Sureshot wrote:If you just going to pick some of the more stronger weapons in the game and then go "see nothing wrong with the damage values" well let me show you a few that are nerfed.
Just for clarity - 'nerfed' means they were more powerful at some point and then changed to be less powerful. Im a stickler for proper usage. =P
The Ultimax Rail gun which is listed as being "one of the more powerful long range rail guns in the world. It has good range yet imo poor damage 1D6 x 10.
WIth 50% better range than any competing rail gun (i dont consider the Glitter Boy to be a viable portion of any argument, as it is the clear outlier in pretty much the
entire game, even higher-power settings like Phase World/TG), i'd say it is exactly as advertised. I dont consider 1d6x10 to be weak -
especially when the Ultimax was printed. Average PC body armor back then was in the 55-70 range, meaning that even on average rolls, thats a 2-shot kill... with 50% better range than anything in the field against it.
The size of that railgun it should be at least 2D6 X 10.
Why? And, honestly, it really isn't even that big - not a lot bigger than a C-40R - just a longer rail (and, ergo, longer range). Even if it is bigger, these aren't traditional cannons; bigger does not automatically mean "more damage". Its not like the difference between a 8" deck gun and a 16" battery gun on a Battleship, or anything.
The Black Night a 35 foot tall robot that has a has a ion cannon that does only 1D6 x 10.
Again, with a range that puts every other Ion canon on the market to shame (4000ft!); Size doesnt automatically equate to more damage.
The first version of the Triax Devestor a 50 ft tall robot whos main gun does a 1D6 x10. That thing should be doing at least a 4D6 x 10.
Why, just because it is big? 1d6x10 from a single blast is pretty freaking impressive damage. Couple that with its absurd range (8000ft!) and it is still a good weapon. Had i written it, i might have written at 2d4x10, but no higher. We're stuck on the "its bigger, so it must do much more damage" trope; energy weapons have virtually nothing in common with big-bore slug guns. Bigger doesnt always (or even mostly, it seems) mean way more damage.
The enforcer Rail gun considering it's size
Marginally bigger than a C-40R and mountable on a truck? The Enforcer is tiny for a robot, remember. Its even got a foot soldier for scale. It is maybe.. .30% bigger than the C-40R, and does 50% more damage. I think we're good.
and that for the longest time was a frontline unit for the CS should have done at least a 2D6 x 10.
Remember that even as of RMB, the Enforcer was an aging design, that they had been using for decades.
You are correct that in some instances those weapons can kill a person in body armor in one shot. If a good damage is rolled on the dice roll.
For a lot of the weapons i listed, like the NG Railgun on the Hunter Mobile Gun, for instance, it isn't even a "good roll" - its like 40% of the time against PCs of the era (80 MDC heavy armor, remember). Less now, but that was bound to happen when the mudflation set in.
I'm not saying everything is out of whack in terms of vehicles and robots. Too many imo just don't make sense to me. I never had trouble with the ranges of weapons. Even if occasionally the ranges are off. It was certain damage vlaues of giant sized weapons that bothers me.
You just have to accept that energy weapons are nothing like, not even remotely similar, to the universally shell-based weapons we use now. Railguns arent very similar either (dont even get me started on how goofy Rifts Railguns are anyway - bursts? the whole design of rail guns is heavy damage, high-speed, dense slug single shots). Mass of the projectile and available power matter WAY more for a railgun than its size. Power most of all. I'd say that Rail Gun damage in Rifts is probably held back by the power needs of the guns - they simply cant afford to juice them up higher without massive power installations (edit: and FAR better heat dissipation - both on the rails and the capacitor/electromagnet rings).
Energy weapons... have even less. Whereas in a shell-based cannon, the bigger the bore/gun, the more propellant you can use (and therefore more range), and the bigger the shell you can fire (and thefore, can pack more explosive/warhead into it) the more range and damage it does. Energy weapons... all of that is meaningless. its all about available power, mostly, and being able to efficiently transfer that power into the desired energy form. While some laser weapons put out equivalent damage
per character action, almost none put out the damage
per shot of that super-laser on the Devastator, making it provably a far more powerful weapon. It isn't until we see the CS using a similar weapon (and one they might even have received FROM Triax) on their tanks and robots that anyone fielded anything similar. I attribute the huge size of the gun to the energy storage (50 shots of 1d6x10 per shot + 8000ft of range) and massive lensing apparatus required to make that thing shoot 8000ft before the beam loses cohesion.
Well for me imo the problem with battles taking so long sometimes is that no way to do a critical strike unless a person has the right level in hand to hand. Imo being able to do doulbe dmage should just be a regular feature in the rules. In my games critical strikes can be done at first level. Or if a group fights something with a lot of MDC and they get bad rolls it does take a long time.
For me, its late and im heading to bed, so i cant check this..... but a natural twenty is ALWAYS a critical strike, as far as i can remember. Maybe i was taught wrong when i first learned palladium way back when, but im as sure as i can be without looking it up.
Edit: nvm, i found it in like 10 seconds. RUE, page 343 "A roll of a natural 20 is always a hit and a critical strike unless the defenders also rolls a natural 20 to dodge or parry" - which is exactly how i remember reading the text from the combat section in HU: Revised when i learned Palladium like .. 18 or 19 years ago.
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:I'm glad many things carry missles because imo as much as I like Robotech it's not a good fit for a anime style game imo. Most things in anime take 1 or 2 maybe 3-4 hits to blow up. Unless a gm houserules it the weapons are too weak.
Well disagree there - what Robotech does is show the difference between the hero (the players) and the extras and illustrates how game mechanics dont exist in-game. Most of the
extras get blown away with as little as a single shot from a Battle Pod.. but Rick's VF-1 gets shot full of holes multiple times, as does Max's, and Rick even loses limbs a few times. The MDC values for things are based on Heroes piloting them; it is why i wouldnt hesitate to say to my players (lets say theyre piloting a Skullsmasher, in formation with a few other robots) "The Skullsmasher next to you gets hit head-on by a pair of missiles and is destroyed" - the game stats may not support that unless those were heavy long range missiles, but NPCs dont get the benefit of being PCs. Sometimes they just get shot and die when appropriate.
