RE: Asymetric ships

Glen Bailey has a B5 Wars Narn DD miniature. He did an SSD for it on his
web
page at http://hometown.aol.com/gbailey/NarnDD.html

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[mailto:owner-gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU]On Behalf Of devans@uneb.edu
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2000 8:00 PM
To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: Re: Asymetric ships

I'm having way too much trouble keeping the ships I'm carving symmetric!
;
->=

I seem to recall a Fasa Klingon being offside, but if there was a fig,
it'd
be huge bucks.

Have you looked at old GW Space Marine? The earlier Eldar had one or
two, I
think the prism cannon was one, that were supposed to be tankish, but
might
work for space ships, and were rather asymmetric. I see them fairly oft
in
bargain bins.

In the final analysis, many regular ships that have 'wings' or the like
would convert pretty easily, cutting off and polishing one side. I'd
think
a big box of Silent Death plastics would be a good place to start.

The_Beast

-Douglas J. Evans, curmudgeon

One World, one Web, one Program - Microsoft promotional ad
Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer - Adolf Hitler
From owner-gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU  Tue Oct  3 18:58:23 2000
Received: (from majordom@localhost) 
	by soda.csua.Berkeley.edu (8.8.8/) id SAA18580
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Tue, 3 Oct 2000 18:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
	env-from (owner-gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU)
Received: from dynamite.com.au (m1.dynamite.com.au [203.17.154.18]) 
	by soda.csua.Berkeley.edu (8.8.8/) via ESMTP id SAA18572
	for <gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Tue, 3 Oct 2000 18:58:17 -0700
(PDT)
	env-from (aebrain@dynamite.com.au)
From: aebrain@dynamite.com.au
Received: from dynamite.com.au (tnt.dynamite.com.au [203.17.154.33])
	by dynamite.com.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA13666
	for <gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 11:58:05 +1000
To: gzg-l
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 01:58:06 GMT
Subject: Re: More Thrust Missiles
X-Mailer: DMailWebReg Web to Mail gateway 1.1u,
http://netwinsite.com/top_mail.
Content-Length: 2210
Lines: 56

htm
Message-id: 39da8eae.132d.0@dynamite.com.au
X-User-Info: 210.8.224.2
Sender: owner-gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu

Beth wrote:

>http://www.users.bigpond.com/derekfulton/

Nice one, Beth.

I do have a somewhat different proposal for MT missiles though. I found
Derek's
proposal just a bit too complex. Of course that's very, very much IMHO,
others
may differ etc etc

MT Missiles (the AEB version):
* Move like fighters (including ability to burn additional endurance to
move
12" after ship moves)
* Have an endurance of 2.
* Have a speed of 24", like fighters.
* Must attack the closest target within 6", if there is one.
* Are shot at like Fighters, Salvo Missiles etc.
* Do 2D6 damage when hitting, non-penetrating.

That's fairly simple. You can add Needles, EMP etc to taste.

There are a number of things to notice about this:
a) In some ways, MT missiles become a lot like SMs, and can easily be
mixed
with them. They also behave a bit like fighters, and can be mixed with
them
too.
b) The 12" move afterwards bit means that they can, at short range, act
a lot
like more accurate ER-SMs - move 24" then move 12".
c) The 12" move afterwards bit also means they can "pick their target".
Sure,
they have to hit the closest target within 6", but with this additional
move,
you can make sure that (at close range) the one you want *is* the
closest targe
t,
providing it's within 12" before the additional move.
d) Alternately, they can be used for long-range sniping at 48", but at a
cost
- no additional move means they suffer the same sort of accuracy
penalties as
SMs. But they have a mid-course guidance waypoint at 24".
e) Finally, the  ' must hit nearest target within 6" ' bit allows the
use of
smaller or escort ships to screen against long-range sniping by acting
as Banza
i
Jammers or anti-missile defences respectively. 

What this means is that by re-using existing mechanics - a cross between
fighte
rs
and SMs - you have a weapons system that's both different enough from
SMs to
be distinct, adds additional tactical possibilities, and yet has its own
proble
ms
in effective use. Bset of all, it's SIMPLE.