hiya,
My first proposal: let meson screens give an effective armour factor
against incoming meson weapons rather than simply stopping some of the
incoming fire dead.
I don't really understand the physics involved, but the way I
understand the Starship Operator's Manual and the Refs Guide, meson
screens are supposed to slow down the incoming meson packet and make
it detonate outside the ship. Hopefully every incoming meson packet
will be slowed down, which means that the fire will no longer hit the
delicate central parts of the ship. Instead the fire will hit the
more robust outer sections.
Sure, if you slow the packet down enough it won't hit you at all.
Unfortunately, large spinal mounts have a nasty tendancy to cut through
meson screens without showing any ill effects. I don't really see any
ratonal for having a hit or miss result. Using the screen as armour means
that every incoming meson weapon will be effected.
Anybody like to comment about this idea? If there are any real
complaints I'll retract the idea.
Someone mentioned synchronising your fire with the flicker of
your black globe. I like this idea also. The current rules give a lot
'evidence' that the weapons fire in discreet lumps. (meson packets are
mentions, missiles are entities, pulse lasers are too, Fusion/Plasma guns
would most likely fire shots. PA's fire bursts also. Beam lasers most
probably wouldn't). Why not allow firing while the globe is flickered
off? Other starships wouldn't be able to detect your turning off your globe
to let a battery of missiles out (the distances involved are large, I don't
have my ref's guide here but the distances involved are quite sizable even
at the speed of light) --- they are simply too far away to react before you
turn your globe back on. Since globes are experimental at TL15 (whatever
that really means), it could be dis-allowed until TL16 which means the game
will not be alter much (who runs campaings over TL15????).
And finally, some random ramblings about how I think TDR should come
out.....
I think that a complete re-write is totally out of the question. It
would be too big a task to do in our spare time. I'd prefer to see an
evolution of the current rules into something that contains more internal
consistancy (and a better basis in real physics). This would mean that,
we don't just throw something out because it seems silly. We'd have to
either alter the definition a little to make that thing possible or throw
the thing out and replace it with something plausable. (the reactionless
drive makes a nice example of both choices: throw it out and replace it
with a reaction based drive or try to find some justification for it, i.e.
find something for it to push against).
For starships (one of my pet areas :-), I'd like to see some
intermediate values put into the tables. There is no reason for a spinal
meson gun-A to be as inefficient at TL15 ass it is at TL12! It would
probably be possible to build a real working meson gun given current
technology (I think they are actually used to burn cancerous stuff out
of people), it would not be practable to do so. The communication gear
has a nice set of intermediate values (even if they are a bit simplistic),
why not everything else???? [ the answer is that it would make for too many
extra tables ]
Pauli
seeya
Paul Dale | Internet/CSnet: [email removed]
Dept of Computer Science| Bitnet: [email removed]
Uni of Qld | JANET: [email removed]
Australia, 4072 | EAN: [email removed]
| UUCP: [email removed]
f4e6g4Qh4++ | JUNET: [email removed]