Re: [FT] Even more NAC ships

At 11:00 PM +0100 2/10/04, Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
>Hugh Fisher wrote:
>
>>I've been designing and testing some new NAC ships (for
>>Outworld Command, so mostly escorts and cruisers) and
>>finally got around to creating some web pages:
>><http://members.ozemail.com.au/~laranzu/fullthrust/OC/index.html>
>
>Tacoma/C: NPV is 93, not 91. This was the only design error I could
see.
>
>Mosquito: Legal, but... there's a good reason why so few others use 
>screens on ships this small: they simply don't have enough hull 
>integrity to make the screens worthwhile. If I were the RN admiralty 
>(not sure whose navy the R*S*N is, but it ain't the NAC's!) I'd 
>stick to the armoured version even if the Solar War heats up again.

Imho, shields are a Cruiser and above fit. Even in the case of a 
heavy-DD (destroyer leader) that exceeds the older cruiser masses, 
they still don't have shields. Its a question of protection level 
(usually some armor too) balancing out the equation and defining the 
role.

[KERSNIP!]
-- 
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
-		  Data Center Operations Group		      -
-		http://web.turner.com/data_center/	       -
----------------------------------------------------------------
- Ryan Montieth Gill		       One CNN Center SE0813 E -
- Internet Technologies   --   Data Center Operations Manager  -
- Hours 11am - 7pm Mon - Fri	    (8Sdc, 10Sdc IT@3Ndc)      -
- Cellular: 404-545-6205	     e-mail: Ryan.Gill@cnn.com -
- Office: 404-588-6191					       -
----------------------------------------------------------------
-	      Emergency Power-off != Door release!	       -
----------------------------------------------------------------