Re: (FT) UNSC/Movement systems

On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 11:42:26AM +0100, Matt Tope wrote:

>Is it best in practice to design vessels specifically for only
cinematic or
>only vector movement as appropiate?
>My approach has been to try and design vessels which can just be
dropped in
>either movement system as they stand.

Well, a designed-for-cinematic vessel will beat a general-purpose vessel
in cinematic; and the same for vector. Since most gaming groups tend to
play just one movement system or the other rather than switching between
them, most people tend to design just for one system.

>Finally, would it be true to say that vector movement favours the
Kra'Vak
>more than humans/Phalons and the reverse for cinematic? (I'm not trying
to
>poke holes in the system, god forbid, just academic interest :-) )

Well, advanced-drive vector as it's currently written is not hugely more
effective than basic-drive vector - it normally gives you the equivalent
of one or two extra thrust points (that you would otherwise have to use
for turning), but it doesn't give the awesome envelope-widening
capability that advanced cinematic drives do.

This is something that's being looked into for possible rule changes
(probably by increasing the thrust cost to rotate).

Roger