(FT)-Defsats, and some other rambles

Defsats

I have one question about building defsats with no drive- where does the
power for the weapons systems come from. If you say solar pannels, the
pannels would have to be rather large, making it a nice target (a nice
large
flat array for your sensors to bounce off, and vulneable to losing power
from the pannels being hit). You can assume an increase of effeciency
for
power systems, but for energy systems the power output is still equal to
the
power input, and to dammage warships armour still requires a lot of
energy
to be focused onto the target. Myself, I would say you need 2% mass for
a
orbital maneuvering drive (0.2 thrust) and power plant.

Modular ships

How about allowing modular warships to have one core section and four
moduals. The core has to be larger than any one modual, and contains the
FTL, normal drive, core systems, etc. The moduals would have their own
hull
and armour, and would be hit separately from the main hull. When the
hull
for the modual is destroyed, the modual is lost with all it`s weapons
and
systems, and cannot be recovered by dammage control parties. I say four
moduals, because it aleviates the need for a roll for whitch piece of
the
ship is hit. Instead, any fire from the F or A arc`s hits the main hull,
and
each modual is for each offset arc. This is used for dammage hits only,
and
the weapon arcs for each modual can be any arc`s as per normal. If a
modual
is destroyed, any dammage from that arc hits the main hull instead.

Reenforced hull

I heard a lot of discusion about UN ships having a strong hull for the
mass
of a normal hull. Because a hull now has no set strength other than a
minimum of 10%, how about this system instead?-
mass/dp as normal, but a cost of x3.
1 dp removed from 2nd row and added to the first row, +2cost
2 dp removed from 3rd row and added to the first row, +3cost
3 dp removed from 4th row and added to the first row, +4cost
This would make the ships harder to threshold check for the first
threshold,
but more vulnerable as the dammage increases. For example-
Normal ship-40DP hull, cost=80
1st row=10DP
2nd row=10DP
3rd row=10DP
4th row=10DP
Reenforced ship-40DP hull, cost=129
1st row=16DP
2nd row=9DP
3rd row=8DP
4th row=7DP
The cost are just a rough guess off the top of my head, but you could
have
double the DP`s moved to the first row for x4 hull cost etc.

Any comments?

BIF
"yorkshire born, yorkshire bred,
strong in arms, thick in head"
From - Mon Dec 04 11:30:02 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA28656;
	Sat, 2 Dec 2000 09:07:22 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB2F6XM20709;
	Sat, 2 Dec 2000 07:06:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 2 Dec
2000 07:06:30 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB2F6TC20673
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 07:06:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:ZfAUQyZ9VUETxqzXFh+f1a9wORrxjB52@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB2F6RP20665
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 07:06:27
-0800 (PST)
Received: from tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts8.bellnexxia.net
[209.226.175.52])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB2F6Rf50391
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 07:06:27 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from rlbell@sympatico.ca)
Received: from sympatico.ca ([64.230.78.114]) by
tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net
	  (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with ESMTP
	  id
<20001202150616.RQPM27329.tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net@sympatico.ca>
	  for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 10:06:16 -0500
Message-ID: <3A291008.EB99DE20@sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 10:06:48 -0500
From: Richard Bell <rlbell@sympatico.ca>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en]C-SYMPA  (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,fr-CA
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Crossover after action report
References: <4.2.2.20001201091143.00a25a70@pop.hba.marine.csiro.au>
<20001201.203355.10255.0.triphibious@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000684

Glenn m wilson wrote:

> I was born in 1950 and watched all three on 'big screen' (Drive-in
> Theater for one, IIRC) and enjoyed the trio.	Haven't seen #1 and
don't
> plan to go.  Just doesn't 'feel' right based on what I've seen on
> previews and heard from others who went.
>

I felt as if I was in the center of the target audience for for the
first three
films; although, the ending of ROTJ left me a little flat (Why
stormtroopers wh
o
mercilessly gun down every un-named character in the other two films
find ewoks
too cute to shoot escapes me).

The pre-release hype and marketing tie-ins of Ep1 gave me the impression
that i
t
was an excuse to show what ILM could throw up on a screen, while
fleecing
millions of parents.  It was the marketing hype that really got to me. 
If I ha
d
seen a commercial for the film before seeing several weeks (months?) of
tie-in
commercials, I might have thought that the movie was created for more
than
reasons of unadulterated greed.

What puzzled me more was that friends of mine who saw the film
considered it to
be one of the worst films they had seen in a while, but with incredibly
good
visuals, so they only went to see it four or five times.

So as I had correctly identified the target of the film to be the
wallets of
parents of children, I stayed home.
From - Mon Dec 04 11:30:04 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA16797;
	Sat, 2 Dec 2000 13:31:06 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB2Gj0G22237;
	Sat, 2 Dec 2000 08:45:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 2 Dec
2000 08:44:54 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB2GiqC22211
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 08:44:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:UzFzd43Z8xTzoq1Zti4J+qOcHPrumvRG@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB2GipP22206
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 08:44:51
-0800 (PST)
Received: from okura.cowell.org (IDENT:root@okura.toysmakeuspowerful.com
[12.13.79.17])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB2Gipf61111
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 08:44:51 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from andy@cowell.org)
Received: from cowell.org (IDENT:andy@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by okura.cowell.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA13876
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:44:55 -0500
Message-Id: <200012021644.LAA13876@okura.cowell.org>
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Campaign system for SG2?
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 10:44:55 -0600
From: Andy Cowell <andy@cowell.org>
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000688

Anybody know of a campaign system that'd work with SG2?  Occaisionally
crossovers to DS2 or, heck, even FT would be acceptable.
From - Mon Dec 04 11:30:07 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA01531;
	Sat, 2 Dec 2000 17:43:23 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB2NfXE29787;
	Sat, 2 Dec 2000 15:41:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 2 Dec
2000 15:41:15 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB2NfEL29761
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 15:41:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.jumpy.it (mail.jumpy.it [212.239.30.36] (may be
forged))
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB2NfCP29756
	for <gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 15:41:12
-0800 (PST)
Received: from deianni (213.255.28.42) by mail.jumpy.it (5.1.050)
	id 3A271D9D00003AB6 for gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu; Sun, 3
Dec 2000
 00:42:02 +0100
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001202191446.007cdaf0@netgen.it>
X-Sender: edi@netgen.it
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32)
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 19:14:46 +0100
To: gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu
From: Enzo De Ianni <edi@netgen.it>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de0000068f

Hello

>Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 14:25:51 +1100
>From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au>
>Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Crossover after action report
>
>G'day guys,
>
>I wouldn't skip just on other people's say so I enjoyed it purely for
the 
>scene where the Gungans (or however you spell it) fight the Droids... 
>wonderful to see a Napoleonic army facing an ancient one... wargamer's
dream ;)
>
>Cheers
>
>Beth

Can be done!! GMT offered counters for the Alexandrian army to play in
their Waterloo game... based on some historian reflections about how
little
black powder had really changed war, up to that time.

Well... sorry! :)

Bye
					Enzo De Ianni
From - Mon Dec 04 11:30:02 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA12916;
	Sat, 2 Dec 2000 13:13:09 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB2JCYG24554;
	Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:12:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 2 Dec
2000 11:12:32 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB2JCVk24533
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:12:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:7sKAyIdfshiTARAexasXg6b4pIlsqzxm@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB2JCTP24528
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:12:29
-0800 (PST)
Received: from unebmail.uneb.edu ([199.240.194.41])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB2JCPf79376
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:12:29 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from devans@uneb.edu)
Subject: [OT] SW discussion Re: Sci-Fi Crossover after action report
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.1a August 17, 1999
Message-ID: <OF360778B8.B8DC07D2-ON862569A9.00694A05@uneb.edu>
From: devans@uneb.edu
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 13:12:01 -0600
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on UNEBMAIL/Servers/UNEBR(Release 5.0.5
|September 22, 2000) at
 12/02/2000 01:14:53 PM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000685

Pretty much been said, again and again and again...

I found subtle things to appreciate, but also found such in SST.

Explaining it here doesn't seem to be forwarding the list's goals at
all.

The_Beast

-Douglas J. Evans, curmudgeon

One World, one Web, one Program - Microsoft promotional ad
Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer - Adolf Hitler
From - Mon Dec 04 11:30:04 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA21577;
	Sat, 2 Dec 2000 13:57:06 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB2Jubg27923;
	Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:56:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 2 Dec
2000 11:56:35 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB2JuYF27902
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:56:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:pUdDXQchwKp+yLuylzfP9UHwhQ05SD1b@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB2JuWP27897
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:56:32
-0800 (PST)
Received: from mailout04.sul.t-online.com (mailout04.sul.t-online.com
[194.25.134.18])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB2JuUf84717
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:56:30 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de)
Received: from fwd06.sul.t-online.com 
	by mailout04.sul.t-online.com with smtp 
	id 142Ilg-0002aP-03; Sat, 02 Dec 2000 20:56:20 +0100
Received: from ranitzsch (320051779127-0001@[62.155.184.251]) by
fwd06.sul.t-online.com
	with smtp id 142IlS-1ZJwAvC; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 20:56:06 +0100
Message-ID: <015601c05c99$db511650$70139fc1@ranitzsch>
From: KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de (Ranitzsch, Karl Heinz)
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
References:
<417DEC289A05D4118408000102362E0A34CF9C@host-253.bitheads.com>
Subject: Re: [FT] Defsats - next question
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 20:54:42 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
X-Sender: 320051779127-0001@t-dialin.net
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000689

----- Original Message -----
From: "Barclay, Tom" <tomb@bitheads.com>
> Defsat Design 101:

> Following on to this strain of thought.... how fast would these babies
> rotate if no thrust was applied? Could they constantly keep the same
arc
out
> from the planet (ie Front arc always directly away from the planet)?

>From a Physics point of view ?

A free-floating object in space will always either point in the same
direction or rotate at a fixed speed around a fixed axis. You could
adjust
its rotation to fit its orbit and to always point outwards - its turning
rate is the same as its orbital period. In practice, small adjustment
thrusters will be necessary (something like 'Thrust 0.001' in game
terms)

Without applying force (or, to be precise, torque, that is, rotational
force), an object in space canot change its rate of rotation.

There are several ways to apply torque to an object to point it in a
desired
direction:
- Thrusters
- gravitational forces of moon and planets - too slow to be of interest
in
the game
- internally mounted flywheels - interesting in that they are 'stealthy'
and
quite energy-efficient. In game terms, these should count as 'Thrust 1'
or
so, but only for turning, not for changing speed.

Greetings
Karl Heinz