Prev: Re: Why big ships are too good... Next: Re: FT III

Re: Why big ships are too good...

From: lojeck <lojeck@b...>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1996 15:42:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Why big ships are too good...

> Brian Lojeck wrote:
> >gotta agree here. I think that the extra cargo room for a larger hull
> >should be free. after all, if you don't fill up a ship with systems,
> >the extra space has no effect on game play, so should cost nothing.
if you
> >DO fill it up, you will pay points for whatever it is you filled it
> >with.
> >
> >the only thing left to pay for with the increasing cost of a hull is
> >ability to take damage and have different threshold check rates...
> Brian,
> Were you thinking of using unused system space as cargo space?  If so,
> think this a simple and effective use of extra space.  Good idea.  The
> significant extra cost involved that I can think of might be for
> access doors for loading\unloading cargo.

not at all... actually, I was trying to put logic to large ships having
such better ability to take damage.

perhaps if I explain it better...

ships have two things they must do, defend and attack. a ships weapons
what attack, its body is what defends.

if I take a 100 ton ship and give it one c battery, it has the same
offensive punch as an 8 ton ship with a C-batt. so their offensive
should cost the same amount in points regardless of the fact that the
larger ship has the potential to mount greater weaponry...

where the larger ship IS better (to account for costing more) is in the
ability to take damage...

better explaination?

Brian Lojeck

"This is the .sig that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends.
Some people started reading it, not knowing what it was; but now that
been reading it, they notice it because... This is the .sig that never

Prev: Re: Why big ships are too good... Next: Re: FT III