27911Re: [sfconsim-l] Re: Ballistic Weapons
- Feb 28, 2002rmrobinson1227 wrote:
> But why not skip the fighter entirely, and instead mount armamentI guess you didn't see the earlier post.
> directly on the main ship? By saving on the vehicle mass of the
> fighter, you could mount a good deal more armament.
> Actually, this is an issue with any rider-ship arrangement - you can
> always increase armament by cutting out the middleman. The only
> justification I can see for riders is greater maneuverability, either
> because the rider uses a combat drive with less specific impulse and
> more thrust, or because the rider can do with a lower fuel fraction.
> Either is plausible (or both).
> A relativistic ship, though, needs pretty high acceleration to achieve
> its performance in a reasonable time - at 1 g, it takes just about a
> year to accelerate to relativistic speeds.
The game is Monash Games' ORION.
If you have two bussard ramjet ships with nearly
identical propulsion performance, moving at relativistic
velocities, and seeing only where the enemy
*was* but not where it is now (due to lightspeed
lag), well, if one of the ships wants to evade,
there is no way the other can catch it.
The "fighter" is a small, armed, robot bussard ramjet.
Since it has no need for the extra mass of a life
system, cargo, and other non-combat items, it
will have a higher propulsion performance than
the enemy ship. So it *can* catch an evading
In ORION, each turn is two years long, and each
hex is 1/6th of a light year.
The game takes place inside the Orion nebula,
to provide "terrain". Terrain types A through
D are increasing density of ionized HII regions
(with A being the Strömgren zone) and types
E and F are dusty molecular clouds.
The fighters are armed with "missiles"
(clouds of relativistic sand) and
Optional rules include command control
with commands subject to speed of light
delays, and tables to calculate "proper
time" (i.e., relativistically slowed time
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>