RE: Heavy Fighter Technology

Well, it still has to fit within the available parameters.  I give
reactive/ablative +1 armour vs the weapons in Stargrunt, as it doesn't
have
an official mechanism.	These are already taken into account in DS
anyway
with the reduced chit validity.

Neath Southern Skies - http://users.mcmedia.com.au/~denian/
[mkw] Admiral Peter Rollins; Task Force Zulu
[pirates] Prince Rupert Raspberry; Base Commander

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ryan M Gill [SMTP:monty@arcadia.turner.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2000 10:24 AM
> To:	gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> Subject:	RE: Heavy Fighter Technology
> 
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2000, Robertson, Brendan wrote:
> 
> > Maximum armour for all aerospace fighters is 3 or 1 less than the
size
> class
> > (whichever is less) under Dirtside/Stargrunt vehicle construction.
> 
> Ahh, good point. Then allowing an increase of one armour point would
also 
> illustrate the fighter's "heavieness" would it not?
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> - Ryan Montieth Gill	    NRA / DoD# 0780 (Smug #1) / AMA / SOHC -
> - ryan.gill@turner.com      I speak not for CNN, nor they for me -
> - rmgill@mindspring.com	       www.mindspring.com/~rmgill/ -
> - '85 Honda CB700S  -  '72 Honda CB750K  - '76 Chevy MonteCarlo  -
> ------------------------------------------------------------------