Re: Vector Rules

Status: RO

In message <199710071453.KAA29797@sparczilla.East.Sun.COM>
	  Joachim Heck - SunSoft <jheck@East.Sun.COM> wrote:

> Imre A. Szabo writes:
> 
> @:) Rotating should cost ZERO thrust.  The little guys will still be
> @:) able to out manuever the big guys because they have more (often
> @:) much more) thrust.  For game play I would limit rotating to once
> @:) per turn, either before or after main engine fire.

I know I've had this argument (sorry, we're all friendly here
aren't we? - discussion :) ) on this list before, but small
does not necessarily mean fast.

If 50% of your mass is devoted to engines and propellant, then
(assuming equal technology for both ships) a big ship is going
to be as 'fast' as a small ship. In fact, some things work out
more mass-efficient on big ships, allowing the big ship to be
faster, given the same proportion of drive systems.

Of course, a lot of people like the 'cinematic' idea of small
is fast, big is slow though.

>   I think this makes some sense but I still don't like the idea of
> ships rotating freely.  I would say instead that ships have thrusters,
> like those found on the Space Shuttle, and they can use them to make
> one heading change per turn at no thrust cost.  So ships with thrust
> two can actually turn three headings per turn, and even ships with no
> engines left can very slowly reorient themselves.

I sort of like the idea of having two drive systems - a primary
drive which thrusts in one direction, and a manouevre drive
which can thrust in any direction, and also be used for turns.
Then you can have damn fast ships, which can't turn to save
themselves (literally).

Realistically, it all depends on the length of the turn. If
you're assuming 15 minute turns, most ships should be able to
complet a 360 degree rotation in a turn. If turns are 15
seconds long, then this won't be so.

-- 
Be seeing you,
Sam.