cm scale collisions

2 posts ยท Nov 21 1997 to Nov 21 1997

From: Tim Jones <Tim.Jones@S...>

Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 13:46:00 -0000

Subject: cm scale collisions

On Friday, November 21, 1997 10:23 AM, Mikko Kurki-Suonio
> [SMTP:maxxon@swob.dna.fi] wrote:

b) Mini-Maxers will

How about if you move a ship so it would touch another
'significant' base/ship-model you receive an equivalent amount of damage
for your mass size. (complete the next damage row and roll a critical say)

The PSB is that your captain automatically *must* make emergency evasive

manoeuvers and the stress causes the damage, plus your ship can't fire this
turn as its 'too shook up'

The offending ship is then placed so it doesn't touch, at the touched captains
discretion or randomly placed, this is the result of going evasive.

The ship you 'nearly hit', no penalty, they never flinched.

I don't see anyone using ramming, then as a tactic.

> Maybe "screws" is a bit too strong word. I mean it changes the

Yes, I and any other centimeters should explore this and report back.

> I just don't see having friends around for gaming and then crowding

Nor do I, but it a PBEM it would work.

sincerely

From: Mikko Kurki-Suonio <maxxon@s...>

Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 22:06:42 +0200 (EET)

Subject: Re: cm scale collisions

> On Fri, 21 Nov 1997, Tim Jones wrote:

> b) Mini-Maxers will

I can not quite agree... ramming may or may not be viable tactic, depending on
your background. Naval tradition certainly has lots of ramming. If you give
rules that have favorable outcomes for ramming, people will think it's an
acceptable strategy.

> How about if you move a ship so it would touch another
...
> The offending ship is then placed so it doesn't touch, at the touched
...
> I don't see anyone using ramming, then as a tactic.

How do you determine who's the offender? Profile parameter? Think about it...
only in extreme cases you can say for sure that one party deliberately rammed
the other.