Re: Sa'Vaksu poser from Newsgroups

On Mon 07 Aug, Kevin Walker wrote:
> on 8/6/00 15:46, Charles Stanley Taylor at
charles.taylor@cableol.co.uk
> wrote:
> 
> >>> Hmm... I quite like this one, as it 'makes sense' that there would
be a
> >>> limit to how much power
> >>> a weapon (especially a biological -based one) could channel.
> >>> Using an analogy with human beam batteries, how about:
> >>> Maximum Power   MASS
> >>> 16			      2
> >>> 32			      4
> >>> 48			      8
> >>> above this, every extra 16 points of capacity doubles the MASS
> >>> COST is MASS x3
> >> 
[snip]
> 
> One little point.  There's no real reason (unless you want to deal
with the
> 1 versus 2 items with threshold checks) to take one max48 over two
max32
> stingers under this system.  Both sets would cost the same mass but
the
> max48 can only channel 75% that of the 2x max32 stingers.  The max48
stinger
> has no additional range over the max32 system.
> 
> Kevin Walker
> sage@bresnanlink.net
> 
I see what you mean - oops!
perhaps table should read:
Max. Power	MASS	Max. Range (mu)
16		2	60
32		4	72
64		16	84
128		256	96

-or-

16 (3-arc)	2
32 (1-arc)	3
32 (3-arc)	4
64 (1-arc)	8 + 4 per extra arc
This uses the same principle as before (each extra 16 PP capacity
doubles
the cost) - but only PP capacities that give extra range are listed.
COST is still MASS x3.

Under this, I suspect that we would rarely see Stingers larger than the
Capacity 16 (standard) version. We could easily forget about the cap. 64
and above versions, and call the Cap. 32 version a "Heavy Stinger".
Maybe use my other suggestion - cut the Cap. 32 stinger down to 1-arc,
MASS 3, COST 9?

Charles

-- 
Sig eaten by hard drive :-(