Peter H. Brenton [email removed] replied to a FF&S
comment that at any tech level projectile weapons far outclass DE
weapons as Anti-Tank Weapons.
I would have to agree that a TL-8 projectile weapon will be
outclassed by a TL-11 + energy weapon. But to compare the two
together at the same tech level I would think that the projectile
weapon would cause more damage.
I say that on the basis of having played Centurion, a grav tank
board game by FASA that I found very playable and fairly
realistic. Vehicles have a variety of weapons mounted as they
each achieve different results. Using various types of shells you
can achieve different effects on the enemy armor. Lasers give a
straight line penetration. And missiles are similar to shells but
more powerful. The lasers alone won't kill a tank since it is
very hard to hit the same spot twice. So the tactics usually
demand that you fire a few shells and missiles first to thin out
the armor, and then fire the lasers to hopefully penetrate and
damage various internal components like ammo, fusion reactor,
crew, and stabalizers.
Or we can look at OGRE/GEV from steve jackson games. Their
rail-gun (gauss) fired tactical nuclear shells outclass every
other weapon on the battlefield. The background history states
that lasers were found to be too tempermental to be used on the
battlefield and so laser are regulated to anti-air duty. A
definite rules simplification but one that works in that future
history.
Also, jump infantry is included in the Centurion rules, and I can
see how Centurion could easily be adapted for use in Traveller
ground actions. Another technology that appears in Centurion is a
ceramic armor that defends nicely against lasers but is normal for
shells, meaning that you have to layer you armor in you vehicle
designs.
And thinking of armor, a reactive or ablative armor spaced with a harder
material (like superdense) should help keep the weight down while still
improving survivability. Which give me a thought. I will have to try to
design a Centurion type Gravtank with FF&S. It should prove enlightening.
Sorry if this is off-topic for some, but anytime I have compared
games, I have found more similarities than different. It is
important to define what exists in the future history you use and
stick with it. If another game design can be used to fill-in
parts, or just make play easier then I'm all for it.
One last note, Centurion doesn't have the believability problems
that FASA's Battletech does. I could never understand why a few
nice heat-seekers couldn't be used in Battletech! <G> The thermal
exaust from those fusion reactors make such easy targets!
The whole point of this was to say that I think that fighting
vehicles would function best with two or more weapon types that
complement each other.
And hopefully when STRIKER II is released (I did hear it
mentioned, I think) it will simplify ground actions for us. (And
cause another new round of debates) <g>
John Bucsek
[email removed]