Prev: Re: Last Post Next: Re: Last Post

Re: [FT] Railgun/Fuel Chat Results

From: John and Roxanne Leary <realjtl@s...>
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 11:23:36 -0800
Subject: Re: [FT] Railgun/Fuel Chat Results

Sean Bayan Schoonmaker wrote:
> Just thought I'd put in a quick summary of last night's chat for those
> missed it.
> Fuel
     I always thought the ships in FT/MT/and FTFB used the compressed
verbage of the list members for reaction mass.	 JTL  :-)
...Snip...JTL (and revised order for what follows)

> Railguns
> We came to several tentative agreements on these - subject to some
> playtesting. Keep the P-Torp/RG to hit mechanism as is. Roll a number
> dice equal to the class of the RG, less 1 die per 12" of range (yes
> means that the last 6" is wasted), for each individual RG. The number
> dice that result in "hits" equals the damage multiplier. In other
words, a
> Class 2 RG at 8" rolls 2 dice, hitting on a 3-6. If both dice "miss"
> it misses; if one die "hits" then that's 2 points of damage; if both
> "hit" then it's 4 points.
     Simple and effective, the best answer for all.   JTL
> ...they may have talked about more stuff, but that's when I had to
> Bye all,
> Schoon
> Scatterguns
> We were mostly in agreement that the basic mechanics of the system was
> sound, but there either needed to be an increase in point cost and/or
> decrease in effective range to bring them into balance.
     Since the group wishes to retain (I think) very limited arcs
for the RG, and wishes to increase mass for all RG types, an increase
in the scattergun mass must be carefully weighed prior to
implementation.   Reason: two additional arcs to be covered.
     Another reason(more personal/background related):	I feel that
the design possibilities will be limited to the 'official' ship 
style. (due to the adjustments in weapons.)

Bye for now,
John L.

Prev: Re: Last Post Next: Re: Last Post