Re: Eldar tech, was (something I can't remember...)

>
>Yesterday or so, Aaron Teske wrote (something I managed to delete
before 
>I could send this mail):
>
>[on the size of the Eldar holoflage tech - I'd use 5% of hull mass,
Aaron 
>prefers 20% or so]
>
>No. 20% means far too much hull mass per weapon. According to Eldar 
>doctrine, ships should be fast, have lots of firepower, and go BOOM as 
>soon as someone actually manages to hit them through the holoflage
<vbg>
>If the holofields are too mass-intensive, the ships will take too long
to 
>go BOOM... which (since I don't want to reduce _weapon_ masses on Eldar

>ships) leads me to either small protective systems (the holoflage) or 
>increased available hull space per hull mass (since ether sails as I 
>envision them are not very mass-intensive).

You could regard them as Q-ships, so that they are twice as "BOOM-able"
:-)

SNIP

Rob Paul
NERC Institute of Virology 
Mansfield Road, Oxford OX1 3SR	  Tel. (01865) 512361
rkp@mail.nerc-oxford.ac.uk
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
  "Once again, villainy is rotting meat before the maggots of justice!"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--