RE: [GZG] Cruisers and Destroyers in the FT World

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

========================================
Message Received: Jan 17 2006, 10:06 PM
From: "Thomas Barclay" 
To: gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
Cc: 
Subject: [GZG] Cruisers and Destroyers in the FT World

Brian B said:
The reason this doesn't necessarily transfer well to FT is simple: 
Space isn't full of water. From what I remember, the ability of
larger ships to fo faster than smaller ships, at least in the Age of
Sail, had to do with drag and the dynamics of the hull interacting
with the water.

Agreed, with feeling :)

Tomb:
Well, it might. Yes, you are right that it has to do with inertia, hull
shape, 
etc. But in the FT world, maybe larger mass FTL drives are inherently
more 
efficient. Hence your SDN, even paying the same 10% mass for FTL, still
has a
more efficient (from a campaign standpoint) drive. This is one of those
economy
of scale factors. Smaller ships can do FTL too, but perhaps they are
either 
slower (smaller mass of drive) or else capable of less endurance
(lighter mass
drive can't hold the field up as long... insert other goobledigook PSB
wherever
you feel necessary). So this effect could be obtained in a campaign, if
it was
desirable. Or perhaps, if you wanted to, you split those theories in
two: Smaller
ships (lighter fields) can go further in hyper, but larger ships can go
faster. 
Or vice versa. So thus you'd create a class of ships that can move
quickly in 
FTL and another that can execute longer ranged manouvers in FTL. 

I see endurance as being more important than speed in the larger ships

_Garnhamghast is: drunk, so sorry for the inconsistencies. At least I
didn't aay Freakin'.

ua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

War! What is it good for? Er.....gaming