Re: [GZG] SFB to Full Thrust conversions

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOn
Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Richard Bell
<rlbell.nsuid@gmail.com>wrote:

> For a remotely faithful SFB-FT conversion, you will need to love the
> Sa'Vasku energy plotting
>

Hehe. I was going to skip that bit, actually.  ;-)   That, along with
too
many other things that are dramatically different from SFB and FT to try
and
fiddle with. I'm just going for flavor and feel here.

>
> The graser is a much better mechanic for the fusion beam, but with a
> lower cost and different range bands.  I would suggest something like:
>
> Four dice 0-2, three dice 2-6, two dice 6-10 and one die 10-15
>
> For a fusion beam, you definitely want something that is savagely
> destructive at close ranges and almost pointless outside the range of
> a class-1 beam.
>

That's a good thought, actually. Keep the mass and cost the same
otherwise?

How would you model ESGs and PPDs? I was actually looking at the graser
for
the PPD, too, but haven't really settled on that. Examining the ships I
want
to put on the table in the near term, none of the Hydrans use a
hellbore, so
that's really of less import than the other ones I want to work on.

I'm thinking to go with Phalon pulzer-Cs as gatling phaser IIIs.

I was toying with trying to model an ESG after a zero-range plasma bolt
that
does NOT damage the firing ship. But haven't followed this thought any
further down the trail.

Didn't someone once do disruptors in FT terms?? I thought they had. Be
useful for Klingon ships.

>
> A serious complication is the very different damage models.  A SDN in
> FT might take eighty hits to destroy, but a SFB CA seldom takes less
> than a hundred.
>

Yeah, that's an issue I was just going to abstract right out. ;-)   Not
going to do a 1:1 phaser:beam weapon, either, but create ships that have
the
right *feel*.

>
> Direct conversions are also complicated by the decision trees for each
> ship.
>
> I would suggest trying an FT conversion from Federation Commander, as
> it is closer to FT, but is as faithful an adaptation to SFB lite, as
> we are likely to get.
>

Thanks. I don't have FC. I'll have to look it up.

Mk