[email removed] (Richard Johnson) writes:
>
> Scott Kellogg asks:
> : What exactly does a Fusion/Plasma gun DO?
> ...
> :I have seen references where a PGMP-12 was fired in an enclosed room and the
> :contents of the entire room were fried. (Annic Nova)
>
> Probably depends on the size of the room, but sounds about right.
That's what I would expect, too. The last time I played Traveller, my
character preferred lasers (preferably TL13+) to PGMP's and FGMP's, as lasers
are much more useful in confined spaces. I also figured that a PGMP's recoil
made it less capable of doing snapshots - even in battledress, you have to
assume a correct aiming posture, and while you're doing that, I'm just
pointing and firing.
> The Traveller computer game "Zhodani Conspiracy" treats the PGMP like a
> truly expensive carbine with great penetration and damage. And this
> game is authorized by GDW...
So? I don't expect so-called computer role-playing games like that to
accurately represent reality, even the fictional "reality" of Traveller. It
was probably a lot easier for the programmers to treat a PGMP as described
above, than to write a special piece of code for it. Anyone who thinks he
can do better, please do! (Then I might buy it.)
[email removed] (Steve Higginbotham) writes:
> Rob Dean:
>
> >Meson Gun tanks: There's one thing to consider about the meson gun
> >tank, if you are going to play using the Striker rules--it's considered
> >to be an indirect fire weapon, due to the difficulty of adjusting the
> >meson speed to decay at the exact target point (and other scientific
> >double-talk).
>
> According to Striker Book 2 (which I finally re-located), a meson gun is
> indirect fire because it can hit targets behind obstacles, and because
> precise ranging is needed for it's use. Also, according to Striker,
> indirect fire weapons CAN be used in direct fire mode, if the
> appropriate fire-control system is available.
But because of the nature of a meson gun, direct fire-control is not
possible, therefore not available. So I think that vehicle-mounted
meson guns would be TL15 self-propelled artillery, not tanks. Thus
they would be lightly armoured, as self-propelled artillery often is,
and as someone else said they would be in another message. But there
would still be TL15 tanks, heavily armoured and equipped with energy
weapons (fusion guns and/or lasers), point defense and perhaps meson
screens.
> My problem with a tank-sized meson screen is that a meson screen
> generator has minimum size of 215Kl at TL15- (or 108Kl at TL16), which
> is rather large for a tank.
Then again, perhaps not.
> Richard Johnson:
>
> >What was the name of the French field marshall who said in 1911 that
> >the airplane was a neat contraption, but had no military value
> >whatsoever?
If he was a time-traveller, and came from a high-tech world with grav-tanks,
he was probably right. :-)
> And Vannevar Bush said (in 1946 or 1947): "There has been a great deal
> said about a three-thousand-mile rocket. In my opinion such a thing is
> impossible for many years. I think we can leave that out of our
> thinking."
He had just read the minimum size for a meson screen. I also think that
a three-thousand-mile long rocket is not something we will see for many
years. :-)
> Brandon Cope:
>
> >One other thing to consider about pirates: they might not want (or
> >need) to take the ship they are plundering. I suppose most people out
> >there are aware of the tremendous costs and construction times of new
> >ships? So why would pirates capture frighters unless they really needed
> >the ships, or unless they really had no time to offload the valuable
> >part of the cargo?
Well, if I were a pirate and had enough spare crew for boarding parties, I
would certainly capture the ships.
> What a silly idea (leaving the ships behind). The ship is almost
> invariably worth more than the cargo is. Take the ship, and leave the
> cargo, if anything.
That's assuming that you can sell the ship to someone who won't ask too
many questions about where you got it. (Which a character of mine did.
Our GM was quite lenient at the time, and anyway we were operating in
Vargr space.) But even without the prospect of selling the ship, you
probably do not have much time to offload the valuable part of the
cargo. In fact, you might not have much time to _find_ the valuable
part of the cargo. If the ship sent out a distress signal, you want to
be out of that piece of space as soon as possible. Besides, if you take
the ship, you can take more cargo - you only use your own ship's cargo
hold if the freighter's crew succeeded in disabling the freighter before
you captured it.
I would not kill the freighter's crew, unless they had done something to
deserve it (e.g. disabled the ship). I would want to get a reputation
for showing mercy to the crew if they co-operated, in the hope that the
next ship would be more co-operative. If I got a reputation for giving
no quarter, the next ship would be quite likely to fight, and possibly
self-destruct, before I could capture it. After all, if they know they're
going to die anyway, what do they have to lose?
- --
"Keyboard? How quaint!" - M. Scott
Adrian Hurt | JANET: [email removed]
UUCP: ..!ukc!cs.hw.ac.uk!adrian | ARPA: [email removed]