Prev: Re: FT-Battleships Next: Re: [FT] WotW #7 Holofields

Re: FT-Battleships

From: devans@u...
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:26:56 -0500
Subject: Re: FT-Battleships


I haven't given this dingus a lot of thought, so I reserve the right to
become a critic at a later date, but...

***
Any system?  *snicker* Wave Gun? *snicker*  Serously, though should some
of the missle systems be turreted?
***

Well, I'd say a Wave Gun is damn large, almost a spinal mount, but I
suppose you could cost it out. As for the missle turrets, I'd think you
could include other complications. Is the missle ammo stored with
turret?
BIG, expensive turret! Does turret have to turn forward to reload and/or
is
it a slowed load time if the ammo is elsewhere?

Wouldn't a needle beam have the same effect on a turret of jamming it?
Isn't the only question as to whether THAT'S fixable?

***
The only contraint on the MASS/COST I can think of is this: A Turret
with a
specific one arc weapon should cost more than the weapon expanded to
include
those arcs if possible.

I.E. a single turreted class 3 beam should cost more than a 3 arc class
3
beam.
***

Feel free to flame away if I'm mis-interpreting your contention, but...

Any particular reason? The non-turreted beam isn't saddled with written
orders on bearing.

PSB: A turret is cheaper than building the number of emitters necessary
to
cover all arcs of fire.

Prev: Re: FT-Battleships Next: Re: [FT] WotW #7 Holofields