Re: [FT-WDA] Grav Comp Firecon was: [FT] Its gone very quiet on the WotW discussions.

This might just be me, but IMHO, I just can't visualize any drive system
producing so much interferance that it disturbs the sensors...(sounds
like
the drive needs an "Electro-magnetic dampener" ie: Mitasize it!  -- I
can't
spell it right at the moment.  Too early in the morning.)

I also understand the game mechanics reasons...

In any setting where the aft arc is taboo, this thing sounds good.

Donald Hosford

Charles Taylor wrote:

> In message <A7C4088A-D17A-11D5-95D7-0003933F1ADA@pacbell.net>
>	    Sean Bayan Schoonmaker <s_schoon@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> Hmm.. maybe WotM, or WotY :-)
>
> You do have a point however, so I'd like a quick discussion of the
> following:
>
> # Grav Compensation Fire Control (GCFC) [Noam Izenberg]
> #
> # Specialized fire control focusing system that allows Aft firing
> # weapons to fire effectively even if Main drive is being used. All
> # weapons firing through aft arc add 12" to effective range.
> #
> # Cost: 1 Mass, 4 pts.
> #
> # Can be used as normal fire control system as well.
>
> [Charles] Is it me, but this system provides the same capabilities as
a
> normal Fire Control System, at the same cost & MASS, _as_well_as_
> allowing fire into the aft arc even if the main drive was used this
> turn!
>
> So who _wouldn't_ replace all standard fire controls with these? (as
it
> would cost nothing).
>
> Ok, so many human designs wouldn't benefit much if at all, as usually
> there are only B-1s and the odd 6-arc B-2 with aft arcs, and the B-1s
> would not have any effect due to the 12 mu range penalty.
>
> And in vector, its a largely moot point anyway.
>
> Or is this just a subtle way for Noam to indicate his dislike of the
> aft-arc restriction? :-)
>
> Comments, anyone?
>
> Charles
>
> --