ATL-7

[Zer0 Kay]

Is the ATL-7 a case of power creep or not? Why?

[Nightmask]

Not, because while it's able to deal massive damage it's a one-shot weapon so it's little different than a portable missile launcher where you have to reload after each shot and dealing roughly the same amount of damage but without the blast radius. Even if a GM let you run it off a power pack it's not much different at that point to the Glitter Boy in damage and those have been around since the start of the game so you're only just reaching the point of competing with it damage-wise.

[wyrmraker]

I'm going to say no, in that it is appropriate for it's home region. Also, since it's one shot, it seriously limits it's utility as a battle-field weapon, lending itself more to a strategic strike weapon, much like missiles.

And to be honest, looking at the damage differentials between weapons along scale, it was about time a properly heavy weapon was brought into the game.

[eliakon]

The weapon, as officially stated out is not power creep at all.
Lets look at it logically, it requires at MINIMUM 3 actions per shot (one to fire, two to change e-clip)
Thus the damage of 3d6x10+20 is actually 1d6x10+6.6(lets call that 7). No one I know of is going to call a weapon that does 1d6x10+7 MD and gets three shots from an E-clip 'over powered' That would be called by most people one of the worst weapons they could think of.
If your aim your shot, then that's yet ANOTHER action per shot.....quickly this weapon becomes a 'once per round' weapon. And joins the ranks of 'highly specialized weapon that is great in its unique role, and not so good elsewhere'

Now I will not say that it can't be abused, especially if someone starts to change the canon stats (removing the e-clip is the most common example) But if you modify the weapon so that it is no longer the weapon in discussion....then its not really about that weapon anymore is it?

[Jefffar]

Its one of the few realistic heavy weapons in Rifts and not overpowered for what it is. There are some who believe that you can use it with WP Rifle and Sniper based on the name, which is one spot that it gets abused. The other issue is that the author didn't think to include overheating rules in case someone hooked it up to a nuclear powerplant.

[Nekira Sudacne]

Of course, all you have to do is TW convert it so it runs off of PPE that you can store up mulptile conceutive shots in, and then it's overpowered.

[Zer0 Kay]

Wow, I thought I was going to get a lot of yeses. We don't know if it just takes the equivalent of an e-clips worth of energy or if it actually draws all the power out of whatever it is connected to. I assumed the first and allowed it connected to the CAF power pack from phaseworld that allows 10 shots. And as thin as they appeared allowed them double stacked and connected in series. But even at 20 shots at 3d6x10+10 we need to remember, and this would have been my counter for those that thought it was power creep, it was...IS from the RMB era of Rifts where any burst capable weapon of 3d6 could do 3d6x10 with a full magazine burst. And if we then set that weapon up with a vehicle mounted ammo drum it would greatly increase the number of times that could be done and each of those weapons much lighter than the ATL-7. Granted if WP e-rifle and sniper are allowed on it, the ATL-7 is far more accurate.

So in short the ATL-7 is the very definition of power CREEP, not enough difference to really note compared to complains of power creep which I would say is large enough to be a power LEAP.

[Zer0 Kay]

Of course, all you have to do is TW convert it so it runs off of PPE that you can store up mulptile conceutive shots in, and then it's overpowered.

I'm confused. So this coming from you is OP good or bad?

[Shark_Force]

Of course, all you have to do is TW convert it so it runs off of PPE that you can store up mulptile conceutive shots in, and then it's overpowered.

there is no canon way to take an energy weapon, convert it to TW, and have it keep it's old stats apart from being powered by PPE. the only rules we have *at all* for converting a TW weapon would make the ATL-7 do something like 2d6 damage per shot as i recall... definitely not overpowered in the slightest.

in other words, it's completely dependant on the GM inventing broken rules for converting it to a TW weapon to break it. definitely not broken in and of itself.

what breaks it is when you combine it with the gizmoteer ability in the same book to make it run off of ISP... at 1 ISP per shot, if you don't house rule (which i would imagine most do, because that's an obvious example of something that's broken). of course, even at, say, 10-15 ISP per shot, it's still a bargain compared to most damaging psychic powers (the only exception i can think of is the burster's super fuel flame).

but of course, what also breaks it, comparatively speaking, is mounting it to a vehicle with a nuclear power supply... for a given definition of "broken" (to be fair, i wouldn't have a problem if the typical large vehicle-mounted weapon in rifts did damage like the ATL-7, and in fact i think it causes a great deal of confusion that they don't deal massively more damage than a typical handheld energy rifle anyways).

i will say that i don't consider it's specialization to be too hard to take advantage of. especially if you can get a few of them in the party; line up a shot, everyone fires a volley, and you've probably just removed a major threat (or several minor ones) at the start of the fight, and the range is long enough you've got a decent chance to get away without getting into a full-on fight. never underestimate the value of cramming several actions worth of damage into the first action... it's basically amazing in any situation where you can leverage your maneuverability into deciding when an engagement happens. if you can step in and out of enemy range with higher speed or other means, you can trade your one gigantic shot for their regular shot, and then get away before they can get in their other regular shots to make up the difference.

[glitterboy2098]

closest you can get is to make a TW recharging E-clip using subparticle accelleration and a PPE battery attached to a normal E-clip.. but then you'd still have to spend an action to activate the recharge between each shot, so the only real gain is not having to carry a couple dozen E-clips around..

as for connecting to a nuclear plant.. that doesn't really effect it much. all you lose is the time to reload, because connecting to a PA's powerplant isn't going to aler the fundemental design of the weapon. a PA level powerplant (which is basically what the MG-railgun ones are too) , even a robot or freaking starship level plant isn't going to allow for say, pulse firing or whatever.. the weapons itself isn't set up for it. if you can adapt it (and i'd say it's trickier than most, because i doubt it has the same kind of regulating hardware a smaller laser would have, which tells it to stop after a certain power drain.. you'd have to rig one up to keep it from greying out your suit everytime), at best you'd just be able to fire it once per action.. which honestly isn't that much faster than it can do using E-clips.

[Zer0 Kay]

At those ranges it should be a surprise attack with no visible beam and no sound.
Enemy just falls down.
Chaos ensues.
You set a remote or timed charge (just a small one to make noise, maybe a little smoke) and reposition.
You set off charge to get chaos organized in that direction.
Next shot
Rinse and repeat

[Zer0 Kay]

closest you can get is to make a TW recharging E-clip using subparticle accelleration and a PPE battery attached to a normal E-clip.. but then you'd still have to spend an action to activate the recharge between each shot, so the only real gain is not having to carry a couple dozen E-clips around..

as for connecting to a nuclear plant.. that doesn't really effect it much. all you lose is the time to reload, because connecting to a PA's powerplant isn't going to aler the fundemental design of the weapon. a PA level powerplant (which is basically what the MG-railgun ones are too) , even a robot or freaking starship level plant isn't going to allow for say, pulse firing or whatever.. the weapons itself isn't set up for it. if you can adapt it (and i'd say it's trickier than most, because i doubt it has the same kind of regulating hardware a smaller laser would have, which tells it to stop after a certain power drain.. you'd have to rig one up to keep it from greying out your suit everytime), at best you'd just be able to fire it once per action.. which honestly isn't that much faster than it can do using E-clips.

Wha!!! How is firing a ATL-7 six times with six actions in one turn NOT better than firing it twice with six actions in one turn? If the CAF power pack (10x eclip) is used there is no drain on your PA. I can't remember is it a standard eclip or ling eclip? What if it is modified to use an energy drum like CS weapons? Why has nobody IG made an energy drum that uses the eclip couple? So
1. Which e clip size does it use
2. how much more does the ling e clip hold over the short and what about a drum?

[Nightmask]

Of course, all you have to do is TW convert it so it runs off of PPE that you can store up mulptile conceutive shots in, and then it's overpowered.

there is no canon way to take an energy weapon, convert it to TW, and have it keep it's old stats apart from being powered by PPE. the only rules we have *at all* for converting a TW weapon would make the ATL-7 do something like 2d6 damage per shot as i recall... definitely not overpowered in the slightest.

in other words, it's completely dependant on the GM inventing broken rules for converting it to a TW weapon to break it. definitely not broken in and of itself.

what breaks it is when you combine it with the gizmoteer ability in the same book to make it run off of ISP... at 1 ISP per shot, if you don't house rule (which i would imagine most do, because that's an obvious example of something that's broken). of course, even at, say, 10-15 ISP per shot, it's still a bargain compared to most damaging psychic powers (the only exception i can think of is the burster's super fuel flame).

but of course, what also breaks it, comparatively speaking, is mounting it to a vehicle with a nuclear power supply... for a given definition of "broken" (to be fair, i wouldn't have a problem if the typical large vehicle-mounted weapon in rifts did damage like the ATL-7, and in fact i think it causes a great deal of confusion that they don't deal massively more damage than a typical handheld energy rifle anyways).

i will say that i don't consider it's specialization to be too hard to take advantage of. especially if you can get a few of them in the party; line up a shot, everyone fires a volley, and you've probably just removed a major threat (or several minor ones) at the start of the fight, and the range is long enough you've got a decent chance to get away without getting into a full-on fight. never underestimate the value of cramming several actions worth of damage into the first action... it's basically amazing in any situation where you can leverage your maneuverability into deciding when an engagement happens. if you can step in and out of enemy range with higher speed or other means, you can trade your one gigantic shot for their regular shot, and then get away before they can get in their other regular shots to make up the difference.

Not seeing how you see it as broken if the weapon was hooked up to a power plant on a vehicle for effectively unlimited firing (although to be fair given the massive energy demand of the weapon that would require a VERY robust system when dragging ten or twenty times the normal amount of energy used for an energy weapon from it). You basically end up with a Laser-gun equivalent of a Glitter Boy's Boom cannon with shorter range and Glitter Boys are hardly broken something being about the same level isn't on the broken end either. Not that the weapon should be able to handle that kind of use as we're already told it's got heavy insulation to handle the massive amounts of heat produced from burning an e-clip's worth of energy in a single shot, trying to fire it so frequently should burn it out or at least cause temporary shut-down from overheating. Presumably the time required to remove and replace a spent e-clip gives it just enough time to cool not to melt down, although likely requires longer to be on the safe side.

[eliakon]

I would just like to point out that there is no, official way to hook the ATL up to a nuclear power plant.
Yes, I know that it might be theoretically possible, but my point is that there is no official rules for it. Which means that its up to the GM to make a house rule to allow it. And frankly if you make a house rule to allow something then I don't see how it can possibly be broken since by definition you are purposefully allowing it in your game.
Its like saying that you have a house rule that power armor pilots can take/use sharpshooter, and then complaining that sharpshooting power armor is broken.
By the RAW it requires an e-clip to fire, and uses the entire clip up when it does so.
Also by the Raw it takes 2 actions to change the e-clip (rather than the usual 1 I believe)
Changing the weapon so that it no longer follows the RAW doesn't mean that the official weapon is broken, just that the unofficial house ruled version is broken.

I will admit that the gizmoteer trick is rather abusive as well. But to be frank the gizmoteer class has lots of potential for abuse (just like the TW actually) and GMs should only be allowing them in their game if the player of them can be mature and will not do things that 'break the game'. If a player is intent on making a 'super weapon' that can break the game there are really two options. Either allow it, or use the GM "no".

(Yes I said it, playing a specific character class/race/what ever is a privilege not a right.)

[ShadowLogan]

No the ATL-7 is not power creep. Remember what its function is. It isn't anti-infantry, it's anti-armor (anti-tank). One should expect a weapon in that category to be powerful.

There is the payload/rof limitation. The end result is the from a damage perspective, it is all being released at once as opposed to over a longer stretch of time. Something that can be duplicated by bursting your weapon.

If a PC wanted to hook it up to a nuclear/mama reactor, I would impose a "recharge time" since a PA suit (or Borg) could not hope to power the weapon at such a high rate, so it has to charge a capacitor bank (not sure about the recharge time though). Now a robot or heavy vehicle could potentially, but would only consider the power distribution system up to the task for a higher ROF (and as Jeffar suggested you might run into heat management issues with the weapon) if it had an attack of comparable damage that required the reactor which is unlikely for most examples (that means it has to be capable of dealing 180points in one attack round).

A TW and Gizmoteer modified version can certainly be unbalancing, but then that is no longer a stock ATL-7 anymore, but a gizmoteer/TW device.

[Zer0 Kay]

...why is almost everyone keep going for the nuclear power plant and others countering with no canon way of doing this? Wouldn't 10 shots be enough? The CAF energy pack from Phaseworld does have a canon way of connecting to any energy weapon that uses e-clips. Funny I just realized they should be e-mags.

[Zer0 Kay]

No the ATL-7 is not power creep. Remember what its function is. It isn't anti-infantry, it's anti-armor (anti-tank). One should expect a weapon in that category to be powerful.

There is the payload/rof limitation. The end result is the from a damage perspective, it is all being released at once as opposed to over a longer stretch of time. Something that can be duplicated by bursting your weapon.

If a PC wanted to hook it up to a nuclear/mama reactor, I would impose a "recharge time" since a PA suit (or Borg) could not hope to power the weapon at such a high rate, so it has to charge a capacitor bank (not sure about the recharge time though). Now a robot or heavy vehicle could potentially, but would only consider the power distribution system up to the task for a higher ROF (and as Jeffar suggested you might run into heat management issues with the weapon) if it had an attack of comparable damage that required the reactor which is unlikely for most examples (that means it has to be capable of dealing 180points in one attack round).

A TW and Gizmoteer modified version can certainly be unbalancing, but then that is no longer a stock ATL-7 anymore, but a gizmoteer/TW device.

Again if we want to go by canon then there are no rules for overheating. If something gets superhot insulating it... Well it would be as dumb as insulating a .50 cal HMG's barrel instead of putting a water cooling sleeve around it. The only reason would be to keep the shooter safe, in which case it isn't a reference to how much heat the components can take. Oops, unless it is insulating the components prior to the amplification stage. But that still doesn't give us an idea of how fast it cools down, or other pertinent information. It only tells us that it gets hot, but is insulated.

[Nightmask]

...why is almost everyone keep going for the nuclear power plant and others countering with no canon way of doing this? Wouldn't 10 shots be enough? The CAF energy pack from Phaseworld does have a canon way of connecting to any energy weapon that uses e-clips. Funny I just realized they should be e-mags.

I imagine they go right for the nuclear power plant because if anything would ensure sufficient energy to power such an energy-guzzling weapon that's what would, and while the books have vague rules for jury-rigging things and customizing they're vague enough for some to insist there's no way to combine the two. There are several power packs around that provide some number of shots over the normal for a particular e-clip, but of course one can argue that by canon they weren't designed to power something that eats up energy like the ATL-7. X number of shots per melee after all is quite different than 10 or 20 times that energy being sucked out for each of those shots. While standard e-clips can apparently take it that doesn't mean the non-standard packs can (or power cable-equipped power armors or robot vehicles).

[eliakon]

...why is almost everyone keep going for the nuclear power plant and others countering with no canon way of doing this? Wouldn't 10 shots be enough? The CAF energy pack from Phaseworld does have a canon way of connecting to any energy weapon that uses e-clips. Funny I just realized they should be e-mags.

At which point you need to modify the weapon to use those. (phase world e-clips, are not, canonically, compatible with earth weapons)

[Nightmask]

...why is almost everyone keep going for the nuclear power plant and others countering with no canon way of doing this? Wouldn't 10 shots be enough? The CAF energy pack from Phaseworld does have a canon way of connecting to any energy weapon that uses e-clips. Funny I just realized they should be e-mags.

At which point you need to modify the weapon to use those. (phase world e-clips, are not, canonically, compatible with earth weapons)

I think you mean modify the adapter, not the weapon, and that would hardly be a problem for any competent engineer either way.

[eliakon]

...why is almost everyone keep going for the nuclear power plant and others countering with no canon way of doing this? Wouldn't 10 shots be enough? The CAF energy pack from Phaseworld does have a canon way of connecting to any energy weapon that uses e-clips. Funny I just realized they should be e-mags.

I imagine they go right for the nuclear power plant because if anything would ensure sufficient energy to power such an energy-guzzling weapon that's what would, and while the books have vague rules for jury-rigging things and customizing they're vague enough for some to insist there's no way to combine the two. There are several power packs around that provide some number of shots over the normal for a particular e-clip, but of course one can argue that by canon they weren't designed to power something that eats up energy like the ATL-7. X number of shots per melee after all is quite different than 10 or 20 times that energy being sucked out for each of those shots. While standard e-clips can apparently take it that doesn't mean the non-standard packs can (or power cable-equipped power armors or robot vehicles).

More or less this.
You can allow things to work one way....but that is not the OFFICIAL way that they work, so the GM ultimately either has to approve the mod (which moves it into house rule territory) or say "no" (Which again is house rule territory) either way its a house rule, and not covered by the Canon.
That said a lot of people like to argue that 'logical house rules' should have the weight of canon, and that they should affect canon arguments. But since they are just that, house rules, they differ at each house....
Some GMs will have no problem allowing nuclear powered ATL-7s, some will not.
Some GMs will have no problem with power packs subbing for E-Clips, some will not
The variability of those decisions makes it impossible to make a blanket statement on how something should be considered.

[flatline]

We just gave it a rate of fire of one shot per melee. Didn't matter if it was connected to a reactor or not.

--flatline

[Zer0 Kay]

...why is almost everyone keep going for the nuclear power plant and others countering with no canon way of doing this? Wouldn't 10 shots be enough? The CAF energy pack from Phaseworld does have a canon way of connecting to any energy weapon that uses e-clips. Funny I just realized they should be e-mags.

At which point you need to modify the weapon to use those. (phase world e-clips, are not, canonically, compatible with earth weapons)

I did not remember that.

[Zer0 Kay]

...why is almost everyone keep going for the nuclear power plant and others countering with no canon way of doing this? Wouldn't 10 shots be enough? The CAF energy pack from Phaseworld does have a canon way of connecting to any energy weapon that uses e-clips. Funny I just realized they should be e-mags.

I imagine they go right for the nuclear power plant because if anything would ensure sufficient energy to power such an energy-guzzling weapon that's what would, and while the books have vague rules for jury-rigging things and customizing they're vague enough for some to insist there's no way to combine the two. There are several power packs around that provide some number of shots over the normal for a particular e-clip, but of course one can argue that by canon they weren't designed to power something that eats up energy like the ATL-7. X number of shots per melee after all is quite different than 10 or 20 times that energy being sucked out for each of those shots. While standard e-clips can apparently take it that doesn't mean the non-standard packs can (or power cable-equipped power armors or robot vehicles).

More or less this.
You can allow things to work one way....but that is not the OFFICIAL way that they work, so the GM ultimately either has to approve the mod (which moves it into house rule territory) or say "no" (Which again is house rule territory) either way its a house rule, and not covered by the Canon.
That said a lot of people like to argue that 'logical house rules' should have the weight of canon, and that they should affect canon arguments. But since they are just that, house rules, they differ at each house....
Some GMs will have no problem allowing nuclear powered ATL-7s, some will not.
Some GMs will have no problem with power packs subbing for E-Clips, some will not
The variability of those decisions makes it impossible to make a blanket statement on how something should be considered.

The CAF power pack isn't a sub it is specifically for powering weapons. So it is just the argument that phaseworld and rifts e-clips are different. Now since the naruni e-clip recharger does bothe that would tell us that by the megacersal builder that the dimensions are the same energy type so it is just an issue of coupling.

[Subjugator]

Not, because while it's able to deal massive damage it's a one-shot weapon so it's little different than a portable missile launcher where you have to reload after each shot and dealing roughly the same amount of damage but without the blast radius. Even if a GM let you run it off a power pack it's not much different at that point to the Glitter Boy in damage and those have been around since the start of the game so you're only just reaching the point of competing with it damage-wise.

It's not a one-shot weapon in the hands of a Machine Person, or a borg or robot with the power connector to the weapon.

/Sub

[Nightmask]

Not, because while it's able to deal massive damage it's a one-shot weapon so it's little different than a portable missile launcher where you have to reload after each shot and dealing roughly the same amount of damage but without the blast radius. Even if a GM let you run it off a power pack it's not much different at that point to the Glitter Boy in damage and those have been around since the start of the game so you're only just reaching the point of competing with it damage-wise.

It's not a one-shot weapon in the hands of a Machine Person, or a borg or robot with the power connector to the weapon.

/Sub

Phase World has better weapons to not have a need of an ATL-7 and in none of those cases is it such a sure thing since the ATL-7 requires easily 15 times the energy for each of those shots compared to what those are normally used to and power systems generally aren't designed to have that kind of leeway, you'd have to seriously redesign them to pull that off.

[eliakon]

...why is almost everyone keep going for the nuclear power plant and others countering with no canon way of doing this? Wouldn't 10 shots be enough? The CAF energy pack from Phaseworld does have a canon way of connecting to any energy weapon that uses e-clips. Funny I just realized they should be e-mags.

I imagine they go right for the nuclear power plant because if anything would ensure sufficient energy to power such an energy-guzzling weapon that's what would, and while the books have vague rules for jury-rigging things and customizing they're vague enough for some to insist there's no way to combine the two. There are several power packs around that provide some number of shots over the normal for a particular e-clip, but of course one can argue that by canon they weren't designed to power something that eats up energy like the ATL-7. X number of shots per melee after all is quite different than 10 or 20 times that energy being sucked out for each of those shots. While standard e-clips can apparently take it that doesn't mean the non-standard packs can (or power cable-equipped power armors or robot vehicles).

More or less this.
You can allow things to work one way....but that is not the OFFICIAL way that they work, so the GM ultimately either has to approve the mod (which moves it into house rule territory) or say "no" (Which again is house rule territory) either way its a house rule, and not covered by the Canon.
That said a lot of people like to argue that 'logical house rules' should have the weight of canon, and that they should affect canon arguments. But since they are just that, house rules, they differ at each house....
Some GMs will have no problem allowing nuclear powered ATL-7s, some will not.
Some GMs will have no problem with power packs subbing for E-Clips, some will not
The variability of those decisions makes it impossible to make a blanket statement on how something should be considered.

The CAF power pack isn't a sub it is specifically for powering weapons. So it is just the argument that phaseworld and rifts e-clips are different. Now since the naruni e-clip recharger does bothe that would tell us that by the megacersal builder that the dimensions are the same energy type so it is just an issue of coupling.

Actually its more
1) there is the question of why it takes 2 actions to change the E-clip instead of the usual 1...which combined with the art (which may or may not be canon, I don't want to start THAT tangent here though) suggests that the E-Clip may be totally internal (meaning that you may need to modify the weapon to work with the pack
2) Also based on the text on other weapons/e-clip incompatibility the trend seems to be that the weapon needs to be modified to take energy sources other than the one it is designed for (most note able is the Ahrkon weapons, which being in the same book as the ATL-7 would suggest that this attitude is the one the author intended)

I would have to re-read the actual text on the CAF pack (and the various other ones).

(on a side note I seem to recall that there was a FAQ/Q&A on this weapon some place....does anyone know where and if it was, what the canonicity of it is?)

[Jefffar]

Not, because while it's able to deal massive damage it's a one-shot weapon so it's little different than a portable missile launcher where you have to reload after each shot and dealing roughly the same amount of damage but without the blast radius. Even if a GM let you run it off a power pack it's not much different at that point to the Glitter Boy in damage and those have been around since the start of the game so you're only just reaching the point of competing with it damage-wise.

It's not a one-shot weapon in the hands of a Machine Person, or a borg or robot with the power connector to the weapon.

/Sub

But that's not an issue with the weapon, that's an issue with the characters using the weapon.

So the ATL-7 isn't overpowered.

[Killer Cyborg]

Yes, the ATL-7 was clearly power creep.

The most comparable previous weapon would be a burst-capable laser rifle that was capable of unloading an entire clip at the enemy in an attack, because that's what the ATL-7 does.
But the ATL-7 does it in one attack, whereas previous weapons (like the JA-11 and the C-14) had to use the burst/spray rules from the RMB, which (iirc) used up ALL of their attacks for the melee round.
The ATL-7's single shot allows for Aimed Shots, instead of Burst or Wild fire, so it's more accurate.
I don't have the books in front of me, but I think the ATL-7 even did more damage with its single shot than ripping off a clip from a JA-11 did.

So... yeah, faster shooting time, better accuracy, and probably more damage than the previous best comparable weapon.
That's power creep.

The only argument I can see against the idea that it's power creep is the old "It's not in the main setting" bit, which is true.
That reasoning is why KS allowed the SA books to be so powerful in the first place, much to his regret.
Paraphrasing one of his comments from memory, "I forgot that if any one thing exists anywhere in the universe, every PC ends up with two of them."

[Sureshot]

I don't think it's too overpowered imo. It's a single shot area specific weapon in Rifts. It is powerful then again the power creep genie was out of the bottles years ago. Mind you i may not be the best judge of power creep. I find the damage values in both South America books. To be what the standard should be in Rifts. Want to sneak up on a tank or giant robot. Well you better be careful as chances are good. if your not blown to bits. Then your armor or whatever your wearing is badly damaged.

As to Kevin attempt to wash his hand of the two SA books. Yeah no. He is the guy in charge. Clearly knew what the material in the book could do. Closed his eyes to it as Rifts was and is their biggest seller. To be fair he is not the only rpg developer to do so. If one is going to allow material that is clearly more powerful then standard. Give it a seal of approval. Then take responsability for doing so imo.

[Jefffar]

I'm personally amused that the ATL-7 is the lightning rod for criticism when there are a lot of other curve breaking things in those books.

[Nightmask]

I'm personally amused that the ATL-7 is the lightning rod for criticism when there are a lot of other curve breaking things in those books.

Yes, that one techno-magic power armor that gets Supernatural PS to deal massive melee damage and thanks to magic can regenerate all its damage several times a day, and when the field is active it's normal level is 600 MDC. Yet no one seems to mention it.

[Slight001]

I'm personally amused that the ATL-7 is the lightning rod for criticism when there are a lot of other curve breaking things in those books.

Yes, that one techno-magic power armor that gets Supernatural PS to deal massive melee damage and thanks to magic can regenerate all its damage several times a day, and when the field is active it's normal level is 600 MDC. Yet no one seems to mention it.

probably because it can't function for very long outside of South America... and iirc only specific facilities can recharge it.

[Nightmask]

I'm personally amused that the ATL-7 is the lightning rod for criticism when there are a lot of other curve breaking things in those books.

Yes, that one techno-magic power armor that gets Supernatural PS to deal massive melee damage and thanks to magic can regenerate all its damage several times a day, and when the field is active it's normal level is 600 MDC. Yet no one seems to mention it.

probably because it can't function for very long outside of South America... and iirc only specific facilities can recharge it.

Afraid I've seen nothing in the write-up on it that makes it unable to leave South America or require any kind of special recharging.

[Jefffar]

Very little of what is in South America is stuck in South America by it's very nature. What keeps it there is the general difficulty of travel between South America and the rest of Rifts Earth. Its easier for to get from South America to other dimensions than it is to get from South America to the rest of Rifts Earth.

[Killer Cyborg]

Its easier for to get from South America to other dimensions than it is to get from South America to the rest of Rifts Earth.

That's how most places on Rifts Earth should be.

[Jefffar]

Its easier for to get from South America to other dimensions than it is to get from South America to the rest of Rifts Earth.

That's how most places on Rifts Earth should be.

And theoretically are, but there will always be player characters built around grabbing the best of everything rather than being coherent with the actual way Rifts Earth is.

When I limit a game to North American books only, it's not because of power levels, its because foreign tech, magic and character classes are very hard to come by.

[Slight001]

I'm personally amused that the ATL-7 is the lightning rod for criticism when there are a lot of other curve breaking things in those books.

Yes, that one techno-magic power armor that gets Supernatural PS to deal massive melee damage and thanks to magic can regenerate all its damage several times a day, and when the field is active it's normal level is 600 MDC. Yet no one seems to mention it.

probably because it can't function for very long outside of South America... and iirc only specific facilities can recharge it.

Afraid I've seen nothing in the write-up on it that makes it unable to leave South America or require any kind of special recharging.

Nazca Power Armor right? Its under power system... which will last for 5 years... however, those sold on the blackmarket only last for 1d4 years. How to recharge it is ambiguous at best while the comment in market costs suggests that it isn't something the average PC is going to know about.

[ShadowLogan]

Again if we want to go by canon then there are no rules for overheating. If something gets superhot insulating it... Well it would be as dumb as insulating a .50 cal HMG's barrel instead of putting a water cooling sleeve around it. The only reason would be to keep the shooter safe, in which case it isn't a reference to how much heat the components can take. Oops, unless it is insulating the components prior to the amplification stage. But that still doesn't give us an idea of how fast it cools down, or other pertinent information. It only tells us that it gets hot, but is insulated.

For the stock ALT-7 you are correct. Jeffar is the one to suggest heat management is an issue with the weapon mentioned in its write up. My solution to those wanting to replace the Eclip with another power source is not in terms of heat management, but rather power management, the power source has to be capble of distributing an Eclip's worth of energy in a short amount of time (1 actions worth). Unless you can show that the unit you are hooking it up to can deliver that much power (3d6x10MD+ worth) in one action you will need time to recharge the weapon's capacitor which will take X-# of shots.

Look at some of the SAMAS to receive a beam cannon in place of the C-40R (which does 4d4x10 worth, though accuracy wise it only delivers 1d4x10 worth). The FQ Violator SAMAS, takes penalties to use a beam weapon that is hooked up to its reactor that has shorter range than the ALT-7 and significantly less damage (1d4x10 worth on burst). Clearly hooking up an ALT-7 in place of the beam cannon on that particular SAMAS will restrict the ROF. Even the Japanese SAMAS can't power an energy weapon with the same performance (it doesn't have penalties like the FQ does). Which strongly implies that other SAMAS models (CS, BM, and knockoffs) don't have the electrical power to charge the ALT-7 to allow it to fire that fast.

Most 'bots, 'borgs, vehicles, and PA will be hard pressed to do this IMHO (A Glitterboy or other boomgun user likely can). Even if you have a backpack generator, it still has to demonstrate it can deliver that much electrical power in a short amount of time. If you try to pass too much electrical energy through a system you will either burn it out/damage it or trip breakers/blow fusees to prevent damage from being done.

But the ATL-7 does it in one attack, whereas previous weapons (like the JA-11 and the C-14) had to use the burst/spray rules from the RMB, which (iirc) used up ALL of their attacks for the melee round.

There are two different sets of burst/spray rules:
-Automatic Weapons & Sub-machineguns use 2 attacks
-Machineguns use all attacks

Unless the JA-11/C-14 you sited fall under the machinegun rules, they only use an extra attack compared to the ALT-7. However both have to spend 2 actions to reload.

Really this seems like an apples to oranges comparison. The ALT-7 is also several times heavier than those weapons (at 30lbs IIRC). It takes a team of 2 to handle properly, Really this weapon should be compared to heavier class of weapons (mini-missile launchers, railguns, grenade launchers, and other heavy weapons types). The WI-GL20 (Mercenaries) rivals the ALT-7 in terms of damage when it bursts (10round burst 3d6x10, same range), and can do that 4 times off a magazine or 20times of a belt fed system. Since the burst is defined as possible, but doesn't match up with the standard burst modifiers for a machinegun (which text describes it as) the number of actions used is of course in question. The weapon is also heavier than the ALT-7.

[Killer Cyborg]

But the ATL-7 does it in one attack, whereas previous weapons (like the JA-11 and the C-14) had to use the burst/spray rules from the RMB, which (iirc) used up ALL of their attacks for the melee round.

There are two different sets of burst/spray rules:
-Automatic Weapons & Sub-machineguns use 2 attacks
-Machineguns use all attacks

Unless the JA-11/C-14 you sited fall under the machinegun rules, they only use an extra attack compared to the ALT-7. However both have to spend 2 actions to reload.

Thank you! I didn't have my books handy, so I couldn't look up which was which.
Unfortunately, it's a bit fuzzy which rules the JA-11 & C-14 would use, but with rare exceptions I've only seen people categorize them as "automatic weapons" not "machine guns."
So it would be 2 attacks.

Really this seems like an apples to oranges comparison. The ALT-7 is also several times heavier than those weapons (at 30lbs IIRC). It takes a team of 2 to handle properly, Really this weapon should be compared to heavier class of weapons (mini-missile launchers, railguns, grenade launchers, and other heavy weapons types).

Okay, compare it then to the main lasers on giant robots and vehicles, if you like, in which case it should only do like 2d6-5d6 MD.
Weight is generally just a token gesture toward balancing.
Somehow, "it weighs as much as a Barrett .50 caliber rifle" doesn't justify that kind of damage in my book, and it doesn't balance it out, especially in a world chock full of characters who can carry that kind of weight without even trying, and many who could fire such a weapon single-handed.

The WI-GL20 (Mercenaries) rivals the ALT-7 in terms of damage when it bursts (10round burst 3d6x10, same range), and can do that 4 times off a magazine or 20times of a belt fed system.

Sounds like you're saying that the ATL-7 does more damage with a single laser blast than the WI-GL20 does with a burst of 10 grenades.
I don't think that makes the ATL-7 seem any less power-creepy.

Since the burst is defined as possible, but doesn't match up with the standard burst modifiers for a machinegun (which text describes it as) the number of actions used is of course in question.

I'd say that a pre-set burst would just take one attack unless specified otherwise.

The weapon is also heavier than the ALT-7.

So it's heavier, requires a burst, and still does less damage.

[Zer0 Kay]

Again if we want to go by canon then there are no rules for overheating. If something gets superhot insulating it... Well it would be as dumb as insulating a .50 cal HMG's barrel instead of putting a water cooling sleeve around it. The only reason would be to keep the shooter safe, in which case it isn't a reference to how much heat the components can take. Oops, unless it is insulating the components prior to the amplification stage. But that still doesn't give us an idea of how fast it cools down, or other pertinent information. It only tells us that it gets hot, but is insulated.

For the stock ALT-7 you are correct. Jeffar is the one to suggest heat management is an issue with the weapon mentioned in its write up. My solution to those wanting to replace the Eclip with another power source is not in terms of heat management, but rather power management, the power source has to be capble of distributing an Eclip's worth of energy in a short amount of time (1 actions worth). Unless you can show that the unit you are hooking it up to can deliver that much power (3d6x10MD+ worth) in one action you will need time to recharge the weapon's capacitor which will take X-# of shots.

Look at some of the SAMAS to receive a beam cannon in place of the C-40R (which does 4d4x10 worth, though accuracy wise it only delivers 1d4x10 worth). The FQ Violator SAMAS, takes penalties to use a beam weapon that is hooked up to its reactor that has shorter range than the ALT-7 and significantly less damage (1d4x10 worth on burst). Clearly hooking up an ALT-7 in place of the beam cannon on that particular SAMAS will restrict the ROF. Even the Japanese SAMAS can't power an energy weapon with the same performance (it doesn't have penalties like the FQ does). Which strongly implies that other SAMAS models (CS, BM, and knockoffs) don't have the electrical power to charge the ALT-7 to allow it to fire that fast.

Most 'bots, 'borgs, vehicles, and PA will be hard pressed to do this IMHO (A Glitterboy or other boomgun user likely can). Even if you have a backpack generator, it still has to demonstrate it can deliver that much electrical power in a short amount of time. If you try to pass too much electrical energy through a system you will either burn it out/damage it or trip breakers/blow fusees to prevent damage from being done.

But the ATL-7 does it in one attack, whereas previous weapons (like the JA-11 and the C-14) had to use the burst/spray rules from the RMB, which (iirc) used up ALL of their attacks for the melee round.

There are two different sets of burst/spray rules:
-Automatic Weapons & Sub-machineguns use 2 attacks
-Machineguns use all attacks

Unless the JA-11/C-14 you sited fall under the machinegun rules, they only use an extra attack compared to the ALT-7. However both have to spend 2 actions to reload.

Really this seems like an apples to oranges comparison. The ALT-7 is also several times heavier than those weapons (at 30lbs IIRC). It takes a team of 2 to handle properly, Really this weapon should be compared to heavier class of weapons (mini-missile launchers, railguns, grenade launchers, and other heavy weapons types). The WI-GL20 (Mercenaries) rivals the ALT-7 in terms of damage when it bursts (10round burst 3d6x10, same range), and can do that 4 times off a magazine or 20times of a belt fed system. Since the burst is defined as possible, but doesn't match up with the standard burst modifiers for a machinegun (which text describes it as) the number of actions used is of course in question. The weapon is also heavier than the ALT-7.

Good point on the power drain but the reverse could be said as well for the packs as far as show something that says it's discharge rate can't keep up with the ATL-7. That does seem like a kind of important rating to stat out for packs though. And generators and Nuclear power Supplies. HOUSE RULE TIME. RAW the packs can do it though.

[Zer0 Kay]

But the ATL-7 does it in one attack, whereas previous weapons (like the JA-11 and the C-14) had to use the burst/spray rules from the RMB, which (iirc) used up ALL of their attacks for the melee round.

There are two different sets of burst/spray rules:
-Automatic Weapons & Sub-machineguns use 2 attacks
-Machineguns use all attacks

Unless the JA-11/C-14 you sited fall under the machinegun rules, they only use an extra attack compared to the ALT-7. However both have to spend 2 actions to reload.

Thank you! I didn't have my books handy, so I couldn't look up which was which.
Unfortunately, it's a bit fuzzy which rules the JA-11 & C-14 would use, but with rare exceptions I've only seen people categorize them as "automatic weapons" not "machine guns."
So it would be 2 attacks.

Really this seems like an apples to oranges comparison. The ALT-7 is also several times heavier than those weapons (at 30lbs IIRC). It takes a team of 2 to handle properly, Really this weapon should be compared to heavier class of weapons (mini-missile launchers, railguns, grenade launchers, and other heavy weapons types).

Okay, compare it then to the main lasers on giant robots and vehicles, if you like, in which case it should only do like 2d6-5d6 MD.
Weight is generally just a token gesture toward balancing.
Somehow, "it weighs as much as a Barrett .50 caliber rifle" doesn't justify that kind of damage in my book, and it doesn't balance it out, especially in a world chock full of characters who can carry that kind of weight without even trying, and many who could fire such a weapon single-handed.

The WI-GL20 (Mercenaries) rivals the ALT-7 in terms of damage when it bursts (10round burst 3d6x10, same range), and can do that 4 times off a magazine or 20times of a belt fed system.

Sounds like you're saying that the ATL-7 does more damage with a single laser blast than the WI-GL20 does with a burst of 10 grenades.
I don't think that makes the ATL-7 seem any less power-creepy.

Since the burst is defined as possible, but doesn't match up with the standard burst modifiers for a machinegun (which text describes it as) the number of actions used is of course in question.

I'd say that a pre-set burst would just take one attack unless specified otherwise.

The weapon is also heavier than the ALT-7.

So it's heavier, requires a burst, and still does less damage.

Uh... since when is a area effect worth 0?

What is the area effect of the WI-GL20?

How does a burst land so close together to do full damage to one target and half to others in the same area as a single grenade? Shouldn't the blast radius of a burst be larger with a larger "full" damage area and maybe a quarter damage instead of half to the rest of the blast radius? Would that make sense? Does PB just never think about this stuff? Why don't they look for one staffer who is into weapons for more than their cool factor? Someone who will go through and edit the books with an eye toward weapon capabilities damn game balance. ":shock:What do you mean the tanks main cannon has the same stats as the Rifle? What the hells the point of paying for the tank when you can arm a platoon up with the rifle and the EBA and be more survivable than the tank? You realize you guys are then wasting space in your books? People should be pissed off at you wasting their money. Oh look it's the ultimate weapon an open topped bus with tiered seating so everyone can shoot using the high seat back in front of them to steady their shot and provide cover. Of course the driver has a reinforced pilots compartment."

[ShadowLogan]

Thank you! I didn't have my books handy, so I couldn't look up which was which.
Unfortunately, it's a bit fuzzy which rules the JA-11 & C-14 would use, but with rare exceptions I've only seen people categorize them as "automatic weapons" not "machine guns."
So it would be 2 attacks.

Welcome. I'd go w/o automatic weapons also, and 1 action for the WI-GL20 burst.

Okay, compare it then to the main lasers on giant robots and vehicles, if you like, in which case it should only do like 2d6-5d6 MD.
Weight is generally just a token gesture toward balancing.
Somehow, "it weighs as much as a Barrett .50 caliber rifle" doesn't justify that kind of damage in my book, and it doesn't balance it out, especially in a world chock full of characters who can carry that kind of weight without even trying, and many who could fire such a weapon single-handed.

That's still apples and oranges though using giant bots and vehicles. 1st PB doesn't do scale very well, so I'd like to look at things "in scale" to the user and the "spirit" of the writeup (anti-tank/armor weapon, man portable, etc) as much as possible.

Lets look at balance for a minute using the C-12 (Rifts Main Book pg203), it has a range of 2000ft (1000ft less than an ALT-7), at setting one does 4d6MD (payload is not effected if using the lighter setting 2, only damage output which is half). Short Clip provides 20 shots, Long provides 30. The JA-11 laser can't burst (JA-9 can, but it does 1/2 the damage), and the C-14's laser has less potential than the C-12 on a short clip (only one it can take).

Short Clip does 40-240 MDC firing single shots (no critical) for a JA-09
Short Clip does 60-360 MDC firing single shots (no critical) for a C-14
Short Clip does 80-480 MDC firing single shots (no critical) for a C-12
Long Clip does 120-720 MDC firing single shots (no critical) for a C-12

Firing Either clip in a full burst in a C-12 (standard CS Rifle per RMB) would do 1 round x10, or 40-240 points of damage (no critical). However it should be noted that the majority of the potential damage capacity of the clip is being wasted in a burst setting of a C-12 (C-14 not as much), and if the same type of clip is moved between an ALT-7 and the C-12 the same would hold true (ATL-7 does 50-200MD IIRC). Now the ALT-7 does have greater range, so some of the energy "wasted" is being used more productively, but given the JA-11/09 range over CS weapons (which have a range advantage over NG) it doesn't appear to be much of a factor.

That means an ALT-7 can hit hard, but it doesn't do so very efficiently and doesn't have the option to do so either. I'd call that another point in favor if it being balanced and not an example of power creep unless one gives extra weight to just raw damage being done with one attack without consideration for other factors that can balance it out.

Sounds like you're saying that the ATL-7 does more damage with a single laser blast than the WI-GL20 does with a burst of 10 grenades.
I don't think that makes the ATL-7 seem any less power-creepy.

While the ATL-7 does slightly more damage than a WI-GL20 with the proper grenades firing a 10round burst, the WI-GL20 is also effecting a wider radius (so more "hits" potentially) and can follow-up with a second attack immediately (next action, unless it has emptied the payload obviously) that is just as devastating as the first attack, which the ALT-7 can not do either (nor can most rifles firing full bursts that can rival the damage an ALT-7). So while the damage is creeping up in the SA2 weapon, it is far more balanced in comparison to the WI-GL20 which can hit nearly as hard, just as far, and do so multiple times in one melee (so in 15sec it could do more damage than an ALT-7) and due to the blast radius hurt more targets with each shot potentially.

So no I don't see the ALT-7 as creepy in a sustained action (long run), even in the short run (one hit) it really depends on what you compare it to.

Good point on the power drain but the reverse could be said as well for the packs as far as show something that says it's discharge rate can't keep up with the ATL-7. That does seem like a kind of important rating to stat out for packs though. And generators and Nuclear power Supplies. HOUSE RULE TIME. RAW the packs can do it though.

I agree that there is information missing. However, it would also be logical to assume that those packs weren't designed with an ALT-7 in mind given how rare the performance is in that combination (range/damage).

[Jefffar]

The ATL-7 doesn't compare really with any sort of anti-infantry weapon like a grenade launcher or rifle. It's purpose built to destroy armoured vehicles and assault robots. Here are some weapons of broadly similar role and capability that can be compared with the ATL-7:

CR-1 - Key Differences: Much Lower Damage (1D6x10), Longer Range, area effect, much lighter
CTT-M20 - Key Differences: Higher Damage (up to to 4D6x10), Longer Range, up to 5 shots of max damage, not really man portable
CTT-P40 - Key Differences: Much lower damage (1D6x10), Shorter range, 40 shots, area effect, not really man portable
NG-E15 - Key Differences: Lower Damage (2D4x10), up to 16 shots, not really man portable, inaccurate
NG-ML6 - Key Differences: Lower Damage (1D6x10), 6 shots, longer range, area effect, not really man portable
NG-ML7 - key Differences: Higher Damage (up to 4D6x10), longer range, area effect, prolonged reloading
WI-23 - Key differences: Much lower damage (1D6x10) 6 shots, longer range, area effect
WI-40M - Key differences: Lower Damage (2D6x10 - though if you use the newer missile chart this increases to 3D6x10), Not really man portable, much longer range, area effect, backblast issue
Wilk's 1000 - Key differences: Lower damage (3D4x10), 80 shots, slightly shorter range, self recharging

While some of these weapons are better than others, it should be noted that none of them completely lose to the capabilities of the ATL-7. Even the lowly CR-1 has the ability to strike from further away than the ATL-7 can. Most of these weapons can fire more shots than the ATL-7 without reloading, making their per-melee damage output higher. Some of these weapons have te ATL-7 beat in single attack damage.

I won't argue that he ATL-7 doesn't occupy a sweet spot in terms of firepower and range, but it doesn't radically differ from other man-portable anti-armour weapons in terms of overall capability. In some comparisons it comes off decidedly inferior.

As a side note, while all of these are man-portable (if only barely) anti-tank/anti-robot weapons, none of them have the power to actually destroy an enemy tank or combat robot in a single attack, baring a critical shot. For single shot weapons like the ATL-7 this is especially dangerous as it gives the robot or tank a chance to retaliate before the weapon operator can reload and finish off the target. I think a lot of people forget that Palladium uses alternating actions instead of alternating turns, so after shooting the ATL-7 the enemy will have three consecutive actions they can use to respond before the ATL-7 is ready for the next shot.

[Killer Cyborg]

Jeffar, when measuring power creep, it only makes sense to compare to previous equivalents, not to stuff that came later.

[Jefffar]

CR-1 came in the orgional main book and if memory serves the WI weapons are just a book or two before the ATL-7 while the other CS weapons were not very long after. Only the Wilk's and NG weapons are significantly newer. The fact that the weapons remain broadly comperable over more than 25 years tells me that in man portable anti-tank weapons we haven't seen a radical shift in power in this category of weapons.

[Killer Cyborg]

CR-1 came in the orgional main book and if memory serves the WI weapons are just a book or two before the ATL-7 while the other CS weapons were not very long after.

I plan to look at my books when I get home, to check the dates.
I still count "not long after" as "after," though. That's how power creep works, a little bit with each new book.

[eliakon]

CR-1 came in the orgional main book and if memory serves the WI weapons are just a book or two before the ATL-7 while the other CS weapons were not very long after. Only the Wilk's and NG weapons are significantly newer. The fact that the weapons remain broadly comperable over more than 25 years tells me that in man portable anti-tank weapons we haven't seen a radical shift in power in this category of weapons.

So not so much power creep as simply showing where the actual threshold lay?

[Killer Cyborg]

The ATL-7 doesn't compare really with any sort of anti-infantry weapon like a grenade launcher or rifle. It's purpose built to destroy armoured vehicles and assault robots.

I disagree.
First of all, ANY mega-damage weapon is anti-armor by nature, because every person in EBA is the equivalent of a (semi-)modern tank.
You can use a Wilk's 320 to take out an Enforcer, if you just hit it enough times. Try taking out even a Vietnam era tank with a .45 automatic.
Rifts presents us with a future where infantry can destroy the heaviest armor that technology can provide, using their standard issue rifle and/or pistols.

Second, I don't care about purpose. It's not important, because "purpose" is a motivation, not a mechanic or a law of physics. If some book presented a new, 120 lb rifle with the purpose of "planet killing," and the damage was sufficient to threaten a planet, that would still be power creep even though the damage was in proportion with the weapon's purpose.
People try to do make the same argument regularly with home-brewed "Sniper Rifles" that do enough damage to one-shot a guy in armor, because "the purpose of snipers is to make one-shot kills," but the argument never holds sway.
Either way, it's the same thing. It's saying, "Because somebody wants this weapon to do something, that creates an in-game justification for the technology that would allow the weapon to exist as written."
Which doesn't make any logical sense, and it certainly doesn't affect power creep.

The function of the weapon is what is important, and the reasoning behind how the weapon function is clear: "a good laser rifle can unload a clip at a target for (1 round)x10 damage, so this rifle will do the same thing, only all at once, with a bit extra."
And that's power creep, plain and simple. It's a new weapon that tweaks the old standard to newer, more powerful function.
Before the ATL-7, what was the single most powerful laser blast (i.e., single shot) of any weapon on Rifts Earth?
Anybody know?
I don't, but I'm willing to bet that it's about 4d6 MD, and NOT because nobody in the game-world saw a need to have a more powerful laser, but because the technology simply wasn't there in the game world, both for in-game reasons (setting) and out-of-game reasons (balance).

[Killer Cyborg]

Okay, compare it then to the main lasers on giant robots and vehicles, if you like, in which case it should only do like 2d6-5d6 MD.
Weight is generally just a token gesture toward balancing.
Somehow, "it weighs as much as a Barrett .50 caliber rifle" doesn't justify that kind of damage in my book, and it doesn't balance it out, especially in a world chock full of characters who can carry that kind of weight without even trying, and many who could fire such a weapon single-handed.

That's still apples and oranges though using giant bots and vehicles. 1st PB doesn't do scale very well, so I'd like to look at things "in scale" to the user and the "spirit" of the writeup (anti-tank/armor weapon, man portable, etc) as much as possible.

No, you're justifying the damage by the weapon's weight and purpose.
But heavier lasers designed for use against other robots didn't do anywhere near as much damage. Weight and purpose aren't the issue.
Yeah, Palladium has always had issues with scaling things properly, but that doesn't justify the ATL-7; the ATL-7 just makes an existing problem worse.

Lets look at balance for a minute using the C-12 (Rifts Main Book pg203), it has a range of 2000ft (1000ft less than an ALT-7), at setting one does 4d6MD (payload is not effected if using the lighter setting 2, only damage output which is half). Short Clip provides 20 shots, Long provides 30. The JA-11 laser can't burst (JA-9 can, but it does 1/2 the damage), and the C-14's laser has less potential than the C-12 on a short clip (only one it can take).

Short Clip does 40-240 MDC firing single shots (no critical) for a JA-09
Short Clip does 60-360 MDC firing single shots (no critical) for a C-14
Short Clip does 80-480 MDC firing single shots (no critical) for a C-12
Long Clip does 120-720 MDC firing single shots (no critical) for a C-12

Nope.
By that logic, chucking rocks is even BETTER, because you never run out of rocks, so the damage before you run out of ammo is effectively infinite.
It's not about how much damage you can do before you run out, it's about how much damage you can do quickly.
We're discussing Power Creep, not Efficiency Creep, but even by efficiency standards, it's a heck of a lot more efficient to one-shot-kill an enemy than to give him enough time to shoot back.

Sounds like you're saying that the ATL-7 does more damage with a single laser blast than the WI-GL20 does with a burst of 10 grenades.
I don't think that makes the ATL-7 seem any less power-creepy.

While the ATL-7 does slightly more damage than a WI-GL20 with the proper grenades firing a 10 round burst, the WI-GL20 is also effecting a wider radius (so more "hits" potentially) and can follow-up with a second attack immediately (next action, unless it has emptied the payload obviously) that is just as devastating as the first attack, which the ALT-7 can not do either (nor can most rifles firing full bursts that can rival the damage an ALT-7). So while the damage is creeping up in the SA2 weapon, it is far more balanced in comparison to the WI-GL20 which can hit nearly as hard, just as far, and do so multiple times in one melee (so in 15sec it could do more damage than an ALT-7) and due to the blast radius hurt more targets with each shot potentially.

I can argue this one further, but instead I'll point out that you're comparing one CJ Carella Power Creep weapon to another, which doesn't really accomplish anything.
Best case scenario for you with this tack is that, yeah.... they're both power creepy.