Re: FT-WotW

From: "Bif Smith" <bif@bifsmith.fsnet.co.uk>
Subject: FT-WotW

I know we are discussing needle beams at the moment, but I was wondering
if
anybody has given thought to what should be covered later (Noam?).

I agree, but would rather make sure we do each subject to some sort of
conclusion before rushing ahead to the next. I'm a bit unsatisfied with
the
EMP discussion, since we resolved basically nothing - too many people
liked
too many different systems to agree on much of anything, When I update
the
archive with Comments on the EMP discussion, I'm basically going to have
to
say "Look at the GZG-L archives in Feb 2001 for the EMP WOTW discussion.
No
consensus was reached."

I think we have a slightly better chance at needle beams, but we're not
there yet. I'm not keen on moving on to the next thing until we've
hashed on
Needles more and/or decided we're bogged down there too. If the latter,
I'm
not encouraged to do more "general systems" duscussions like EMP or
Needle
or Fighter, but would rather attack one specific weapon/system at a
time.

> Subjects
>I think need discussing (just from the WDA) are-MT missiles (and the
>launcher varient)

MT Missiles (and fighters) are done every 6 months to year on this list.
There are a couple of good proposals out there (several of which are
linkd
to in the WDA) and I think it's going to have to be one of the things
Jon
will update in FT3 or FB3. I like MT missiles alot, but  I wonder
whether we
should let them lie for now.

> human railguns (asraised by Matthew Smith), 

My personal bias is to just rename K-guns. There's not logic in creating
something that is basically a K-gun and give it  a differnet mechanic
just
so Humans can use them.

> AF-SML`s (and SMR version), 
Fine with me. 

> wave guns (scalable?, overpowered?), 
Sure, I suppose. I'd rather look at some others first, though.

There are several other systems I'm dying to discuss, but I want to do
justice to each one or each group one at a time.We really risk getting
ahead
of ourselves and shortchanging the subject at hand by rushing onto
thinking
about the next thing.

That said, back to the Needle:

Also from BIF:
> Another thought I had for a long ranged needle beam is that at short
range
> (0-12 mu), you can target a system at will as normal. At long range
(12-24
> mu), you roll to hit as normal for a needle beam. If you roll a 6 (a
needle
> hit), the targetted player specifies the system to be hit, and the
attacking
> player rolls a 6 to disable. The defender keep specifing systems until
the
> attacking player rolls a 6. 

I agree with Beth on this one. It's pretty long and drawn out. I think a
long range Needle with one die thoughout can be done, but it's best cost
cmpared with Pulsers than Beams. My HNB was made using the Beam
mechanic. A
single arc of pulser fire at close range costs 2 mass and gives 6 dice.
A
like number of dice for an M pulser costs 6 mass, or 3x. that'd be too
expensive for Needles, but 3 Mass would be too cheap. You'd either have
to
make if 3xMass at 4 or 5Pts/mass or 4 massat normal (or slightly less
than
normal) cost.

Noam

Noam