Technology of 2183

The nameless critic speaks out again:

  Actually it's nothing like changing the system.  The system is a bunch
of weapons with a die associated with them.  You're the one associateing
bullet size and rate of fire with the weapons and getting irked that
they
don't match.

** Hmmm. I'm not just inventing it - at least I perceive myself to be
deriving some portion of the description directly from the text in the
SG2
rulebook. 

 You even go through some leaps of logic that would be
appropriate to Star Trek.

** If you're trying to be offensive, you've surely succeeded. Next
you'll
brand me a munchkin or a GWer.... ;) 

  My personal favourite is the one where you talk
about how much better targetting systems would be in the future so
should
get better than d6.

** If you ignore the other half of that argument, I'm sure it could be
taken
to sound that way. 

  Fine, whatevever, but it's just as valid to say they
get d6 unless your crystal ball is that much better than mine.	Mine
personally says that things as large as a human won't play much part on
the battlefield in the future, but hey... it's a fun game.

** Yes. However, I believe my contention is that if a human fired
support
weapon can be rolling d10s and d12s, and given we're presuming our human
is
not something unrecognizably advanced and presumably vehicle weapons
mounts
move forward at the same rate, then their is no way *COMPARITIVELY* that
I
can see to justify d6 for the vehicle. I'm not arguing for more than a
D6
for weapons guidance - or if I am it is only when taken in the context
of
the effectiveness of the infantry FP die. All I'm suggesting is if, as
we
seem collectively to realize, we're playing a game that loosely mimics
today's world - we still have infantry, tanks, etc and most of the stuff
is
recognizable modern day kit with some sci-fi PSB bolt-on boiler-plate,
then
isn't it perhaps desireable to try to reflect the proportionality of
modern
infantry SAW efficacy of fire to that of vehicle mounted gunnery?
Especially
when the vehicle mounted technologies seem surficially more likely to
progress (since they have far more areas to improve and a far faster
rate of
imporvement) than said human-fired version? 

Anyway, do what you think is best. I won't challenge your right to
excercise
your judgement or your sarcasm. :) 

  I take it by your long reply you're all set for Lancaster?  :D

** Working steadily to reach that state. :)

Thomas Barclay
Software UberMensch
xwave solutions
(613) 831-2018 x 3008