Prev: Vectored Thrust (a fairly long post) Next: Re: Vectored Thrust (a fairly long post)

Re: Scatterguns and SMPs... and PDAF

From: db-ft@w... (David Brewer)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 10:35:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Scatterguns and SMPs... and PDAF

In message <> Mikko
Kurki-Suonio writes:
> On Thu, 17 Apr 1997, David Brewer wrote:
> > This isn't so 
> > for scatterguns, because of the dual function.
> So they'll pay extra for that function. Frankly, I don't see the big 
> point here. 

There is a gamble, as you mention, in allocating points to 
defensive systems such as PDAF and screens. The cost should not
only be related to their defensive abilities, but to the amount
of offensive weaponry displaced.

There is no gamble in purchasing scatterguns because they are 
both defensive and offensive. No offensive weaponry is displaced.

> > It seems odd that such high-tech ships come with so few DP's w.r.t
> > the outrageous offensive capabilities that they carry. 
> How so? Seems very "modern" to me. Extreme range, lethal firepower,
> the aluminum tin cans just can't take a hit. 

While I reserve a certain scepticism towards the exact 
capabilities, large modern warships seem to expect to be able to
actively defend themselves against cruise missiles with point-
and area-defence systems. There are also a range of deception 

> > I'm not
> > saying that this isn't justifiable, but I'll still call it odd. 

I'm still not saying this isn't justifyable. I still call it odd.
I don't want to make too big a deal of this.

> > The
> > minimum human ship to take a PTT carries enough DP to take the
> > average PTT hit. The minimum Kra'Vak ship to carry an RG-2 cannot
> > take the least-damaging RG-2 hit. Civil wars must be pretty darn
> > swift out there in Kra'Vakia. 
> Well, the average DD can't eat a torpedo hit.

Nor can a BB or CV... if it's a nuke. 

Not much of a game.

> > Only w.r.t. the Kra'Vak technology. That's where an overhaul is
> > needed.
> Exactly my point. The original system is clean and simple, but the
> things you tack on it, the more oddities, discrepancies, conflicting 
> rules sections and simple oversights you have.
> You need to overhaul it before you have special rules for each ship
> like the "Evil Overlord of Miniatures Gaming" games.

I think "overhaul" is too strong a word. In some cases 
clarification is needed. One can make endless arguments about how
things should be changed to "make sense" or "balance". I would not
play with the Kra'Vak as they stand because I think the rules are
poor (and for *that* reason in need of overhaul), but the rules are 
there for those who wish to play them and they are not overly
complex IMHO.

> > I would also suppose that
> > a minimum number of DP's would have to be taken.
> It only changes the math. As long as there are weapon systems that let

> you fight out of everyone else's range, you don't really lose anything

> taking the minimum possible DP for the stand-off ships. 

...weren't you justifying the use of aluminium cans above?...

David Brewer

Prev: Vectored Thrust (a fairly long post) Next: Re: Vectored Thrust (a fairly long post)