RE: FT-JC conversions

On Thursday, February 07, 2002 10:10 AM, Bif Smith wrote:
> The JC ships are equipt with mass driver cannons on turrets, large
> spinal mount lasers (discribed as being able to core a colony cylinder
in
a
> single shot), missiles, PDS, and embarked mecha. For these you would
have
> the mass driver turrets represented as beam batts (or pulsars, that
can
fire
> at all ranges, long with 1D6, medium at 3D6, and close with 6D6, to
> represent the added leathaty of the mass drivers as the range falls.
This
> would require a recaculating of the mass/cost of the pulsars). For the
> spinal lasers, K-guns would be perfect. Missiles, SML`s and PDS would
be
the
> kinetic turrets, and the mecha would be fighters. A idea to represent
more
> primative (read delicate/vunerable) ships, we can have weak/fragile
hulls,
> minimal thrust (say a maximum of 4 thrust, with each thrust point at
10%
> mass or more), no shields and limited armour (only one point of armour
for
> every 4 points of hull). 
> 
> Comment anybody (especially about the pulsars with the increasing
damage
as
> the range closes)?

Summary:
Spinal Mount = K-guns
MD Turrets = Pulsars or beams
Missiles = SML/SMR
PDS = PDS
Mecha = Fighters
MD = 10% per MD Thrust
Screens = unavailable

There are 2 schools of though about mass-driver technology in space: the
garbage can theory and the shotgun theory.  K-guns represent the garbage
can
model.
Due to the nature of how a mass driver works, using the pulsar rules as
written would be best.	The ship would "program" the settings before
combat
so as to maximise the firing pattern of projectiles due to "time on
target"
issues.  Pulsar-L denotes a long-range wide spread pattern programmed,
while
the Pulsar-S would show a "point and shoot" style targetting as there's
neglible flight time at that range.  The standard beam rules could also
be
used quite easily, as this would denote re-programming on the fly of the
weapons potentials.

Brendan