Greetings!
Just to come up the lurker mode.
Does anyone knows if there are official stats for the NAC Lancers? Our group
(better to say, about half of the players) are not too fond about experimental
designs, and stick to the FleetBook ships.
If they are "ships" and not some hangar hugging fighters or bombers, they are
something in Corvette range, being a little bigger than the Arapaho.
Thanks in Advance,
Greetings,
Akos Buky
"Help Wanted: Telepath. You know where to apply."
Greetings, Büky Ãkos! (I'd assume Büky is your familiar, but I've run
agound on cultural disparities far too often to be sure.)
***
Does anyone knows if there are official stats for the NAC Lancers? Our group
(better to say, about half of the players) are not too fond about experimental
designs, and stick to the FleetBook ships.
If they are "ships" and not some hangar hugging fighters or bombers, they are
something in Corvette range, being a little bigger than the Arapaho.
***
You've got me running for my book, but I could have sworn that, officially,
lancers ARE Arapaho varients, with a straight swap out of ordinance.
Definitely in the shoot-and-scoot school.
Like I said, I'll have to dig...
The_Beast
Buky Akos (sorry about the lack of dots over the vowels; that's how it
> turns up on my screen) wrote:
> Does anyone knows if there are official stats for the NAC Lancers?
There aren't any yet.
If you don't want to create your own designs, use the Arapaho Brave stats
Doug mentioned - they're not intended for the FT-123 model (Arapaho
Braves
are simply FT-103s with a somewhat different armament, whereas the
FT-123
has a completely different hull), but they'll do until Jon comes up with
the official stats for it :-/
> If they are "ships" and not some hangar hugging fighters or bombers,
Their catalogue number (ends with "23") says that they're supposed to be
corvette-sized rather than fighters (ends with "01" or "21", except for
those in the GF range).
Regards,
***
> Does anyone knows if there are official stats for the NAC Lancers?
There aren't any yet.
If you don't want to create your own designs, use the Arapaho Brave stats
Doug mentioned - they're not intended for the FT-123 model (Arapaho
Braves
are simply FT-103s with a somewhat different armament, whereas the
FT-123
has a completely different hull), but they'll do until Jon comes up with
the official stats for it :-/
***
Whoops! I hadn't realized that there were even figs named 'Lancers'. Natch,
the pre-FB Lancers had two packs, while I think the Braves were supposed
to have a single pack. No staying power there. Still, I guess a way to
overwhelm FC's.
Oerjan, have you given thought to working up stats? I'm sure Paul would be
delighted to add them to the web site to make 'em 'official'. Wait, do I
hear groans in the distance? ;->=
Büky Ãkos (interestingly, the diacritical marks are missing from the text
of the posts, but present in the 'from' field), I'd say use the non-FB
design, in More Thrust, available as download from
http://www.gtns.net/gzgstore/, and work the points out yourself. No
worry about massaging arcs of fire, at least.
Course, I still don't know what your friends call you... ;->=
The_Beast
> Doug wrote:
> Oerjan, have you given thought to working up stats?
No; I only decide the official stats for the models I've sculpted (*), and
the FT-123 is one of Jon's. Of course I could work up *un*official stats
for the FT-123, but they wouldn't be any more "official" than anything
you come up with!
Besides, the FT-123 is an NAC model. I don't do NAC :-/
(*) Those of my models currently in production are the FT-421 through
431A
and the FT-625. Of these the FT-421 is a heavy fighter so doesn't need
any
stats, the FT-425 and 625 both have stats (but no SSDs or background
blurbs) available for download at the GZG web site. IIRC I've sent the stats
for the others to Paul too, but not all of them have names yet (other than
"heavy Kra'Vak strike cruiser" and the like) which may be why they haven't yet
appeared on the GZG site. (Another likely explanation is that
Paul hasn't yet had time to do it - AFAIK he maintains the GZG site in
his free time, not as a paid job!)
Later,
Greetings!
> ***
Sorry not answering earlier, I was unable to reach the Hungarian Freemail
server (well, reaching was OK, but it would demand installing the Eastern
European character set)
> Whoops! I hadn't realized that there were even figs named 'Lancers'.
Natch,
> the pre-FB Lancers had two packs, while I think the Braves were
Yep, the Arapaho Braves had 1 pack, but I do not recall anything called
Lancers. I will check out FT and MT.
The Lancers looks more like a race ship, a bit like a scaled up version of the
new NAC heavy Fighters. 2 huge Engine pods that would suggest thrust 6 or
above. I know we don't really know how Beam batteries looks like, but there's
2 pipes
looking forward under the cockpit/bridge section. They look like
snapped-on single tube
missile launchers or snapped on beam "cannons".
I was toying with the idea of some kind of 1 arc Class-2 beams or
those single missles from MT, but as far as I remember they are not really in
the FBs. And again, the guys like if everything is official.
As for Submunition packs - I was wondering why the Tacoma doesn't
have one.
The first time I saw the model - Heck, they are nice looking missile
pods on the sides. I have a design based on that, but I've never gave a try so
far.
> Oerjan, have you given thought to working up stats? I'm sure Paul
:-)
> Büky Ãkos (interestingly, the diacritical marks are missing from the
At least there - that is how it should be written, but being here and
there I got accustomed to be written in several versions, and even more
pronounciations. In English I use Buky Akos, in German Bueky Akos.
Yep, Büky is tha family name. In Hungarian family names come first. (There
are nice legends about family coming before the individual, but as far as I
know, not even our brightest know for sure.
The nice suprise was in the GZG catalogue - NSL Szent Istvan Class
Battledreadnaught.
Szent Istvan is also Hungarian. ;-) We are everywhere...
> Course, I still don't know what your friends call you... ;->=
Normaly simply Ãkos (Ã is pronounced like the u in "cut"), or fool -
or some other names that should not be written for the sake of not
geting banned from the list for using incorrect words - depending on my
last action taken. :-)
Many thanks for the feedback!
Greetings,
> --- Büky_Ákos <catinator@freemail.hu> wrote:
> The nice suprise was in the GZG catalogue - NSL
I should know that... but somehow it didn't click. I guess that makes it
official, Hungary is NSL. Was Szent Istvan historical, and if so, who was he?
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 04:22:08AM -0800, John Atkinson wrote:
I suspect it's more that the NSL is Austria-Hungary. See
http://www.warships1.com/AHbb05_VUnitis_specs.htm for more on the
Viribus Unitis class (of which Szent Istvan, Tegetthoff and Prinz Eugen
were the other members - some familiar names there...).
> Was
Szent Istvan == Saint Stephen.
I looked this up a little while back because I was trying to get plausible
names of ships within the classes given. I knew things were getting obscure
when the web search for Maria von Burgund turned up
GZG-related pages as the first few hits...
> I should know that. . . but somehow it didn't click.
I guess that makes it official, Hungary is NSL. Was Szent Istvan historical,
and if so, who was he?
From:
http://smmlonline.com/reviews/models/szent_istvan/szent_istvan.html
***
The Szent Istvan was the fourth ship in the Austro-Hungarian Tegetthoff
class of battleship but the only dreadnought operated by Hungary. Hungary got
her battleship in return for agreeing to the immense funding of the Tegetthoff
class and named her after Hungary's first Christian king (Szent
Istvan/St Stephen). The lead ship of the class, SMS Viribus Unitis was
the first battleship to be commissioned with triple gun turrets
***
I thought it was St.Stephen, but had to find a site to verify. Whenever I see
the name, I think of the Spanish 'Estiban'.
The_Beast
John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> Ãrta:
> I should know that. . . but somehow it didn't click.
Greetings!
Yes, he was real, and a historical person. As someone already mentioned, he is
Saint Stephen (aka Stephen the 1st.)
He was the first "real" king of Hungary. Effectively he founded the State,
christianised the Hungarians and made a strong central control that
transformed Hungary in one generation from tribes of nomadic horsemen to
settled, organized state.
If you would like to know something else, please feel free to ask.
Greetings,
Akos Büky
OF course, I have to wonder about naming a range of ships after an entire
class that met various and sundry ignominious ends. Eyetie Torpedos (oh the
shame), being taken by the Yugoslavians, and various other fates.
Being sunk by the British is at least honorable in that they were the
best of the best at the time. Having 1/4 of the class given to
Yugoslavia to rot in port just isn't a fate befitting a great warship.
No, John isn't using my account.