Re: [GZG] Gzg-l Digest, Vol 37, Issue 24

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOn Wed, Sep 29,
2010 at 1:56 PM, Eric Foley <stiltman@teleport.com> wrote:

> [...]
> So I thought that the magazine explosion and/or the power core
explosion
> when a ship is destroyed might partly alleviate both.  Like to carry
lots of
> missiles and/or fighters?  Fine, but if one of the magazines or
fighter bays
> thresholds you'll very possibly lose the ship.

I understand what you want to go for. Kinda like what Japanese carriers
were
in WW2. Maybe it's feasible to purchase the same systems (hanger bays,
missile magazines) at a reduced cost and allow them this potential
catastrophic damage, but keep the current fighter bay/missile magazines
as
written with no catastrophic damage potential on a hit (more like WW2 US
carriers)

Mk