Re: [FT] WotW #7 Holofields

----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Taylor <charles.taylor@cableol.co.uk>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 6:58 PM
Subject: Re: [FT] WotW #7 Holofields

In message <20010410174944.30750.qmail@web10404.mail.yahoo.com>
	  Shawn M Mininger <smininger@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I actually upped the mass to 10%.  This may be a bit
> high, but the holofield effectively makes it harder to
> be hit by ALL weapons (except plasma bolt which is
> area effect)
>
> The logic behind this is that my group tends to use a
> lot of alternate weapon systems, not just beams.  When
> I started thinking about how many more weapons are
> covered by the holofield vs. screens, I realized that
> I needed to up the mass.
>
> I think 7% would be fair if you were primarily using
> ships right out of the books.  My group tends to
> custom build our own ships and fleets so we don't use
> nearly as many beam weapons (the pulse torp is a huge
> favorite in my group.)
>
[snip]
> =====
> Thank You,
>
> Shawn M Mininger
>
OTOH, 10% is easier to calculate :-)

So, what does everybody else think? 7% or 10%, or....?

Charles

I think a 10% mass for the feild sounds right to me (ie-haven`t tested
yet),
especially when you consider the bonuses you get Vs p.torps and
especially
k-guns. Would a k-gun be disadvantaged by this weapon in reroll dammage
(ie-the doubble dammage from the size of gun?). I could see k-guns being
forced to roll for doubble dammage as a class lower than normal (except
k6
and above). This would make the weapon more effective, but it does mass
the
same as a level 2 screen if using 10%, with only the effect of a level 1
screen Vs energy weapons anyway. Just my ideas for discussion.

BIF
 "yorkshire born,yorkshire bred,
 strong in arms, thick in head"