Re: Supplement publication idea

Joachim Heck - SunSoft wrote:
> 
> John D. Hamill writes:
> 
> @:) One of the reasons people on the list post specific systems to the
> @:) lists is that in the books Jon Tuffley himself explains the weapon
> @:) tech he uses in the "official" universe; i.e. Beams are particle
> @:) weapons.
> 
>   Well, that's true but I think it misses the point to a certain
> extent.  In the same paragraph as the "Particle Accelerator" statement
> it is mentioned that players can use the same weapon to represent "a
> Laser, Phaser, Blaster or whatever!"
> 
> @:) From that simple statement you can project the other tech, such as
> @:) screens being simple EM fields designed to disrupt incoming
> @:) particle beams, which is why they don't work on solid projectiles
> @:) or pulse torps. from that start you can add additional weapons
> @:) (lasers and the like) because you have a starting tech point.
> 
>   I think that's all right but I don't think it's really important
> what the new weapons are called as long as their rules distinguish
> them significantly from the existing weapons.  Maybe you want to write
> rules for a weapon that does one die of damage at any range out to 36"
> and weighs as much as a B battery.  OK.  Call it a laser if you like
> (and if it fits your universe) but maybe I've invented the same weapon
> and called it a mustard projector - it doesn't matter.  I would hate
> to see people arguing about things like "no laser could ever fire over
> 36 inches" or things like that.
> 
>   What I'm interested in seeing are weapons (or other) ideas that
> really add something to the game.  Customization of FT to a specific
> universe is interesting but I'd rather see an expansion of the types
> and functions of weapons.  Jump torpedoes are an example of something
> really quite new, as are the B5-style PDAF/interceptors.  These
> systems can probably work in many universes and therefore I think they
> would be a more valuable addition to the game than Advanced A battery
> with range to 48" or the like.
> 
> -joachim

In the real world, dramatic new tech doesn't really happen that much.
For example, tank cannons are outwardly the same since WWII, but a whole
host of small incremental improvements have occured since then so that a
modern M1A1 could take out any number of WWII tanks at little risk to
itself. The same in naval tech, with the exception of the overwhelming
switch from guns to missiles. So any space combat game that is going to
cover different periods is going to come up against the same thing. If
you want to say for example that the C batt. is the first one designed,
then go right ahead. But why would old tach be used on new ships? Just
something to think about.