Yesterday or so, Aaron Teske wrote (something I managed to delete before
I could send this mail):
[on the size of the Eldar holoflage tech - I'd use 5% of hull mass,
Aaron prefers 20% or so]
No. 20% means far too much hull mass per weapon. According to Eldar doctrine,
ships should be fast, have lots of firepower, and go BOOM as soon as someone
actually manages to hit them through the holoflage <vbg>
If the holofields are too mass-intensive, the ships will take too long
to
go BOOM... which (since I don't want to reduce _weapon_ masses on Eldar
ships) leads me to either small protective systems (the holoflage) or
increased available hull space per hull mass (since ether sails as I
envision them are not very mass-intensive).
Although mass is a better deterrent than cost, huge costs will work fine
anyway - and the holofields I've used gives on average the same
protection as level-2 shields, so they shouldn't be much more massive
than that for the Wraithships, and preferrably smaller (but more expensive).
[on erratic movement for starships using up lots of fuel]
Remember that Eldar ships are powered by ether sails. They don't use much fuel
at all, no matter how much they manouver. (And yes, I have rough
drafts for ether sail rules too - main differences compared to normal
engines are that their capacities depend on the facing of the ship, and
that they recieve a +1 penalty on each treshold die (large vulnerable
external structures...))
Later,
Date sent: 24-OCT-1996 14:50:15
> Yesterday or so, Aaron Teske wrote (something I managed to delete
> [on the size of the Eldar holoflage tech - I'd use 5% of hull mass,
> No. 20% means far too much hull mass per weapon. According to Eldar
> ships) leads me to either small protective systems (the holoflage) or
How about using something like 75% capacity 25% damage for the Eldar
rather than the standard 50/50 split?
P.S. It looks like Mike Elliots fileserver has fallen off the edge of the
world. (The errors report it as being somewhere in France?)
> On Thu, 24 Oct 1996, Adam Delafield wrote:
> Date sent: 24-OCT-1996 14:50:15
> >increased available hull space per hull mass (since ether sails as I
Yes, something like that. Perhaps not 25% damage; even a mass 50
Wraithship gets very vulnerable once the sails are gone - which,
with the +1 penalty, is bound to happen quite fast! However, with
reduced hull sizes (and thus reduced damage points per firepower) combined
with more expensive shields and drives, they should balance fairly well
against human tech - but they should be quite different in their
fighting style, of course.
Lessee - the crew would be smaller than on normal ships due to the
waystone spirits; on normal ships the FTL drive takes up 25% of the mass,
but Eldar are known for their lousy on-ship FTL drives anyway - this
could be because they're smaller, since they obviously have the tech needed
for
better FTL drives! (and no, I _don't_ want to introduce the Chaos Powers
as an explanation as to why Eldar don't like long FTL jumps...)
When I get enough time (as with the DSII Titan ideas...) I'll type a fuller
description of (my ideas about) Eldar spaceships for all of you
non-GW gamers. Too much of my reasoning depends on the GW background for
these posts to be readable if you don't know the background, I fear...
> Yesterday or so, Aaron Teske wrote (something I managed to delete
> ships) leads me to either small protective systems (the holoflage) or
You could regard them as Q-ships, so that they are twice as "BOOM-able"
:-)
SNIP
> Lessee - the crew would be smaller than on normal ships due to the
perhaps you could allow eldar to go without FTL of any kind... since they
could use the webway (reliance apon such would explain why they didn't develop
good on ship ftl)
Excerpts from FT: 24-Oct-96 RE: Eldar tech, was (someth.. by
lojeck@mizar.usc.edu
> > Lessee - the crew would be smaller than on normal ships due to the
Actually, GW states quite specifically in several places that Eldar
ships have no Warp engines -- they always use the Webway. "The extent
of the warp-gate system is a matter of conjecture, but it must be very
vast to enable the Eldar to move so freely from one place to another." (Rogue
Trader, p.178) Anyway, that could solve your mass problems. In a pretty big
way.
And, if you want to use the Eldar (& the Webway) in a campaign, well...
obviously the ships can't escape into FTL during combat (unless said
combat is near a portal, in which case *only* the Eldar may use it --
the portals are activated by a Wraithbone "key") but either have webway gates
in every system (not unlikely) or allow a group of ships with sufficient time
to "bulid" a temporary webway gate, or (with a lot of time) a permanent one.
This could create another strategic aspectto the
game, asssuming you have in-system exploration -- find all the webway
gates, or risk Eldar behind you when you least expect it. (Might it be a good
time to mention that Webway travel, regardless of distance, is instantaneous?)
Later,
> On Thu, 24 Oct 1996, Aaron P Teske wrote:
> Excerpts from FT: 24-Oct-96 RE: Eldar tech, was (someth.. by
In
> a pretty big way.
However, there are other (more recent, in the Eldar Codex as well as
Tyranid Assault) references to Eldar ships _using_ FTL drives - because
all systems in the galaxy are not connected to the Webway (or at least the
Gates have been lost/destroyed). Yriel's pirates seems to have used
FTL/Warp drives to come to the aid of Iyanden during the Tyranid
assault; and there is a reference (in the Eldar Codex, I think, but I'll dig
it up ASAP) to FTL travel being more dangerous to Eldar than to Humans (since
the Eldar don't relate to the Astronomicon, and they also attract the Warp
Powers far easier than Humans).
So, I envision Eldar FTL travel somewhat like Starfire Warp Points, with
a short-ranged and risky 'normal' FTL capacity too.