Prev: Re: FT: Sa'Vasku ship costs... Next: Re: [FT] Updated MT Missiles question

Re: FT: Streamlining for Sa'Vasku???

From: Charles Taylor <nerik@m...>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 17:11:41 GMT
Subject: Re: FT: Streamlining for Sa'Vasku???

In message <000a01c1cdb8$23f01e20$a653bfa8@prostar>
	  "Imre A. Szabo" <ias@sprintmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Guys,
> 
> Does anyone know if it legal to have streamlined Sa'Vasku ships?  It
could be
> very useful in campaigns where you are trying to land large numbers of
> ground troops very quickly...  My idea was build a 40 to 50 mass
> streamlined ship with a drone womb and not much else, so it could
> "grow" ground troops on the surface.
> 
> Another idea is to allow ships in orbit with drone wombs to "grow"
Interface
> Craft and ground troops in orbit, and then send them in, say a mass 5
> interface craft and 1 bio mass of ground troops.  The Interface Craft
> will be re-absorbed when/if they return.
> 
> My last idea is to allow ships in orbit with drone wombs to "grow"
drop pods
> and ground troops.  Say a 3 bio-mass drop pod and 3 bio-mass of ground
> troops.  The advantage of drop pods is that they allow a lot of troops
> landed quickly.  The disadvantage would be that the drop pods can not
> be re-absorbed...
> 
> ias
> 

Hmm.. well, from the top - personally I don't see why you _couldn't_
have a atmosphere capable SV ship, at the usual cost (FB1 p.10).

Likewise, allowing the use of Drone Wombs to grow either interface
landers or drop pods, I'd allow both.

Another, additional, possibility, is the use of pod launchers to launch
'landing pods' complete with 'battle constructs'.

Charles


Prev: Re: FT: Sa'Vasku ship costs... Next: Re: [FT] Updated MT Missiles question