Re:FT-Tech etc etc

David Rodemaker wrote:

>I handle this IMC in a very simple matter. Since it is based on a
Traveller
>model, a Higher Tech Level Ship get's a +1 per tech level difference
on all
>pertinant die rolls.

And Oerjan Ohlson wrote

>The problem with this is that FT only uses D6s. Even a +1 modifier is
>very, *very* much unless you restrict them to DCP rolls only, and a +6
>modifier is utterly devastating :-(

Yup, that would be a big difference in FT. My way to represent advanced
tech
in FT would involve mass/cost for different systems. Off the top of my
head,
say the heavy beams used in the GZG-ECC for the mass of normal beams
+50%
(instead of the next class above). The cost would increase by a greater
ammount than the weapons advantage would represent (say x6 mass for the
above). This would give new tech a advantage vs old tech, and would also
be
a lot more expensive (and no, I have no idea how this would affect the
game
ballance, this was just off the top of my head). Of course, the same
idea
could be applied to anything, say drives (KV drives gain 1 thrust per 4%
mass instead of per 5%, but at a cost of x4 mass) or weapons (KV kinetic
guns have dammage of the class above (K2 =3 DP) for the same mass, but a
cost of x5 mass, or 8 MU range bands instead of 6 MU, for higher
velocity
rounds), or even electronics (a flag bridge at mass of 4, a cost of 20,
can
tie all ships with 18 MU into a PDS net, without the need for the ships
involved to mount ADFCons). Just some ideas off the top of my head.

BIF
 "yorkshire born,yorkshire bred,
 strong in arms, thick in head"