Re: Tech Level Differences [FT]

In message
<417DEC289A05D4118408000102362E0A210107@host-253.bitheads.com>
	  "Barclay, Tom" <tomb@bitheads.com> wrote:

> 
> Although the addition or subtraction of mass for a system or the
leaving of
> a few percent of waste space is one way to represent inefficient
design, it
> comes up lacking in one or two particulars. 
> 
> One way it falls short is that their are qualitative differences
between
> technology levels. It isn't just that a modern missile system is
lighter for
> the same effective punch, it also probably has more range. And the
sensor
> suite backing it up, in addition to being smaller, is far more
sensitive.

Good points, and ones I've considered, but I've had problems comming up
with a system for handling range variation - just check out my previous
thread on the subject.
Interesting point about Fire Control, DS II has different grades of fire
control, FT just has the on (not counting ADFC).
> 
> What does this mean? Lower tech in FT (and to one extent or another in
DS2
> and SG2) ought to be reflected in a way that represents varying
capacities,
> not just heavier (for oldtech) or more costly (for newtech) systems. 
> 
> Things such as
>	- reduced or increased range
>	- reduced or increased efficacy (damage for weapons...)
>	- reduced capability (slower launch rates for fighters, lower
thrust
> for engines). 
> 
> Some of these things give themselves to being modelled mass-wise. Some
> don't. Sensors strike me as one example of a system whose limits
change
> dramatically as tech changes. A ship with sensors say 10 years out of
date
> might have half the effective range of a modern one. 
> 
> I'm not saying I have the answer (cuz I don't just now), but the idea
that
> just omitting a few percentage points of mass is sufficient strikes me
as
> incomplete. It's a reasonable starting point and it'll do until we can
think
> up a better method, but it isn't the full picture.

> 
> ------------------------------------------
> Thomas R. S. Barclay
> Voice: (613) 722-3232 ext 349
> e-mail: tomb@bitheads.com
> 

Which is what I suggested it for - for instance, the example I gave
(lower tech kinetic weapons) mentions that range should probably be
reduced (either by applying a penalty on the 'to hit' roll, or by
shrinking the size of the range bands, can't decide which :-).

I guess the only real answer is:

Design your ships using the higher/lower tech.
Build a fleet for a certain number of points
Get a friend to build a fleet using 'vanilla' FB1/2 tech (FB1/2 designs
_and_ custom jobs).
Playtest! Playtest! Playtest!

Hmm.. need more games to test my mad ideas!

The other effect of higher tech designs are _radically new technologies_
which are largely going to have to be designed from scratch.

Anyway, I hope this is of use to someone,

Charles.

--