Prev: Re: [Power Projection] Review Next: Re: [Power Projection] Review

Re: [Power Projection] Review

From: Dominic Mooney <dom@c...>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 20:39:46 +0100
Subject: Re: [Power Projection] Review


On Monday, May 12, 2003, at 14:21 Europe/London, laserlight@quixnet.net 
wrote:

>> BGs are the one area we are still debating (as Andy is laying it
out).
>> They are horribly complex to handle, especially as adopting the FT
> combat engine merges the to-hit roll with the damage roll
>
> Make all other adjustments, roll on that line and note the damage.  
> Then
> shift down one for each BG rating.  Apply that damage to the ship, and

> the
> difference between that and the original to the ship's capacitors.  
> (You
> could do the same for outbound, except it's not absorbed).
>
> Or
> Roll for damage as usual, then roll d6, if =< BG rating, that attack
is
> absorbed.  I knew the original BGs were in 10% increments, this makes 
> it
> 17% increments but is pretty simple.

The thing is, most of the damage values have been scaled relative to 
each other relative to HG2, and there are a whole set of multipliers 
for most weapons (damage isn't related to energy in HG2 except 
generally)...

Cheers,

Dom

-----------Dom Mooney-------dom@cybergoths.u-net.com----------
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/

Prev: Re: [Power Projection] Review Next: Re: [Power Projection] Review