aim and fire than so can these. You are just putting a drive system on the mine and giving it the ability to target like a SBMHAWK.

In real history many thinks were researched and even deployed that were inefficient. Examples include parasite fighters for bombers, infantry launched nukes. In vietnam fighters were deployed with no cannon because missles were thought to be the only weapon needed. (the answer was wrong) Think of the many oddball weapons used in WW2 (the ME163 Komet is a good example). The same could apply here.

And it need not be wasted research. For example say a race developed Beamhawks, and then discovered another race using SBMhawks. The research could assist SBMhawk research. Just thinking.

Actually I can see this unit being effective, especially with primary and needler weapons. That effectiveness would be short lived maybe.

BTW of course a CAM2 would be more effective. You're talking about antimatter weaponry, about the nastiest weapon in the game. The beamhawks would be lower tech level than that by far.

[AlexeiTimoshenko]

Below HT 10 the beamhawks would be half damage and range if they follow IDEW rules. With the HT 10 version IDEW's beamhawks would be useful in some circumstances.

[tmul4050]

Oh. Point.
I have to admit I forgot that.
However I agree the system would be useful under certain circumstances.

[AlexeiTimoshenko]

Needle beam pods wouldn't work as the weapon needs Xr to function. On the other hand, at a high enough TL something similar to the Apollo concept from Honor Harrington might be a solution. Essentially have one somewhat larger missile mount Xr and the others have needle beams.

[Crucis]

Needle beam pods wouldn't work as the weapon needs Xr to function. On the other hand, at a high enough TL something similar to the Apollo concept from Honor Harrington might be a solution. Essentially have one somewhat larger missile mount Xr and the others have needle beams.

Frankly, this highlights a problem that I have with both the Needle Beam and the Primary. It seems to me that both weapons possess the ability to do two things that synergize well. Penetrate and Precision.

Cutting to the chase, I see no reason why a Primary Beam couldn't mate up with Xr and take out individual systems with precision. OTOH, if Needle Beams have the penetrating ability to destroy individual systems deep within a ship (when mated to Xr), I see no reason that it wouldn't operate like a primary beam, when not working with Xr (except for its inability to penetrate shields). Would this make the two weapons very similar? Yeah, it would. But I really see no logical justification for saying that it shouldn't be so, other than an arbitrary game design one.

(And for that matter, I see no reason why there shouldn't be a penetrating and precision laser weapon either.)

But regarding this beam-armed drones thread, I'm not fond of the idea. However, ignoring that for a sec, I'd rather avoid the HH Apollo controlling drone thing, and just let needle armed drones function as I describe above, similar to primary beams in terms of penetration, though only AFTER the shields on the target were down. (If shields were not down, they'd just do a single dp against the shields per needle beam.)

[AlexeiTimoshenko]

For the sake of argument, would Needle beam IDEW's be an option then.

[Crucis]

For the sake of argument, would Needle beam IDEW's be an option then.

I don't see why not, though it'd be without any precision ability. Only deep penetrating ability (after shields are down).

[Crucis]

Alexei, I should take a step back and say that I've never been entirely comfortable with the idea that a beam weapon could be so amazingly precise that it could target and hit an individual system within a moving starship. It's one thing to do it when the ship is tractored and immobile relative to the firing starship. But to do it to a moving target seems all but impossible, even if you were close enough and your sensors could pick out individual systems within the target.

[AlexeiTimoshenko]

Specific system, no. Type of system (i.e. engine, weapon etc), maybe.