Re: Vector movement - Reply

Alun Thomas wrote:

Quoting Jon T.:
>>> I'm sure the guys at Wireframe/Chameleon won't object to me telling
you
>>> that the FT/B5 rules are using BOTH movement systems; the EA and
other
>>> "young" races get to use newtonian vectors, while the Minbari etc.
use a
>>> development of the original FT movement to simulate their "grav"
drives.

Quoting Mikko Kurki-Suonio:
>> I'm not sure that's a good idea. The FT system is easier but not
>> necessarily more flexible. I think free-spinning dreadnoughts need
>> to be examined thoroughly.

> I agree, I think the older races should be able to switch between
> systems as they see fit (by turning the grav systems off ?).
> There might be a case for limiting the amount a ship can turn
> to its thrust rating (but not actually using any thrust to turn). 

I'm going to have to put my oar in here. If we (i.e., B5 gamers and
designers) are
going to use Newtonian movement, then it should apply to _all_ races,
the way
it would in reality (you can't turn the laws of motion on and off).

So how do you represent higher tech level drives? NOT by suspending the
laws
of physics, but by giving the Minbari, etc., what their magno-gravitic
drives would
really give them -- the ability to generate high accelerations! So a
Minbari War
Cruiser doesn't have an "FT" drive that magically enables it to use the
normal,
but non-Newtonian, movement rules; what it has is a drive that generates
larger
accelerations (i.e., high "thrust" in FT terms) than the low-tech races,
with the
possibility (for _real_ high-tech races) of producing these
accelerations in _any_
direction, rather than being limited to the forward direction. This does
away with
the Real Thrust thrusters and makes the ship _very_ manoeuvrable. And
dangerous, because the weapons arcs are now more-or-less independent of
the
ship's motion -- rather like a StarFury, which has engines that can
thrust forward
(the biggest), backwards and to either side. 'Furies can dance, and it's
a deadly
dance -- just watch Sinclair and Garibaldi splash Raiders during the 1st
season.

The standard FT movement rules effectively assume this, anyway. Try
working
out the thrust needed to do a 3-point (90-degree) turn; you'll find that
it's well off
the fore-aft axis. So, in Newtonian rules, the "young" races have to use
thrusters
and their main drive as per Real Thrust, the "middle-aged" races do the
same
but with much higher thrust ratings (and turning performance), and the
"old
guys" have the high thrust and the ability to use it in any direction. I
reckon this
would simulate the difference between the various tech levels quite
well. Of
course, players will have to get used to Newtonian movement.

As to "free-spinning DNs", the manoeuvrability of a ship in Newtonian
movement
is basically controlled by how fast it can rotate, thereby varying the
direction of
its thrust vector. So, to stop over-agile big ships (assuming that you
want to),
either keep the thrust low (as the FT rulebooks indicate) or introduce
(MASS-
and TL-based?) limits on thruster power, whatever the thrust of the main
drive.

Comments?

Phil
--------------------------------------------------------------
"We gotta get out into Space,	     | A sentiment echoed by:
 If it's the last thing we ever do!" |	   Phil Atcliffe  
   -- Return to the Forbidden Planet |	(p-atclif@uwe.ac.uk)