Re: RE: (4152) Re: Proposed Alternate Starship Combat in Traveller

I writes:
> Hmm, according to the design tables in the Referee's Guide, this should NOT
> be a problem until Tech Level 24.  (Max armor is TL *5)

Rob sez:
}As far as I am concerned, this intention of this rule has always been an
}open question.  For starships, should that be 40 + 5*TL?  If not, then a
}'legal' TL7 spacecraft is impossible.  (Tell the Apollo crew to give it up
}boys--we can't build the command module thick enough!)

True, and to tell you the truth, I don't see the real reason for this rule,
I would think you could always slap on thicker armor.  But the rule is on the
books, and it does solve the problem.  However, I would point out that the
Apollo capsule was not as radiation proof or as well armored as I am lead to
believe in the case of traveller starships.

>}  First, we will compute the damage points each type of weapons does...
> I like it.

}I don't.  At least not yet.  Look at it like this.  For smaller weapons
}operating over a _short_ turn, a laser does MW damage if pulse, or 2*MW
}damage if beam.  A ship sized beam laser should do 500 points of damage in
}combat--more if the turn length is considered.  If it doesn't, then I'll
}design my ships with the smaller weapons, nyet?  The principle is good, but
}the math is bad.

Your right.  I hadn't considered that.  But I still like the idea of using
the damage point values.  What we need is to adopt a more mass oriented
system than the volume oriented system.  (ie 1 damage point per 15 tons
rather than per 15 kiloliters or something like that)

}This reminds me--have we _ever_ come to any agreement on
}whether lasers actually shoot at their targets at far orbit range or whether
}they just slash around hoping for a random hit?  If the latter, then a low
}damage might be justifiable (but it should increase as range decreases, not
}from differing beam strength but from increasing time on the target).  If
}the former, then the damage should be larger (or the damage from vehicle
}mounted weapons should be smaller.)

A good question.  *I* would assume the slashing movements for the lasers.
It seems to make sence within the confines of the game and as to what is
actually going on.  This would account for the increased probability of
hitting with lasers at closer ranges.

2G Scott Kellogg