Re: Two AARs--John Atkinson vs Laserlight

Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
>
> >which at 12-24 takes 16 mass worth of beams.  Haha.	That's even. 
>Or
> let's compare PTs, which average 3.5 points of damage and have >the
> same range bands and (usually) arc limitiations.  Gee, that takes an
> >average of 4.6 (or thereabouts, havn't done the math) to do 10 points
> >of damage.
> 
> John, I'm *very* glad you pointed out that you haven't done your maths
> here - otherwise I would never, ever dare to use a bridge (or even a
> dug-out) you've been involved in building, or be anywhere within ten
> miles of any demolition you're doing.

Yeeps.	As near as I can figure, I was thinking 15, not 10.  Too tired
to think--much driving, followed by much drinking in too small a time
frame.	I'll just go commit suppukku.

> That also confirms my suspicion that the force you used was CruRon4
and
> not CruRon5 :-/

Umm. . . Yeah.	You're right.

> >Gee, that's easy with a higher thrust for the KV AND an objective to
> >defend.
> 
> Attempting a salvage under fire, without first driving the enemy off?
> You've only got yourself to blame, then <shrug>

Went for the K'V to try to whack them--leading them a merry chase "at
range" would result in leaving the salvage undefended.

> OK. IOW; bad luck with your dice while Laserlight rolled quite hot. A
> really good basis for objectively evaluating a new weapon, don't you
> think?

Hrm. . . I guess you win--so-so tactics and poor (though not
spectacularly so) dice combined to give bad first impression.  

John