Re: FT-Movement, corkscrewing

In message
<6B3C0EEAB4FED3119F5F009027DC5E9E01D7338D@spacemsg3.jhuapl.edu>
	  "Izenberg, Noam" <Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu> wrote:

> >> So it becomes useful for pretty much custom ships only.
>  >> I'd rather make the cost 4 Thrust and say ships can't turn  while
> >> corckscrewing.
> 
> > Well, as a counter-argument, it could be considered a pretty extreme
> > manoeuvre, so only highly manoeuvrable ships could do it. The
problem of
> >making the cost 4 Thrust in total is that there are SDNs that have
that
> > much thrust.
> > Charles
> 
> I'll agree that it makes it accessible to things like the ESU BDN, but
then
> there's something poetic and heroic about a great tub like that doing
a
> 15-20 minute pirouette. It may be challenging from a game POV, but I
think
> the no-turn penalty may be reasonable compensation. We could add an
engine
> threshold roll at -1 per 50 mas above 50 or 100, depending how harsh
you
> want to be.
> 
> Noam

Well, If you want SDNs doing it, then ok, I was considering limiting it
to more manoeuvrable ships.

So, say, costs 4 thrust, as much as possible of which should be counted
as manoeuvre thrust, which prohibits turns to ships with advanced drives
or MD10+.

Should there still be some form of fire penalty? I think something like
reduced range bands?

I'd make the Engine Threshold as follows:

MASS	Threshold
1-49	none
50-99	6
100-149 5+
150-199 4+
200-249 3+
250-299 2+
300+	Automatic

Failure is as usual - lose half engine power.

Charles