Re: Vector Movement
From: "Partly cloudy today, partly sunny tomorrow - what is the difference??" <KOCHTE@s...>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 12:10:40 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Vector Movement
>If you play vector, you play vector. If you play cinematic, you play
>cinematic. Basically it means you have to be aware of the
>risks/character of the system you use. For example, we have found it
>very hard for the FSE to make a dent in the NSL in Vector, because
>their high thrust is less of an advantage (it still helps, but it is
>less of an advantage given the burst radius change for SMs). The
>solution I think that will be tried (and probably to good effect) will
>be a 4" burst radius for SMs in vector. That should nicely even things
>out for the FSE. We sort of proved <with some math> that the coverage
>envelope for SMs needs upped a bit in vector or the only thing you'll
>ever hit is a thrust 2 ship or luckily a thrust 4. Never a six. Up the
>burst radius to 4" and those numbers change to be more in line with
>the level of effectiveness you expect from SMs in cinematic.
In the Fleetbook it does not say that you are required to change the
SM burst radius in the vector system, only that i "strongly suggests"
it (2nd paragraph, page 9, left column). I have found the 3 mu radius
too limiting and last year was lamenting this to KR. He said his group
had opted to retain the 6 mu burst radius because of this and it seemed
to work okay, balance-wise (now, whether they still use it or not I
know; this data is a year old ;-)
Just some other input.
M 'back to lurking for now' k
McCoy: "Angry, Mr Spock? Or frustrated, perhaps?"
Spock: "Such emotions are foreign to me. I am merely testing the
of the door."
McCoy: "For the 15th time?"
- ST:TOS, 'Bread & Circuses'