Prev: Re: Kinetic Energy Missile--New weapon for DSII Next: Re: [FT] A thought on that vector movement problem

Re: [FT] A thought on that vector movement problem

From: devans@u...
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 14:24:44 -0600
Subject: Re: [FT] A thought on that vector movement problem

*ahem* Taking care not to push Send instead of Paste...

Jerry:
***
You know, the one thing that's always kind of bothered me about pushes
is that you can't write PF i.e. push forward.  If pushes represent the
use of thrusters, shouldn't those thrusters allow you to burn in any
direction?  ("We need a little more Delta Vee to reach the dock", "Sorry
Sir, we can't do that without lighting off the main drive.")

This doesn't actually have anything to do with the current debate,
though.  (8-)

J.
***

This IS the discussion, Jerry. Absolutely right!

Oerjan:
***
So, you haven't used more than 100% of the total thrust power of the
ship, but you have used up 200% of the *time* available in a single game
turn - unless, of course, your ship manages to face in two separate
directions at once (but if it does, I'd say it is badly broken <g>).
***

This assumes that, as I was assuming, that the max thrust is the full
thrust that a CONTINUOUS burning engine throttled at full will put
out over the course of the turn. According to others, this is not the
way the rules are written. More a burp thrust.

Course, I've never played vector FT; obviously, my reading was off,
so I'll have to go back and re-read. I thought push, main, and
rotate came out of the same 'pool' of thrust.

Jerry, you CAN do what you suggest, IF you can rotate, push, rotate
back again.

Do the rules say you can't?

Prev: Re: Kinetic Energy Missile--New weapon for DSII Next: Re: [FT] A thought on that vector movement problem