(FT)-Defsats, and some other rambles

2 posts ยท Dec 2 2000 to Dec 4 2000

From: Bif Smith <bif@b...>

Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:18:19 -0000

Subject: (FT)-Defsats, and some other rambles

Defsats

I have one question about building defsats with no drive- where does the
power for the weapons systems come from. If you say solar pannels, the pannels
would have to be rather large, making it a nice target (a nice large flat
array for your sensors to bounce off, and vulneable to losing power from the
pannels being hit). You can assume an increase of effeciency for power
systems, but for energy systems the power output is still equal to the power
input, and to dammage warships armour still requires a lot of energy to be
focused onto the target. Myself, I would say you need 2% mass for a orbital
maneuvering drive (0.2 thrust) and power plant.

Modular ships

How about allowing modular warships to have one core section and four moduals.
The core has to be larger than any one modual, and contains the FTL, normal
drive, core systems, etc. The moduals would have their own hull and armour,
and would be hit separately from the main hull. When the hull for the modual
is destroyed, the modual is lost with all it`s weapons and systems, and cannot
be recovered by dammage control parties. I say four moduals, because it
aleviates the need for a roll for whitch piece of the ship is hit. Instead,
any fire from the F or A arc`s hits the main hull, and each modual is for each
offset arc. This is used for dammage hits only, and the weapon arcs for each
modual can be any arc`s as per normal. If a modual is destroyed, any dammage
from that arc hits the main hull instead.

Reenforced hull

I heard a lot of discusion about UN ships having a strong hull for the mass of
a normal hull. Because a hull now has no set strength other than a
minimum of 10%, how about this system instead?-
mass/dp as normal, but a cost of x3.
1 dp removed from 2nd row and added to the first row, +2cost
2 dp removed from 3rd row and added to the first row, +3cost
3 dp removed from 4th row and added to the first row, +4cost
This would make the ships harder to threshold check for the first threshold,
but more vulnerable as the dammage increases. For example-
Normal ship-40DP hull, cost=80
1st row=10DP 2nd row=10DP 3rd row=10DP 4th row=10DP
Reenforced ship-40DP hull, cost=129
1st row=16DP 2nd row=9DP 3rd row=8DP 4th row=7DP The cost are just a rough
guess off the top of my head, but you could have double the DP`s moved to the
first row for x4 hull cost etc.

Any comments?

BIF "yorkshire born, yorkshire bred, strong in arms, thick in head"
From - Mon Dec 04 11:30:02 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
        by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA28656;
        Sat, 2 Dec 2000 09:07:22 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB2F6XM20709;
        Sat, 2 Dec 2000 07:06:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 2 Dec
2000 07:06:30 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB2F6TC20673
        for gzg-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 07:06:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:ZfAUQyZ9VUETxqzXFh+f1a9wORrxjB52@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB2F6RP20665
        for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 07:06:27
-0800 (PST)
Received: from tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts8.bellnexxia.net
[209.226.175.52])
        by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB2F6Rf50391
        for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 07:06:27 -0800
(PST)
        (envelope-from rlbell@sympatico.ca)
Received: from sympatico.ca ([64.230.78.114]) by
tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net
          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with ESMTP
          id
<20001202150616.RQPM27329.tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net@sympatico.ca>
          for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 10:06:16 -0500
Message-ID: <3A291008.EB99DE20@sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 10:06:48 -0500
From: Richard Bell <rlbell@sympatico.ca>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en]C-SYMPA  (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,fr-CA
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Crossover after action report
References: <4.2.2.20001201091143.00a25a70@pop.hba.marine.csiro.au>
<20001201.203355.10255.0.triphibious@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000684

> Glenn m wilson wrote:

> I was born in 1950 and watched all three on 'big screen' (Drive-in

I felt as if I was in the center of the target audience for for the first
three films; although, the ending of ROTJ left me a little flat (Why
stormtroopers wh o
mercilessly gun down every un-named character in the other two films
find ewoks too cute to shoot escapes me).

The pre-release hype and marketing tie-ins of Ep1 gave me the impression
that i t was an excuse to show what ILM could throw up on a screen, while
fleecing millions of parents. It was the marketing hype that really got to me.
If I ha d seen a commercial for the film before seeing several weeks (months?)
of
tie-in
commercials, I might have thought that the movie was created for more than
reasons of unadulterated greed.

What puzzled me more was that friends of mine who saw the film considered it
to be one of the worst films they had seen in a while, but with incredibly
good visuals, so they only went to see it four or five times.

So as I had correctly identified the target of the film to be the wallets of
parents of children, I stayed home.
From - Mon Dec 04 11:30:04 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
        by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA16797;
        Sat, 2 Dec 2000 13:31:06 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB2Gj0G22237;
        Sat, 2 Dec 2000 08:45:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 2 Dec
2000 08:44:54 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB2GiqC22211
        for gzg-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 08:44:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:UzFzd43Z8xTzoq1Zti4J+qOcHPrumvRG@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB2GipP22206
        for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 08:44:51
-0800 (PST)
Received: from okura.cowell.org (IDENT:root@okura.toysmakeuspowerful.com
[12.13.79.17])
        by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB2Gipf61111
        for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 08:44:51 -0800
(PST)
        (envelope-from andy@cowell.org)
Received: from cowell.org (IDENT:andy@localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by okura.cowell.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA13876
        for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:44:55 -0500
Message-Id: <200012021644.LAA13876@okura.cowell.org>
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Campaign system for SG2?
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 10:44:55 -0600
From: Andy Cowell <andy@cowell.org>
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000688

Anybody know of a campaign system that'd work with SG2? Occaisionally
crossovers to DS2 or, heck, even FT would be acceptable.
From - Mon Dec 04 11:30:07 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
        by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA01531;
        Sat, 2 Dec 2000 17:43:23 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB2NfXE29787;
        Sat, 2 Dec 2000 15:41:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 2 Dec
2000 15:41:15 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB2NfEL29761
        for gzg-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 15:41:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.jumpy.it (mail.jumpy.it [212.239.30.36] (may be forged))
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB2NfCP29756
        for <gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 15:41:12
-0800 (PST)
Received: from deianni (213.255.28.42) by mail.jumpy.it (5.1.050)
        id 3A271D9D00003AB6 for gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu; Sun, 3
Dec 2000
 00:42:02 +0100
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001202191446.007cdaf0@netgen.it>
X-Sender: edi@netgen.it
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32)
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 19:14:46 +0100
To: gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu
From: Enzo De Ianni <edi@netgen.it>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de0000068f

Hello

> Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 14:25:51 +1100

Can be done!! GMT offered counters for the Alexandrian army to play in their
Waterloo game... based on some historian reflections about how little black
powder had really changed war, up to that time.

Well... sorry! :)

Bye Enzo De Ianni
From - Mon Dec 04 11:30:02 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
        by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA12916;
        Sat, 2 Dec 2000 13:13:09 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB2JCYG24554;
        Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:12:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 2 Dec
2000 11:12:32 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB2JCVk24533
        for gzg-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:12:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:7sKAyIdfshiTARAexasXg6b4pIlsqzxm@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB2JCTP24528
        for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:12:29
-0800 (PST)
Received: from unebmail.uneb.edu ([199.240.194.41])
        by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB2JCPf79376
        for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:12:29 -0800
(PST)
        (envelope-from devans@uneb.edu)
Subject: [OT] SW discussion Re: Sci-Fi Crossover after action report
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.1a August 17, 1999
Message-ID: <OF360778B8.B8DC07D2-ON862569A9.00694A05@uneb.edu>
From: devans@uneb.edu
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 13:12:01 -0600
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on UNEBMAIL/Servers/UNEBR(Release 5.0.5
|September 22, 2000) at
 12/02/2000 01:14:53 PM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000685

Pretty much been said, again and again and again...

I found subtle things to appreciate, but also found such in SST.

Explaining it here doesn't seem to be forwarding the list's goals at all.

The_Beast

-Douglas J. Evans, curmudgeon

One World, one Web, one Program - Microsoft promotional ad
Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer - Adolf Hitler
From - Mon Dec 04 11:30:04 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
        by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA21577;
        Sat, 2 Dec 2000 13:57:06 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB2Jubg27923;
        Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:56:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 2 Dec
2000 11:56:35 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB2JuYF27902
        for gzg-l-outgoing; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:56:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:pUdDXQchwKp+yLuylzfP9UHwhQ05SD1b@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB2JuWP27897
        for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:56:32
-0800 (PST)
Received: from mailout04.sul.t-online.com (mailout04.sul.t-online.com
[194.25.134.18])
        by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB2JuUf84717
        for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 11:56:30 -0800
(PST)
        (envelope-from KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de)
Received: from fwd06.sul.t-online.com
        by mailout04.sul.t-online.com with smtp
        id 142Ilg-0002aP-03; Sat, 02 Dec 2000 20:56:20 +0100
Received: from ranitzsch (320051779127-0001@[62.155.184.251]) by
fwd06.sul.t-online.com
        with smtp id 142IlS-1ZJwAvC; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 20:56:06 +0100
Message-ID: <015601c05c99$db511650$70139fc1@ranitzsch>
From: KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de (Ranitzsch, Karl Heinz)
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
References:
<417DEC289A05D4118408000102362E0A34CF9C@host-253.bitheads.com>
Subject: Re: [FT] Defsats - next question
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 20:54:42 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
X-Sender: 320051779127-0001@t-dialin.net
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000689

[quoted original message omitted]

From: Robertson, Brendan <Brendan.Robertson@d...>

Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 15:45:46 +1100

Subject: RE: (FT)-Defsats, and some other rambles

I usually allocate a minimum of MD 0.5 for station keeping drives for the
rotational capacity. In order to free up trained spacers, I sometime allocate
them as civilian crew levels. Can't fix anything that breaks, but they're an
expendable asset anyway.

If you wanted to be nasty in a campaign game, you give your defsats a
3-arc
class-3, firecon and nothing else but hull & armour.  Really
inefficient, but will tie up the enemy fleet for a long time...

Neath Southern Skies -http://home.pacific.net.au/~southernskies/
[Pirates] Dame Captain Washalot
[MKW2] Admiral Peter Rollins - Task Force Zulu-Beta
[Firestorm] Battletech PBeM GM

> -----Original Message-----
For
> building them, I would use the rules for installations on p 27.
From - Mon Dec 04 11:30:27 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
        by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA06625;
        Sun, 3 Dec 2000 22:48:22 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB44lom46918;
        Sun, 3 Dec 2000 20:47:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 3 Dec
2000 20:47:49 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB44lmw46897
        for gzg-l-outgoing; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 20:47:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:8ASF1hN8SajARLWdZEiJ6eVvlLESEzAm@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB44lkP46892
        for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 20:47:47
-0800 (PST)
Received: from avocet.prod.itd.earthlink.net (avocet.prod.itd.earthlink.net
[207.217.121.50])
        by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB44lkf79984
        for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 20:47:46 -0800
(PST)
        (envelope-from chuckparrott@earthlink.net)
Received: from home (sdn-ar-003gasavaP242.dialsprint.net [158.252.83.4])
        by avocet.prod.itd.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with SMTP id
UAA29048
        for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 20:47:44 -0800
(PST)
Message-ID: <004501c05dad$402d2640$3153fc9e@home>
From: "Chuck Parrott" <chuckparrott@earthlink.net>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
References:
<417DEC289A05D4118408000102362E0A34CFA8@host-253.bitheads.com>
Subject: Re: [DS2] Fire restriction
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 23:46:13 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de000006b6

I came upon this in my first DS2 game recently, and the mates I played with
ignored the fire restrictions. We had a situation of a MBT rolling through an
infantry position attempting to run down 2 elements, firing the APSW at a
third element, and firing a MDC at an APC approx. 600 meters away. On
reflection, this seemed a bit over the top to me but I may be biased seeing
as how my sides infantry/APC was on the receiving end.  It's been my
impression that tank warfare at this level is certainly chaotic, and generally
not quite as free wheeling as many gamers would like to believe.
> From talking with officers and crew actively serving in armor units

But on the other hand, if you are looking at doing a HS universe setting, the
novels do talk about things like combat AI and other techie goodies that take
a lot of the load off of a crew, so a really advanced tank would be able to
identify, track, and engage multiple hostiles in it's vincinity.
 In
the end I guess it's all up to how you want the game to portray the setting
you are using.

Maybe adding additional cost to units for different levels of
multi-targeting would play well and balance out nicely.

[quoted original message omitted]