>From: [email removed] (Burton Choinski.)
>Subject: (2970)
>[]> (btw, is there any reason WHY only one spinal mount is allowed? If the ship
>[]> is large enough, could it not have 2 parrallel, or 3 triaxial mounts?
>[]
>[] This is something that I've wondered, too. (And on this mailing list on a
>[] few occasions. :-) What about catamaran designs? Take two 30,000 ton
>[] cruisers and join them together with a big lump of metal. You now have one
>[] 70,000 ton cruiser with two meson guns. (I said it was a big lump, 10,000
>[] tons! :-)
>If you take 6 meson spinal mounts and wrap them around the axis, you get the
>"Gatling Gun" class. :)
Not much use in my eyes (and I am an opinionated bigot aren't I :-).
Presumably, the spinals are all firing at the same target (how often will
ships get into a nice line so you can fire at all of them at once?)
the hardest bit about killing with a smallish spinal mount is the to-hit
roll (or have I made another major error). Generally, penetration of
meson screens isn't too hard (besides, who uses the power gobblers anyway)
and configuration doesn't do all that much either. So all these wonderful
spinals are going to share the to-hit roll ---- I suppose you could treat them
as a more powerful spinal for penetration purposes. Much, much more powerful.
>Thi is as it should be. If you want your ship to do a deathwind attack, launching
>hundreds of missiles in a single volley, you better have a deep wallet to buy new
>ones.
And storage space for all of the bloody things. They consume quite a bit of
cargo space that could be better used for 'small packages'.
>The sand prices should be in there anyways.
I agree that sand should be bought, but couldn't you use some local asteroids
and mash them up a bit??? I was under the impression that just about any
waste material is useful as 'sand'. Perhaps, we could come up with some
different kinds of sand. Salvaged rocks, lots of shiny metal spheres, ice,
just about anything...and you'd have lots of different protection
characteristics and prices :).
>If I remember MAYDAY rules correctly, you could bought missiles with a G-rating
>and an endurance. 12G was the maximum burn. Thus a 12/3 missile could make up to
>12 hexes of vector changes per turn for up to 3 turns.
I thought it was 12G and fuel for 3 hexes movement of the destination counter.
It has been quite a while since I looked at mayday missile rules and both
methods have pros/cons and they are really describing the same thing.
>We now face the prospect of multitudes of laser and missile attacks being
>fired from each ship. How should a barrage of 30 lasers be handled with
>regards to "to hit" and damage? Should it be (2d6+attack DMS) crossreferenced
It should be possible to figure out some method of agumenting attacks into
stronger attacks. RebelGuard does this (or I think it does). Basically,
the attack is made and the defences stop a percentage of the incoming thingies.
The stuff that gets through causes damage.
Another thing that would be nice would be being able to determine the
batteries during normal ship operations rather than during the design phase.
e.g. you get 100 triple lasers and can alloacte them however you want. This
might cause some problems with fire control/gunnery crew but that's life.
Pauli
Paul Dale | Internet/CSnet: [email removed]
Dept of Computer Science| Bitnet: [email removed]
Uni of Queensland | JANET: [email removed]
Australia, 4072 | EAN: [email removed]
| UUCP: [email removed]
f4e6g4Qh4++ | JUNET: [email removed]