Re: Bigger--not always better

On Sun, 23 Mar 1997, Samuel Penn wrote:
> Am I the only one who doesn't have a hatred of A batteries?
> No offence Paul (and I've heard similar suggestions before,
> so this is directed towards others as well), but the above
> seems totally stupid, useful only in making beam weapons
> utterely useless.

I don't; as a top-of-the-line weapons system, they do a good job,
and they just need a little tweaking to make them more balanced.
The "4 mass for 1 arc, and 1 mass per additional arc" suggestion
seems like a good way to make them as expensive as they are effective.

> Beam batteries aren't very effective against capital ships, but
> are very effective against escorts, which, to my mind, suggests
> that their intended targets are escorts.
> 
> Pulse torpedoes do (on average), less damage against escorts
> than equivalent mass of A batteries, but far more damage against
> capital ships. This suggests pulse torpedoes are designed to be
> used against capital ships.

Yep -- this is one of those built-in logistical considerations you make
when you design a Full Thrust starship.

Rick Rutherford       rickr@digex.net	    The above opinions are mine.
"It seems to me that the nearer painting approaches sculpture the better
it is, and that sculpture is the worse the nearer it approaches
painting."
					     -- Michelangelo