Re: [GZG] Gzg-l Digest, Vol 29, Issue 42

Brendan
'Neath Southern Skies
http://home.pacific.net.au/~southernsk/ 

-----Original Message-----
From: gzg-l-bounces@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
[mailto:gzg-l-bounces@mail.csua.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of
gzg-l-request@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
Sent: Thursday, 21 January 2010 11:40 AM
To: gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Gzg-l Digest, Vol 29, Issue 42

Send Gzg-l mailing list submissions to
	gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	gzg-l-request@mail.csua.berkeley.edu

You can reach the person managing the list at
	gzg-l-owner@mail.csua.berkeley.edu

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of Gzg-l digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1.	Stargate Conversion: Goa'uld Ha'tak (Tom B)
   2. Re:  Stargate Conversion: Goa'uld Ha'tak (Indy)
   3. Re:  Firecon chart/list? (Eric Foley)
   4. Re:  Stargate Conversion: Goa'uld Ha'tak (Tom B)
   5. Re:  Stargate Conversion: Goa'uld Ha'tak (John Tailby)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:07:08 -0500
From: Tom B <kaladorn@gmail.com>
To: gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: [GZG]	Stargate Conversion: Goa'uld Ha'tak
Message-ID:
	<b50d33431001201207t395ce1e8u646d9d50113c836a@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Inestimable Beast sayeth:

Just wanted to remind all of Indy's main point; when in doubt, kill
subordinates. Enemies are entirely a side issue.

The_Beast
---------
[Tomb] The only issue I have with this statement is that you appear to
be
drawing a bifurcation between subordinates and enemies.

Subordinates are just enemies that are closer to hand and who can be
forced
to sometimes do something useful (even if that is simply dying for your
greater glory or temporary amusement).

T.

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:08:04 -0500
From: Indy <indy.kochte@gmail.com>
To: gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [GZG] Stargate Conversion: Goa'uld Ha'tak
Message-ID:
	<e059515f1001201208k30803a86j76d71e55e3921cd@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Tom B <kaladorn@gmail.com> wrote:

> Mark:
>
> Yes. But if you have to configure it at the beginning of the turn and 
> are playing cinematic, you've still got some guesswork as you and your

> target both move before you have to fire.

Usually very little if you're reasonably experienced with FT playing.
Given
your velocity and your opponents, they are either going to be in one
range
band or the other, and it's usually not terribly hard to figure out
which.

If you configure at firing
> time, yes, you'd always get optimal.
>

And then there's that!

> John:
>
> 1) Everything 360 to put all weapons on the same basis. If you read 
> the HTML link, they mention that they can reconfigure their firepower 
> on the fly and this is due to the spherical weapons arrangement they 
> have or something like that. And to avoid total cheese, that 
> restriction is also important. This neatly avoids any particular 
> manipulation of the mass towards a single arc solution.
>

Configuring on the fly suggests to me configuring at the time of firing.
Hence always optimal configuration every turn.

> Also, having to choose at the start of a turn might mean uncertainty 
> as to what weapons fit is the best. If not, that's fine, you still 
> payed the mass for 360 with all the ones you chose, which makes the 
> cost you paid for the dice you do rather standard.
>
> 2) Ships manouvered a lot more in later seasons and in the movies. I 
> even saw Ha'taks doing some crazy flying when T'ealc was battling 
> Goa'uld System Lord ships from a Ha'tak in one episode and also when 
> they were fighting the Ori.
>

T'ealc learned from the Hu'mans.  :-)

>
> 3) As to the suggestion of how you could fight the Goa'uld ships.... 
> there is a nearly infinite difference between what a ship is 
> technically claimed capable of and what they actually have it do in an

> episode. Any capabilities of any technology or vessel vary as required

> to tell a good yarn about SG-1 or Colonel Shepherd's team.
>

Yep. As with almost any show or movie. B5, iirc, is one of the few that
came
the closest to keeping things the same throughout (once introduced on
the
table, that is).

>
> If you put Pulsars on and wedged them in that rear arc, you could do 
> the same thing. If I force the beams to be 360 in any configuration, 
> then you can't abuse the mass/arc relationships and you can do more or

> less what you see in the show as far as I can see.
>
> I'm not saying Pulsars won't work, but you won't have the ability to 
> dynamically reconfigure the weapons array like these ships are 
> supposed to have.
>

And as John stated, having that dynamic reconfiguration capability makes
them damned powerful for the current flavors of FT weaponry. Without
doing a
numbers churn (not my thing), I would at the very least double the mass
(and
cost) of said weapon system as compared to the equivalent beam.

Mk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/private/gzg-l/attachments/20
1001
20/9e63c690/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 12:14:00 -0800 (GMT-08:00)
From: Eric Foley <stiltman@teleport.com>
To: gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [GZG] Firecon chart/list?
Message-ID:
	
<5021523.1264018440675.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net
>
	
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

I might not have read the difference between Type III and IV the same
way as
you wrote it, then.  I interpreted that to mean, one fire control per
weapon
type per target.  If you're crazy enough to want beams, pulse torpedoes,
and
K-guns all on the same ship, you'd need three firecons just to target
them
all on a single enemy ship.  As such, I only put needle beams in Type IV
because you have to have a different fire control to target more than
one
system even if it's on the same enemy ship.

All main weapons need a seperate fire control in order to fire in point
defense mode, it's true, so you could put pulsers, class 1 beams, and
class
1 K-guns in Type V under that heading.

E

-----Original Message-----
>From: Tom B <kaladorn@gmail.com>
>Sent: Jan 20, 2010 11:58 AM
>To: gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
>Subject: Re: [GZG] Firecon chart/list?
>
>Eric:
>
>Thanks for the first cut. I think I poorly explained the categories 
>(except Type I which is no firecon).
>
>I would have put Beams in IV because they require a firecon for every 
>target. I see why you put them in III (needs and FC per weapon type) 
>though as that is also true.
>
>The distinction there was meant to be one I saw in ships with PTs and 
>Beams. I think PTs require an FC (could be confused here) for 1...N of 
>them. So do Beams. So they both need an FC. As I understand it, two FCs

>would let them fire at two targets (PTs at one, Beams at another) or 
>one target. But one FC would not let them shoot at a single target with

>both systems due to the requirement for PTs to have a firecon.
>
>I have to agree with something Bob said to me offlist - Just having 
>most weapons there be a firecon available for their target (which could

>aim several different weapons types conceivably) would be easiest. Skip

>any restrictions that require a dedicated firecon to fire at the same 
>target with a different weapon. That would skew some costing, but how 
>badly, honestly?
>
>Class V was thrown out because I thought there were some odd rules 
>surrounding FCs and PDS and B-1s. Both of those weapons can run in 
>anti-fighter or anti-ship mode and I thought the FC requirements varied

>by mode (not required for anti-fighter but required for anti-ship). 
>That means they would not be tied to the weapon so much as to the 
>weapon mode. Of course, I may have this wrong too.
>
>T.
>_______________________________________________
>Gzg-l mailing list
>Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu 
>http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:35:40 -0500
From: Tom B <kaladorn@gmail.com>
To: gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [GZG] Stargate Conversion: Goa'uld Ha'tak
Message-ID:
	<b50d33431001201235j5ea7811at8682cbd1507682c6@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Ryan,

You have to make some judgements because FT ship construction may
consider
more than one turret in SG to be a single battery or it may allocate
different crew numbers, etc. So it's all a guesswork to try to get the
feel
right. And I'm not trying to match them to conventional FB navies. Also,
source materials vary in information and don't always agree.

So far I've done the Prometheus and the Daedelus (X-303 and X-304
classes).
I also did the Achilles (X-305 in my books).

http://www.thescifiworld.net/img/wallpapers/stargate/animaniac/animaniac
_66_
1280x960.jpg

So, that said, first cut:

X-303 Prometheus Deep Space Battlecruiser
Mass 160
8 x Railgun Batteries (K-1, 360)
2 x Missile Batteries (SML, 2 salvos per, Front 180)
47 Hull in 6 Rows, 14 Shields (regenerating armour)
MD 4, FTL, Normal Sensors
1 ADFC (applies to railguns in PD mode and PDS)
2 PDS (CIWS)
3 FCs
8 F-302s in two bays, 2 squadrons of 4
2 Asgard Beaming Modules
1 Goa'uld Ring Transporter
2 small hangar bays
6 Core Systems (Normal + beaming systems, shield generator, and
sensors/comms)

X-304 Daedelus Deep Space Carrier
Mass 265
12 x Railgun Batteries (K-1, 360)
4 x Asgard Beams (F arc, Graser class 2)
2 x Missile Batteries (SML, 2 salvos per, Front 180)
60 Hull in 5 Rows, 25 Shields (regenerating armour)
MD 4, FTL, Normal Sensors
1 ADFC (applies to railguns in PD mode)
4 FCs
16 F-302s in two bays, 4 squadrons of 4
4 Asgard Beaming Modules
1 Goa'uld Ring Transporter
2 small hangar bays
Asgard Sensors (lets you see a lot of the other guys SSD)
6 Core Systems (Normal + beaming systems, shield generator, and
sensors/comms)

X-305 Achilles Deep Space Battleship [INCOMPLETE]
Mass ???
14 x Railgun Batteries (K-1, 360)
8 x Railgun Batteries (K-2, 3x F/PF/PA, 3x F/SF/SA, 1x PF/PA/A, 1x
SF/SA/A)
Not sure if it should have Asgard Beams 2 x Missile Batteries (SML-ER, 2
salvos per, Front 180) ??? Hull in 4 Rows, 30 Shields (regenerating
armour)
MD 4, FTL, Normal Sensors 1 ADFC (applies to railguns in PD mode) 5 FCs
24
F-302s in two bays, 6 squadrons of 4 6 Asgard Beaming Modules 2 Goa'uld
Ring
Transporter 2 small hangar bays Asgard Sensors (lets you see a lot of
the
other guys SSD) 6 Core Systems (Normal + beaming systems, shield
generator,
and sensors/comms)

The notional Ha'tak looks (right now) like Mass 400. In addition to the
60
mass of dynamically configurable beams, it carries 2000 goa'uld troops,
15
ring transporters, 3 squadrons of Al'kesh bombers (torpedo
fighters) and 12 squadrons of death gliders (regular fighters).

I haven't got to the Ori yet, but I was weighing a classed Nova Cannon,
an
HDC, or a massive Heavy Beam (EFSB).

Of course, I need to get the 4 304s, the 303, and the 4 Ha'taks
assembled
and painted along with the 3 Wraith Cruisers and the Hive Ship and the
Ori
Mothership before I can go into much testing.

I just wish someone in England would make me some not-F-302 and
not-puddle-jumpers and not-death-gliders and not-wraith-Darts. I might
be
able to use some of the not-Centauri for the death gliders. But the 302
is a
fairly unique shape as are puddle jumpers. The irony is we have Not
(UNSC)
Hammerheads from a short lived and relatively paintul series and no sign
of
not(various ships) from the longest sci-fi serious other than the one
starring Lethbridge Stewart. I think the English are still mad about
that.
<grin>

Wraith I was going to actually consider some needle beams, given their
interest in capturing prey. Probably standard beams or the like too
since
they seem to do ship destruction as well. Maybe a Pulser there. They
have
their Darts. And they have piles of hull (at least on the hive).

The Asgard get Grasers, sensors that see a lot and heavy shields and
asgard
beaming systems (aka 'transporter').

The Ancient Drones are pretty potent stuff. Swarms of Fast, Attack
Fighters
might represent them with successful attacks destroying some of them.
Maybe
Torpedo Fighters, depending on how the numbers work out.They seem to be
able
to destroy more than one ship and be flown around like a fighter.

Anubis Ha'tak might get a huge HDC or Nova Cannon - the special weapon
on it
could wipe out a continent or multiple ships in one shot. But like the
Wave
Motion Gun, it had a power up time.

I haven't thought much about Replicators because they are the atomic
weapon....

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:40:08 -0800 (PST)
From: John Tailby <john_tailby@xtra.co.nz>
To: gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [GZG] Stargate Conversion: Goa'uld Ha'tak
Message-ID: <426365.60367.qm@web96002.mail.aue.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Hi Tom

http://www.warlords.org.nz/forum/viewtopic.php?t=229
This thread holds a copy of the rules and?technologies that we play
with.

There are some intersting ideas that you might want to look at if you
want
mega weapons and different types of beams and topedo weapons.

If you want to stick with a Fleet book based weapon a class 6 Plasma
bolt
might do nicely as a mega death weapon.

________________________________
From: Tom B <kaladorn@gmail.com>
To: gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
Sent: Thu, 21 January, 2010 9:35:40 AM
Subject: Re: [GZG] Stargate Conversion: Goa'uld Ha'tak

Ryan,

You have to make some judgements because FT ship construction may
consider
more than one turret in SG to be a single battery or it may allocate
different crew numbers, etc. So it's all a guesswork to try to get the
feel
right. And I'm not trying to match them to conventional FB navies. Also,
source materials vary in information and don't always agree.

So far I've done the Prometheus and the Daedelus (X-303 and X-304
classes).
I also did the Achilles (X-305 in my books).

http://www.thescifiworld.net/img/wallpapers/stargate/animaniac/animaniac
_66_
1280x960.jpg

So, that said, first cut:

X-303 Prometheus Deep Space Battlecruiser
Mass 160
8 x Railgun Batteries (K-1, 360)
2 x Missile Batteries (SML, 2 salvos per, Front 180)
47 Hull in 6 Rows, 14 Shields (regenerating armour)
MD 4, FTL, Normal Sensors
1 ADFC (applies to railguns in PD mode and PDS)
2 PDS (CIWS)
3 FCs
8 F-302s in two bays, 2 squadrons of 4
2 Asgard Beaming Modules
1 Goa'uld Ring Transporter
2 small hangar bays
6 Core Systems (Normal + beaming systems, shield generator, and
sensors/comms)

X-304 Daedelus Deep Space Carrier
Mass 265
12 x Railgun Batteries (K-1, 360)
4 x Asgard Beams (F arc, Graser class 2)
2 x Missile Batteries (SML, 2 salvos per, Front 180)
60 Hull in 5 Rows, 25 Shields (regenerating armour)
MD 4, FTL, Normal Sensors
1 ADFC (applies to railguns in PD mode)
4 FCs
16 F-302s in two bays, 4 squadrons of 4
4 Asgard Beaming Modules
1 Goa'uld Ring Transporter
2 small hangar bays
Asgard Sensors (lets you see a lot of the other guys SSD)
6 Core Systems (Normal + beaming systems, shield generator, and
sensors/comms)

X-305 Achilles Deep Space Battleship [INCOMPLETE]
Mass ???
14 x Railgun Batteries (K-1, 360)
8 x Railgun Batteries (K-2, 3x F/PF/PA, 3x F/SF/SA, 1x PF/PA/A, 1x
SF/SA/A)
Not sure if it should have Asgard Beams 2 x Missile Batteries (SML-ER, 2
salvos per, Front 180) ??? Hull in 4 Rows, 30 Shields (regenerating
armour)
MD 4, FTL, Normal Sensors 1 ADFC (applies to railguns in PD mode) 5 FCs
24
F-302s in two bays, 6 squadrons of 4 6 Asgard Beaming Modules 2 Goa'uld
Ring
Transporter 2 small hangar bays Asgard Sensors (lets you see a lot of
the
other guys SSD) 6 Core Systems (Normal + beaming systems, shield
generator,
and sensors/comms)

The notional Ha'tak looks (right now) like Mass 400. In addition to the
60
mass of dynamically configurable beams, it carries 2000 goa'uld troops,
15
ring transporters, 3 squadrons of Al'kesh bombers (torpedo
fighters) and 12 squadrons of death gliders (regular fighters).

I haven't got to the Ori yet, but I was weighing a classed Nova Cannon,
an
HDC, or a massive Heavy Beam (EFSB).

Of course, I need to get the 4 304s, the 303, and the 4 Ha'taks
assembled
and painted along with the 3 Wraith Cruisers and the Hive Ship and the
Ori
Mothership before I can go into much testing.

I just wish someone in England would make me some not-F-302 and
not-puddle-jumpers and not-death-gliders and not-wraith-Darts. I might
be
able to use some of the not-Centauri for the death gliders. But the 302
is a
fairly unique shape as are puddle jumpers. The irony is we have Not
(UNSC)
Hammerheads from a short lived and relatively paintul series and no sign
of
not(various ships) from the longest sci-fi serious other than the one
starring Lethbridge Stewart. I think the English are still mad about
that.
<grin>

Wraith I was going to actually consider some needle beams, given their
interest in capturing prey. Probably standard beams or the like too
since
they seem to do ship destruction as well. Maybe a Pulser there. They
have
their Darts. And they have piles of hull (at least on the hive).

The Asgard get Grasers, sensors that see a lot and heavy shields and
asgard
beaming systems (aka 'transporter').

The Ancient Drones are pretty potent stuff. Swarms of Fast, Attack
Fighters
might represent them with successful attacks destroying some of them.
Maybe
Torpedo Fighters, depending on how the numbers work out.They seem to be
able
to destroy more than one ship and be flown around like a fighter.

Anubis Ha'tak might get a huge HDC or Nova Cannon - the special weapon
on it
could wipe out a continent or multiple ships in one shot. But like the
Wave
Motion Gun, it had a power up time.

I haven't thought much about Replicators because they are the atomic
weapon.... _______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/private/gzg-l/attachments/20
1001
20/949c2728/attachment.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

End of Gzg-l Digest, Vol 29, Issue 42
*************************************

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l