> We'll steal something from Traveller. (I think it's from Traveller)
It is indeed.
> SANDCASTER
[snippage]
> It can be mounted two ways; sand can be dumped overboard, creating a
I'd say just stick with the launcher concept. Forget the dumping. It opens up
a whole can of worms about placement anyway.
> Sand is laid in 9" long, 3" wide bands if dumped overboard, and
I like the 3" dia concept, but I'd restrict it to 6" of the ship. (PSB) Sand
would tend to disperse too quickly otherwise.
> Sand interferes with all direct fire weapons. Treat the target as
I'd question this, unless you're maintaining that it interferes with the basic
targetting somehow.
> Somebody else can figure out the MASS and mechanics of the lauchers;
Not just yet. I'd like to get the effects hammered out first.
> Sean Bayan Schoonmaker wrote:
True, but I like the idea of laying down 'smoke screens' to protect freighters
and other ships under convoy.
> >Sand is laid in 9" long, 3" wide bands if dumped overboard, and
(PSB)
> Sand would tend to disperse too quickly otherwise.
Sure...
> >Sand interferes with all direct fire weapons. Treat the target as
Which means that if there's a sand cloud between a ship and a Class-1
battery, you can't hit the ship.
> If 'sand' is located
That's the basis of the 'affects the broad EM spectrum' idea. Assuming
SMLs use something as plebian as radar (8-), sand should be able to
scatter the signals, making targets harder to lock on to.
> >Somebody else can figure out the MASS and mechanics of the lauchers;
Whoever wants to hammer, hammer. I'm still trying to get work
done here. Really. (8-)
J.
Or fighters, missiles (salvo or MT), mines, scatterguns, submunitions packs,
or needle beams. All of which have only one range band.
One of the problems of FT is that there is no standard means of targeting.
Targeting and damage are combined (on most weapons) to speed game play. This
has the disadvantage of making it impossible for one system (such as ECM) to
effect all weapons equally. One of these days, I am going to have to post
FMARO* FT to my web site. :-)
*Full Metal Anorak Rip-Off
> "Bell, Brian K" wrote:
True, but you can come up with mechanics for them. What I threw out wasn't
meant to be a finished product; it was a brain storm to deal with the problem
at hand: "How do escorts defend a convoy?"
If people want a finished house rule for this, let me think about it,
and put it up after I email FT Racing to Jon T. (8-)
> One of the problems of FT is that there is no standard means of
That would be cool. (8-)
> >
I see you kept the important line of the .sig. (8-)
Just treat the sand as creating a dust cloud effect, which is already well
defined under the rules (gives +1 Screens). If we want to make it like
Smoke
Launchers - then just say that it works like ADFC in that the target or
launching platform must be within 6" of the ship using the Sand Caster.
This allows escorts to cover their charges - but it is hardly all
powerful - plus you get a limited number of shots. On the upside a
freighter might consider buying 1 or 2 shot launchers on the cheap to hold off
the lucky raider that slips by any escorting vessels.
DUSTCASTER Creates a 6" radius dust cloud around the launching ship that
interferes with beam weapons. If the target of the attack or the attacking
ship is
within this effect it affords +1 Screens (as per Dust Cloud).
MASS: x + y/shot
POINTS: a + b/shot
-----
Programming: It's not just a job - it's an indenture
[quoted original message omitted]
> True, but I like the idea of laying down 'smoke screens' to protect
This can still be done with the launchers. You just place the sand and
maneuver the ships differently.
> Which means that if there's a sand cloud between a ship and a Class-1
This seems wrong to me. I think that a slightly different mechanic might be
in order. Perhaps a -1 to the die roll, for beams, and/or a minus 1 to
the damage roll of other weapons. Or maybe just minus 1 to the "to hit" roll
for any weapon.
> I'd question this, unless you're maintaining that it interferes with
So if I understand this right, we're essentially making a high-tech
smoke screen here.
> Whoever wants to hammer, hammer. I'm still trying to get work
Sure you are... ;-)
> Just treat the sand as creating a dust cloud effect, which is already
I like this mechanic. Very simple, and it doesn't litter the board with
hundreds of 3" templates.
The caster is either on or off on any given turn. Any ship within 6" of the
caster-ship gains protection. They could be similar to a mine launcher,
but with 4 or 5 charges instead of 3. Each turn the system is activated, mark
off a charge.
> DUSTCASTER
I'd say keep it simple, like mine launchers rather than SMLs.
The problem is balancing it against screens. As most battles only last
7-8
turns, it needs to be massed and priced to ensure that it doesn't become a
cheap way to get shields!!
> On Tue, 21 Sep 1999, Jerry Han wrote:
> That's the basis of the 'affects the broad EM spectrum' idea.
Assuming
> SMLs use something as plebian as radar (8-), sand should be able to
Plus if it had some sort of electro optical or infrared (near or far spectrum)
then it would be very bad for a salvo missile to fly through the sand cloud.
Optics don't like getting additional bits of silica smashing into it at high
speed.
> the sand cloud. Optics don't like getting additional bits of silica
Nor does *anything* moving fast through such a cloud including hyper velocity
projectiles from railguns. A dense enough cloud to attenuate beams would also
ablate anthying moving through it at a high velocity.
> On Wed, 22 Sep 1999, Tim Jones wrote:
> Nor does *anything* moving fast through such a cloud
Ablate or abrade?
"Need to repaint your ship? Don't use nasty unsafe chemicals. Use Alliant
Space System's Tactical Silica Dispenser. An essential equipment fit for
stripping paint from craft undergoing refit or just on a long patrol cruise. "
> Ablate or abrade?
Ablate
Main Entry: ab7late
Pronunciation: a-'blAt
Function: verb Inflected Form(s): ab7lat7ed; ab7lat7ing
Etymology: Latin ablatus (pp. of auferre to remove), from ab- + latus,
past participle of ferre
Date: 1542
transitive senses: to remove especially by cutting, abrading, or evaporating
intransitive senses: to become ablated; especially: VAPORIZE 1
> Nor does *anything* moving fast through such a cloud
This is why I favor the ADAF type mechanic for sand, close in to the "casting"
vessel, as opposed to the launched vesion.