Star Wars Roleplay: Chaos

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Approved Tech Nova Cannon

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nova Cannon

Conqueror_superlaser.jpg

Image Source: Here. Picture from Wookieepedia. This design is less dish-shaped and more like a long cannon.
Intent: To develop a powerful main weapon for the modern age. This weapon is substantial, able to inflict huge damage, but also has notable weaknesses. The rate of fire, inability to hit anything faster than a Destroyer, and the vulnerability this causes the mounting ship makes it balanced.
Development Thread: YES
Manufacturer: Firemane Industries & Technology
Model: NC-001
Affiliation: Silver Sanctum Coalition
Modularity: No
Production: Unique. Only the Barsen'Thor has the design, power and construction requirements for this weapon.
Material: Durasteel, electronic components, Hadrium and Dunite for heat absorption. Microthrusters handle recoil.
Classification: Large ship-mounted laser.
Size: Ship-mounted.
Length: 200 metres long.
Weight: N/A, several hundred thousand tonnes at least.
Ammunition Type: Powered by a Colossus Reactor.
Ammunition Capacity: One shot per two ‘rounds’ of fleeting. This is about one shot every 5 minutes.
Effective Range: ‘Long-Range’ in a fleeting sense. Although it has essentially unlimited range it is impossible to aim at anything above ‘Long-Range’
Rate of Fire: Single
Special Features:
  • Turbo-turbolaser.
  • Consumes 300 capital guns of space.
  • Can only be used against Star Destroyers or larger.
  • Fires once every two posts.
  • Molecular shields must be deactivated to allow this to fire.
  • Requires a Colossus Reactor.
Description:
In order to create a capstone for the Coalition Fleet, Admiral Stahlmann wanted to go big. In order to properly arm such a vessel he looked into possible armaments.
Once, the Galactic Empire had built many weapons of terror and destruction, but the Admiral did not want to entertain any of those ideas. Destroying planets, or even mass destruction of any kind was against both his and the Coalition’s ethics. However, what he wanted would need enough power to damage ships.
As a compromise, the Admiral downgraded his vision so that it could not be used for terror campaigns or indiscriminate slaughter. He did not want a super weapon, he wanted a weapon of war.

Therefore, the Nova Cannon was born. In theory and execution the weapon is like a very very large turbolaser. Rather than a focused beam it fires a massive bolt channelled through the Colossus Reactor and through the 200 metre long cannon. This bolt can travel as far as any naval weapon and can inflict substantial damage if it hits. As the equivalent of 75 batteries of regular turbolasers, a single impact can inflict severe damage…providing it hits.
This hit, like all turbolasers, is better at damaging hull, and is less likely to puncture shields, either on enemy capital ships or planetary shields.
As it takes time to charge, aim and initiate firing, the rapidity of the weapon’s fire is not great. One shot every five minutes is a good baseline, and firing faster than that is not practical. For a weapon of this size this is actually quite good.

Such a large weapon does have weaknesses though. For a start, it is impossible to aim at ships smaller or faster than a Star Destroyer. The rapid pace and small size keeps smaller ships safe. Linked to this, the size of the weapon limits the fire arc to directly forward. Considering the ship it is mounted on is slow it means enemies need to be directly in front to target.

Further, as opposed to the significant hull around it, the cannon is quite lightly armoured. Attacks which penetrate the shield and hit the nestled cannon have a better chance of disabling it. Indeed, an especially powerful attack might even cause critical damage if it hits at the right place or time.

Finally, its capabilities as an orbital bombardment weapon are devastating where it hits. Essentially, where this shot lands it will punch a deep crater into the ground and level an entire city block. However, aiming from orbit is an extremely uncertain process. Lighter, faster firing guns would be more accurate, but this weapon is ruinous where it hits.

Overall, the Nova Cannon is a powerful weapon, but it is one with clear limits.

Strengths:
  • A very powerful weapon able to deal significant damage.
  • Has a relatively rapid firing time – above 5 minutes.
  • Does not impair the ship’s regular functions except the molecular shields.
  • Can inflict a powerful orbital bombardment.

Weaknesses:
  • Requires the molecular shields to be disable in order to fire.
  • Is better against hulls than shields.
  • Relatively limited fire arc.
  • Cannot target anything faster than 15 speed and/or over 1500m.
  • Is lightly armoured and significant damage can cause potentially devastating consequences.
  • Targeting through atmosphere is very imprecise.

Primary Source: N/A
 
RESEARCH REVIEW

Star Wars Canon:
Pending initial review

Starwars Chaos:
Pending initial review

WITHOUT DEV THREADS
Pending initial review

WITH DEV THREADS
Pending Initial review

SUGGESTIONS
Pending Inital review
 
[member="Friedrich Stahlmann"], as your character said in the development thread, a technological terror...almost sounds Tarkinish.

In any case, is this a fixed weapon? Or does it have some tracking ability of its own not dependent on its host ship's movement?


  • Molecular shields must be deactivated to allow this to fire.
Does the weapon have any effect on other shielding technologies that the host ship may have, such as vanilla ray, particle, or deflector shields?
 
[member="Gir Quee"]
It's a fixed weapon in that it's axial on the ship rather than a turret, hence why it can only fire at slow moving enemies.

I'd say other shields are fine, considering the Conqueror, Death Star and Eclipse could fire with its normal shields up. The molecular shields being built for the secret project though would probably interfere and cause a feedback loop which would be...bad.
 
I see that a lot of work has been put into this, and I think that there are plenty of examples to say that this has a well-established canon basis for existence. However, I think that for gameplay purposes and balance, we should consider a couple of things to minimize any potential OOC conflicts with its use.

From the Conqueror entry:

When the weapon was fired, beams emanated from the generators and converged into a single green laser capable of destroying a small moon,
I'm concerned that someone will report this as a superweapon, even if it isn't applied against an orbital body. In the Nova Cannon's defense, the
Munificent-class Frigate had cannons purportedly able to destroy 1000 km wide ice moons. But still, it's something to think about.

it[the death star laser] was fired once with four percent power to destroy the Fortressa, a Lucrehulk-class battleship under Rebel control
For comparison, would I be right in assuming that the Nova Cannon would have ~1.5% (1/64) of the power of the death star's original superlaser? If this is the case, then the Nova cannon would have the offensive ability to instantly vaporize a 1125 meter ship. Because of that, I'm glad to see that it cannot target any ship smaller than a star destroyer.

However, if it is hitting the classical Imperator-class Star Destroyer, we're looking at over two-thirds of the ship being destroyed in a single hit. That ship may not be completely destroyed, but for all intents and purposes, it looks to me that it would be out of the game.

In really large fleet battles, that loss might be considered acceptable if the Nova is only deployed on a single ship. In some of the smaller engagements that we've seen recently (with fleet sizes less than 5000 meters), even one Nova Cannon looks to me like it could be considered as unbalancing because it could have such a decisive action. With one shot, we're talking about something like 30-40% of a fleet's firepower disappearing.

I'm concerned that in such instances, that this weapon is likely going to be reported. I'd like to head off this issue before it occurs, and in doing so, save us all time and potential OOC drama.

I think that the obvious answer to this issue would be to scale down both the weapon's size and power, perhaps to the point where the host ship could carry other weapons or even multiple Nova Cannons.

But I'd like to hear if you any alternative thoughts or ideas that could address those concerns before we proceed.
 
[member="Gir Quee"]
OK, there's a couple of potential solutions here. I think the main problem we're concerned about is misunderstanding and general complaints about it. I mean, there's not much smaller it can go without being just a very powerful turbolaser. :p

  • Make it unique: I have it in mind for one, very special ship. Making it unique would mean only that one ship could use it, meaning that proliferation would not be an issue.
  • Increase the capital ship load. If increased to 500 capital guns capacity it would provide a nice cap on just how much other weaponry could be added.
  • Reduce the firing rate. Though it seems rather a nerf, it could be reduced so it can fire only every 4th round.

As mentioned, it lacks the ability to destroy or devastate a planet or moon. It could provide an orbital bombardment...but then so could a star destroyer render a planet uninhabited with a Base Delta Zero.

There's not much I can do to reduce that further without really rendering the weapon useless. It's not a superweapon, it's a 1/64th sized superweapon. Since I don't decide the damage other ships take, one can only suggest its effects, not enforce it.

I think any of the above bullet points, or a combination of them, should reduce some of the anxieties.
 
All right, this looks good to me.

I think that you probably know this better than myself [member="Friedrich Stahlmann"], but as a matter of public record, abuse and suffer.

As long as we're clear that the receiver of the cannon's attack will detail and determine damage, I do not forsee any problems with this.

Approved pending secondary approval.
 
[member="Friedrich Stahlmann"] Have you made the edits we spoke on skype about? Also can you include Strengths and Weaknesses to the Template - It would help the submission and lay things out for people reading the submission.
 
[member="Friedrich Stahlmann"] - due to [member="Spencer Varanin"] being boss and also busy, she's asked me to take over this sub. I'm coming at this cold -- all I know about this sub is that it exists -- so I'll read through the dev thread and the sub, and look at what other people have gotten stamped on a similar scale, and try to get back to you today.
 
[member="Friedrich Stahlmann"]

SO. Initial thoughts. I'm going entirely from the sub as it's currently written; I haven't read Gir's stuff above, or consulted current/former FJs on this. Coming at it cold for the sake of fairness.
  • I'm a fan of barrel consolidation in general. In theory, I have no problem with a 300-gun consolidation.We've got a decent stable of barrel consolidation examples ranging from 100-160 guns' worth. (Javelin, Mjolnir, Hellbore, LRHHVel, VIORA, etc.) Those are the benchmarks that the board uses for weapons on this scale. Do you feel this weapon gives damage equivalent to, say, three of Ayden's axial Javelins, or any other 300-point combination of approved weapons? Or are you aiming to create something, through dev, that is greater than the sum of its parts? In other words, this costs 300; does it hit like 300? Not a trick question, just trying to gauge where your intentions are at.
  • 45 degrees of fire arc seems high, to my mind. I've seen one or two big guns with broad arcs, but there's also some that are axial-fixed or have like 20 degrees of arc. What's your thinking on the 45 degree fire arc for your 200-metre, X00,000-ton gun?
  • You're not going to get even limited effectiveness against planetary shields from 300 turbos' worth. One gun can't outperform the Executor and Death Fleet, not at 300 anyway. You'd need to scale up the cost quite a bit, probably an order of magnitude or more, to make any kind of a dent in planetary shielding. Any reference to planetary shielding will need to be removed.
  • So far, no high-end barrel consolidation weapons have had more than token dev. I know you're willing to do more dev as necessary; just be aware that I'm aware that the 100-150-point guns haven't generally had much dev if any. So your 23 posts are to your benefit, more than normal.
  • I don't feel there's a whole lot of comparison between this gun and the fleetkiller on the Undying. Even so, I think the Undying is worth mentioning because how the board perceives something and how I perceive it are not necessarily the same. I can't stamp something that looks like a superweapon, quacks like a superweapon, and has the same mission profile as a superweapon -- not unless it's made really, really clear that this can't be considered a superweapon by anyone but the whiniest.
 
[member="Jorus Merrill"]
I'll go through these in numerical order.

  1. I see it doing as much damage as 300 barrels worth concentrated into a single point would. Since damage is decided by the opposition, it would be their choice on how to interpret it. However, I suspect it would be more effective against hulls than shields, and probably balance that way.
  2. 45 degrees is basically the angle where it can be aimed relatively quickly. It's axial which means the ship has to physically line up with the target. I can clarify this if required and leave the angle out.
  3. Will remove planetary shield reference.
  4. Cheers.
  5. Previous drafts of this weapon were a bit more intense. I've revised and nerfed it down into basically a very big turbolaser. I don't consider that a superweapon any more than a dual Hellbore could be considered one. I leave it to your judgement to decide, but I feel this cannot be construed a superweapon based on other items approved on this board.
 
[member="Friedrich Stahlmann"]

1. Perfect.
2. That would be ideal. I'd really flesh that out to make it clear to your average reader that we're not talking a wide-angle field of fire like the DS2 sniping Mon Cals over Endor.
3. Thankya. Let me know when that's all polished up.
4.
5. Good stuff. Your answer for #1 resolves most of this to my satisfaction. The precedents I pulled together this morning were the ones I listed above, and I know for darn sure that list probably isn't comprehensive. Are there any others that served as references for you?

At this stage, I'm about 85% sure I'm comfortable with what's here. You've made it clear that you don't expect it to punch above its weight, and that's sort of the critical point. I'm going to discuss this with [member="Spencer Varanin"] to make sure we're all on the same page.

Oh, one more thing I'd meant to address:

6. You may need to reexamine how you describe the orbital bombardment capabilities (though I'd imagine this was the result of the previous nerfing). I can think of more than a few precedents for a small handful of turbolaser shots causing the degree of devastation you describe. At 300x, I'd imagine the devastation would be two orders of magnitude greater, and the bombardment inaccuracies wouldn't matter so much as a limitation. We're nowhere near crust-cracking territory here, so what I'd recommend at this stage is a couple of handwaved sentences about how the blast is so intense that it just sort of keeps going down rather than exploding on impact. So instead of a city wiped out in a shot, you get a very big, very deep hole in the ground between Jameson and Third, surrounded by all the usual peripheral damage. And maybe that one super-bunker underground is only half-wrecked, with all the dirt gone from around it. Would it really work like that? Heck no: you've got a city-killer here. But apply the right phlebotinum here and you'll get a visually impressive result that respects the weapon's power without making people scream superweapon. Sound like a plan to you?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom