RE: FT AAR - Operation Furious Riposte - 20,000 pt battle

My memory of this was that they were going to get +50% hull for the same
mass; but then I wasn't happy with that either.
The early discussion involved only the change in KV armour, not the
hull;
that came up later.

Personally, I found the old railgun rules too unbalanced.  The current
Schoon RG rules I'm not happy with for various reasons, including
damage/mass breakpoints (which have been mentioned in the last few
posts).
Schoon followed the garbage can PSB theory, whereas I followed the
shotgun
PSB for a different railgun ruleset.

'Neath Southern Skies - http://users.mcmedia.com.au/~denian/
Schoon's KV: http://www.homestead.com/fullthrust/files/kv_fb_design.html
My KV: http://users.mcmedia.com.au/~denian/ft/kravak.htm

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oerjan Ohlson [SMTP:oerjan.ohlson@telia.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2000 4:33 AM
> 
> When you add in the cost of the hull and engines to carry those
weapons
> as well, it no longer is. The pulse torp loses ground - it balances
for
> human ships which use 50% of their TFM for hulls and engines (which
> corresponds to KV ships using 40% of their hulls for same), but is
> worse than the RGs on ships using more Mass than this for hulls and
> engines. 
> 
> The KV armour would be fairly priced at 5xMass if it only protected
> against beams - that's how much invulnerability to threshold checks
> would be worth to screens. However, that'd make its ability to reduce 
> damage from virtually all weapons (EMP missiles and Needle beams 
> are the only current exceptions) completely free, and such a powerful 
> ability can't be free without damaging the game balance.
> 
> The big KV discussion broke out just when I was moving house, so I
> didn't manage to keep up with it :-( Otherwise I'd have brought these 
> points up for discussion then instead of now :-/
> 
> Oerjan Ohlson