RE: [FT] Heavy Beams - 4321

I believe the author stated that there were no Class-1s of this weapon.
I guess that you could just state that they cost and MASS the same as 1
class larger normal beams.

---
Brian Bell
bkb@beol.net
ICQ: 12848051
AIM: Rlyehable
The Full Thrust Ship Registry:
http://www.ftsr.org
---

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[mailto:owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU]On Behalf Of Charles Taylor
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2001 4:22 PM
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [FT] Heavy Beams - 4321

In message <003501c0a7cb$f0cc62a0$d0468bca@avis>
	  "Alan and Carmel Brain" <aebrain@dynamite.com.au> wrote:

> I've done some more experimentation with a concept I had for
> minimalist "Heavy Beams". I've boiled it down to the following:
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
--
> -------------
> Mechanics:
>
> Heavy Beams cost and mass the same as normal beams.
>
> A Heavy beam rolls 1 less die than a normal beam at every range.
> So a class 3 heavy beam rolls 2 dice at 12MU, and 1 die at up to 24
MU.

Does this mean that Class-1 Heavy Beams do _no_ damage? or am I
misreading?
If I'm right - couldn't you just say - 'Heavy Beams cost the same as
normal beams of a class 1 higher - and roll the same number of dice as
beams of the _same_ class'?
Effectively, they have twice the mass of a beam battery of the same
class, using the FB 1 beam battery MASS progression (which, IMHO and
based on my calculations, is too high for very large beam classes).
[snip]

Charles