Prev: Re: Re: [FT] Battlecruisers vs. battleships Next: Re: Re: [FT] a "true Fisher Battlecruiser" for the NAC, was Battlecruisers vs. battleships

RE: [FT] back to fighters

From: Beth.Fulton@c...
Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 11:38:06 +1000
Subject: RE: [FT] back to fighters

G'day,

> The amount of energy required seems to be a bit high
> to do that sort of damage to _everything_ in such a
> massive globe.  If you could generate that much
> energy, it would seem to me a better idea to narrow it
> down and punch holes in planets rather that simply
> microwaving them.

Even at the larger scales I haven't had much of a problem as I've
thought of
it as the area covered my small homing bomblets rather than a single
massive
wave of plasma (even if that is what is said under the blurb).

Cheers

Prev: Re: Re: [FT] Battlecruisers vs. battleships Next: Re: Re: [FT] a "true Fisher Battlecruiser" for the NAC, was Battlecruisers vs. battleships