RE: [FT] RG Damage Vs. Armour

On Fri, 4 Dec 1998, Tim Jones wrote:

> I'd accept the to-hit mod recently proposed for the sRG against
> Iarmor. It is however not the general case against FB armor, so OKish.
> Generally the KV won't be firing at each other so we can ignore it.
> 
Sounds good to me..

> IMO the KV armor thing looks reasonably fixed. And we have the costs
> sorted too though they seem to have changed in the turmoil, Schoon?
> 
> <Wed	02/12/98 schoon wrote in thread: Kra'Vak Railguns
Number-Crunched>
> I'd be game for those increases. They would result in:
> 
> <Fri 04/12/98 schoon wrote in thread: Armour & RG - again>
> 
> Given that the *higher* mass (1,3,6) were for fixing the 
> damage / mass / cost problems in thread 'Kra'Vak Railguns 
> Number-Crunched' we should stick with them?
> 
> -= tim jones =- 
> 

Aslong as we balance out the total mass of the ship, when we balance out
the Railguns - I don't see a problem with the higher mass/point cost.
This
means a 70-80 mass thrust 6 Heavy Cruiser - mounting class2 x4, class3
x2,
scatterguns x4, and FC x3 for around 300 to 340 points.

Steven 

			       Steven Arrowsmith
			  www.public.usit.net/arrowjr
			     steven@arrowsmith.net
			      dredd@quake.usit.net
________________________________________________________________________
_______

		    I Would Rather live a Lie, Thinking I Can.
			 Than know The Truth That I Can't
________________________________________________________________________
_______