> On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Laserlight wrote:
> > Weapons and/or defenses shouldn't necessarily be different,
No Beam-3 or *higher*? The Alarishi government clearly doesn't follow
'monopoly on force' the way most governments do - must be interesting
sometimes.
I'd imagine that most governments would list you as more than a navigational
hazard if you installed shipkiller weaponry on your vessel or installation...
Just an observation,
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Laserlight wrote:
"Installation" is the operative word in this case; it's on Jack Old Ron's
asteroid "homestead".
Reminds me of the fighter jock who thought it'd be a lark to see how close he
could get to Jack Old Ron's place in an experimental stealthed fighter. Which
he did *NOT* have permission to take outside the secure test zone.
No chance of any fragments getting into the wrong hands!
And the wake was one hell of a party. 8-)
I would imagine that ships with more than Class-1 Beams, PDS, and
(maybe) Submunitions Packs (which can be justified for protection from Pirates
and stray asteroids, space junk, etc.) would need special
permission/licence/etc. to operate within a stellar system. Such
permission/licence/etc. would be EXPENSIVE, so most nonmilitary do not
mount them or mount them. I would also imagine that in most systems operating
a
ship with such equipment without a licence/permission would be grounds
for confiscation of the ship (at least until it has been disarmed). And
(finally) such ships would be subject to being "acquired" by the military
during times of war or emergency.
In addition, goverments, most likely, would limit the numbers and
displacement (mass) of ships carring Class-2 beam weapons (such as
convoy escorts) when in system. Many systems will limit the size of such to
smaller-than-cruiser and other to frigates-and-smaller.
With this in mind, ITTT
(http://members.nbci.com/rlyehable/gzg/ittt.html)
usually either contracts for favorable terms or its escorts and Q-Ships
or passes the responsibility for the ship to the client once inside the
protected zone of a system. The ITTT systems (Front Office and Van Rijin)
limit both number and mass to unlicenced intrests and limits licenced parties
through the licence
contract. ITTT does not allow ANY non-ITTT ships into its Back Office
system
(incursions by non-ITTT ships is considered an invasion, and dealt with
accordingly).
As to military vs civilian jump engines, I took it for granted that this was
largely a matter of cost/effeciency. Just as today, most super-sonic
planes are in the military. It is just not cost effective to operate
supersonic planes for passenger or commercial travel (in most instances). The
military may have an edge in jump engine design and performance, but pay for
it in efficiency and maintenance as it surpasses the comercial designs.
How to model this? I usually tie the Jump engines to the MD of a ship for jump
range (power from the MD is channeled through the jump engine to perform the
jump). Most civilian ships of the same mass have lower rated MD than military
ships, so the model is built in. I also apply a limit to how long a ship has
to wait to jump again. This "cooldown", for lack of a better term, of the jump
engine could be weighted to allow military ships to jump sooner. I usually
apply a minimum of 24 turns before a ship can jump a second time (using 15
minute turns, this coorisponds with the commentary on FB1 p. 44 of a minimum
of 6 hours between jumps for military ships). For commercial ships, I would
probably double this wait time. So military ships can jump 4 times per day,
and civilian 2 times per day if they push both equipment and crew to the
breaking point. However, at this rate, I would also make a threshold check vs
FTL for each jump past the first within a
given 48 hour period and/or give a chance for a misjump.
Hmmm... I like this concept for scenarios. Ships arrive on table by FTL and
are ambushed but cannot jump out for 24 turns (or 24-x turns). Makes
boarding actions more likely.
-----
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net
-----
> -----Original Message-----
> > In Alarishi space, the Imperial Fleet requests that people
Some
> > people install them anyway. Jack Old Ron is an example, but
Anyway,
> > if you install them, you're listed as a navigational hazard.
Well, partly it's pragmatic--the AE is spread out over a lot of
planetoids so it's easier for each sovereignity to build its own defenses than
to have the Fleet try to cover everything. "He who defends everything, defends
nothing." Mostly, though, it's philosophical. If the government is upset by
your ability to defend yourself, it may be because the government doesn't want
to be impeded if they decide to use force on you. The government may decide
it's really necessary to use force on its citizens, but it's a step taken a
lot less casually than by some modern governments.