Whoever posted the suggestion about turrets being separate hulls, could you
please provide an example? I'm wondering if you've overlooked that the main
hull would have to pay Thrust, FT and Screens for the total mass. Eg, for a 70
mass Main Hull and three 10 mass Turrets, if you want the ship to have MD4 and
FTL, you have to pay
(70+10+10+10)*.3 = 30 mass, not 70*.3 = 21.
If you're including that, then I can't see why "turrets" as described would
have an advantage.
That was me. Yes, the turrets would have to be included in the main mass of
the total ship for working out the MDthrust and FTL and sheilds (although you
could mount the sheilds in the turrets). It was a idea of mine to allow
multi arsc firing for single arc weapons like k-guns, and allow large
ships to be more vulnerable (it makes it easier to disable a large ships
offensive firepower, while said ship is still survivable). It also allows the
recreation of a dreadnought battle (thinking like when the bismark was sunk,
with all it`s turrets out of action, gaping holes in the armour, but still a
floating ship).
BIF
> From: "Laserlight" <laserlight@quixnet.net>
> At 9:10 PM +0000 9/8/03, david smith wrote:
Except the difference between a sunken ship and a destroyed spaceship is that
a sunken ship has bouyancy and weight working against each other. If the
weight over comes the bouyancy (water let into the hull) it sinks. Space craft
don't have this as an issue. A section that is open to space isn't necessarily
a problem for the ship as a whole. The compartment may be screwed (or not) but
it won't critically affect the fighting power of the ship as a whole
(especially if sections are designed to be exposed to vacuum.