Re: [GZG] Revised Salvo Missiles Update

["Eric Foley" <stiltman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I pretty much agree with laserlight here.  He's said it more eloquently than 
I have:  they're _missiles_.  Missiles have guidance stuff.  This strikes me 
as especially strange when we have other solid-projectile weapon mechanics 
that can hit more accurately at longer ranges despite the complete absence 
of either guidance or post-firing propulsion.  (Namely, just about 
everything the Kra'Vak use.)

This is all I'm really interested in either -- we should have a lock-on roll 
based on ECM of some sort, perhaps a central guidance for the salvo at large 
and then perhaps a second one for how many missiles within the salvo hit. 
I'm not saying we shouldn't still allow salvo missiles to just plain miss. 
They should, on occasion.  I just don't buy that something that's presented 
to us as "missiles" should have a "spray and pray" aiming mechanic.

EF

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <laserlight@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 8:06 AM
Subject: Re: [GZG] Revised Salvo Missiles Update


> From: Robert N Bryett
> > Of course I too have  PSB ideas and personal feelings about what is 
> > credible and  "realistic" in SF space battles, but I think house rules or 
> > "universe" rules are the place to express those
>
> Perhaps the distinction is between a generic mechanism ("beam dice") and a 
> universe-specific name ("phasers" or "blasters" or...). If you agree that 
> missiles ought to home but don't, then you'll understand that we'd like to 
> see a generic mechanism for them, regardless of whether it applies to 
> Moties or Harringtonverse or what. (If someone thinks missile homing is 
> adequate the way it is, I'm going to assume that person haven't used them 
> much--sorry).
>
> > pretty crushing, so some balancing feature needs to be present.
>
> Right. What I'd like is to replace the current lock-on roll with some kind 
> of ECM/ECCM roll, just enough to allow crew/equipment quality to make a 
> difference. Otherwise missiles are going to lock on to brand new NAC EW 
> cruisers just as easily as they do to 80 year old PAU tramp freighters, 
> which seems a bit unlikely.
> _______________________________________________
> Gzg-l mailing list
> Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l


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