Re: more grav

--- Tomb <kaladorn@fox.nstn.ca> wrote:

> [Tomb] MDC burns ammo pretty darn fast relative to
> conventional weapons.

Why?  If you have the firecontrol for one shot, one
kill (which the modern M1A2 does) then why shoot
bursts if you don't have to?
 
> [Tomb] I grant you. And I also thought you were
> talking generically > rather than game system
dependent. 

Eh?  Why would I do that?

> [Tomb] For how long? 

Long enough.

>How sustainable? 

Heh.  Don't know.  But no one does.

>These numbers are all utterly contestible, but I've
>heard about the damage the environment did to the
> Apache (which had to fly low). That wasn't good.

Yeah.  But if you have a whole planet to choose from,
you won't settle in the deserts.  You'll settle in the
nice parts.  They'd still have resources--the only
reason we develop inhospitally located resources is
because all the easy-to-grab ones were used centuries
ago.  And at any rate, it's not comprable because grav
vehicles don't need air intakes for their engines.

> Plus something that'd > get you a downcheck in
peacetime will let you fly in > war, even though
> your performance may be impaired. 

Of course.

> [Tomb] Yep. You'll argue and then your GAO will say
> "Nice argument but > you still get X bucks. You
still have to cover Y > planets." And you'll
> still be stuck buying multi-role kit unless you are
> way rich. 

That's Canadian thinking.  World powers can actually
afford multiple tanks.

> Plus in the right tech period, a tank is _not_
> outclassed by a fighter. > With a human aboard, a
fighter will move finite > speeds, once I add a
> lightspeed weapon with horizon attack range (some of
> the Traveller > systems) to my tank and firecontrol
to match, your > fighter is just plain > dead when it
crosses the horizon. And my tank has > enough armour
to give > me some chance of shrugging off your
counterstrike. > This is a highly > debatable instance
and hinges on the details of the > tech available at
> both ends. Given high enough tech, the fighter is
> pointless. 

Sure.  But that's a discussion for the Traveller
mailing list where tech levels cap off at about 16 or
so (For New Era Regency) rather than GZG.
 
> [Tomb] Sorry, I should have said "in a world where
> grav isn't to > predominate". I agree with your
comments about the > GZGverse though you
> had indicated you were talking generically rather
> than specifically > about the GZGverse.

Whoops.  Thought I said I was talking GZGverse.  My
mistake.

> If I can fly a plane in a flight sim (most modern
> gamers can), then I > can probably fly a grav tank.
Avionics, on-board > expert systems, etc. > can make
it so you don't need any more skill than a > truck
driver to > operate a flying tank. And if those key
systems > fail, its gonna drop > like a brick
anyway.... ;) 

One small thought. . . This is an idea inspired by a
modelling consideration.  For my 25mm Grav IFVs, I
wasn't happy with the selection of grav hulls
available, so I'm using a GEV model with skirts.  The
skirts are split into segments.  It occours to me that
instead of one big grav module, it might be better to
have 40 or so spread around the bottom of vehicle. 
That way one or two can fail without catastrophic
crashes.  

John

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals