Re: [GZG] Re: Gzg-l Digest, Vol 11, Issue 26
From: "john tailby" <John_Tailby@x...>
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:22:56 +1300
Subject: Re: [GZG] Re: Gzg-l Digest, Vol 11, Issue 26
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nyrath the nearly wise" <nyrath@projectrho.com>
> Of course this mainly happens since said super hovertanks
> are armed with utterly science fictional "powerguns"
> that convert each round of ammo into
> a dense bolt of copper plasma traveling
> near the speed of light.
>
> Aircraft will be much safer if the tanks were
> merely armed with lasers or something.
Why would aircraft be safer if the tanks were armed with lasers or other
particle cannons that fire particles at the speed of light as opposed to
the
slower plasma bullet?
If the aircraft can have the same weaponry and everyone has LOS range
then
it comes down to who has the best sensors and the ability to evade or
survive the attack.
If ground vehicles can mount heavier weapons than aircraft (which seems
likely to me in a universe without big antigravity lifters) then tanks
can
possibly hit harder and further than planes. It comes down to targeting
capabilities.
If you have efficient antigravity capacities then you get a merging of
plane
and tank into a suborbital gunship equally at home just above the ground
or
in the upper atmosphere.
The Slammer universe seems odd if big LOS rule because that leads into
why
are none LOS weapons not used? Self guided smart munitions give a big
stand
off capability without the LOS weapons being able to retaliate.
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l