Re: Fighters and Hangers

[agoodall@xxxxxxx]

Jared wrote:

> I couldn't find numbers for the older 12" and 13.5", but they would be
> in line with the 15", which is an older gun, whereas the 14" Mk VII and
> 16" are 20-30 years newer. 

I've done extensive work on a Russo-Japanese War version of Full Thrust. I set it aside for a time, but recently I've been opening it back up.

The 12" guns at the turn of the previous century may have had theoretical ranges close to the 5" you cited (I don't have my Conways or Janes available, or Warship International), but actual engagement range was far less, with battles opening up at closer to 18,000 yards. You can chop down your ranges if you know the ranges that most battles opened at.

Of course the turn of the 20th century saw guns with good range but pretty pitiful fire control...

> I don't mean a "lucky strike".  What I meant was one system (the Main
> Drive) provides thrust for *Acceleration Only*, while a separate system
> (the Maneuvering Drive) provides maneuvering thrust for course change
> and deceleration.  As two separate systems, they take Threshold Checks
> separately, so that either one can be damaged without affecting the
> other.

I did it an entirely different way. Ships in my game have a top speed equal to the ship's historic top speed. They lose speed automatically each time a hull row is lost (my ships had 5 hull rows, not 4). This was stolen from _General Quarters_. I added a number of othe critical hit systems, one of which was a rudder jam forcing the ship to go straight, turn right only, or turn left only.

At any rate, I hadn't thought to look at MT for ideas. Instead, I used beams to represent guns, but broke them down into 6" range bands instead of 12". Armour was a modifier to the roll, ala shields. I'll have to look at MT again, though, as I'm not hugely crazy about this idea.

--
Allan Goodall              agoodall@att.net
http://www.hyperbear.com   agoodall@hyperbear.com