Re: Fw: Weapons for Newtonian based FTIII

On Mon, 5 May 1997, Joachim Heck - SunSoft wrote:

If you don't mind, I'll turn this one upside down.

> Saying bases are helpless against
> sandcasters is not so different from saying "Chicago is helpless
> against nuclear weapons" - which is true but even in a (limited) war
> most windy citizens would not feel themselves to be under particular
> threat.  Why?  Because the bombers that could fly a nuke over Michigan
> Ave would be intercepted long before they got in range.  So why not
> just presume the same for FT?  

We can change anything, but we're discussing Phil's proposed sandcaster
rules. And as presented, sandcasters have *unlimited* range and
*unlimited* damage. Given initial velocity of, say, 1000", they're
pretty
impossible to intercept. Even if you're directly in its path, the FT
turn
structure means you probably won't get a shot at it. And unlike ships,
the
cloud does not have to slow down to make a meaningful attack. It only
has
to cross paths with the target. 

> At worst one could make the sandcaster
> a large weapon so the ships carrying it could be recognized and
> destroyed early on but this is just PSB to make a campaign more
> playable.

That would make it unusable in its "chaff" role... This was supposed to 
be a defensive weapon, I think. It just had unrealized offensive 
potential. 

>   I think what no one's really though of is that if your attacking
> forces get to your base, you're already in pretty deep trouble.  The
> sandcaster issue seems only to be an extension of the modern
> superiority of offensive weaponry.  

Well, ignoring sandcasters for a while and returning to my favorite 
source of controversy, missiles, yes you can take this approach.

But it still castrates stations as military installations. I.e. if the
battle is decided by keeping the missile boats over 60" away from the
target station, the station's weaponry won't matter one teeny weeny bit
--
so why blow points on any? Why even put it on table? Just designate one 
table edge as the "last line of defense".

So, it still removes the fun of having a battle within the range of 
"shore batteries".

To put this in SF terms, I'd like it to matter whether the Death Star
has 
guns (apart from the planetbuster) or not.

-- 
maxxon@swob.dna.fi (Mikko Kurki-Suonio) 	  | A pig who doesn't
fly
+358 50 5596411 GSM +358 9 80926 78/FAX 81/Voice  | is just an ordinary
pig.
Maininkitie 8A8 02320 ESPOO FINLAND | Hate me?	  |	     - Porco
Rosso
http://www.swob.dna.fi/~maxxon/     | hateme.html |