Do the Indomitable-class ships qualify as battlestars? Alex Goodwin (08 Jun 2020 14:10 UTC)
Re: [TML] Do the Indomitable-class ships qualify as battlestars? Kurt Feltenberger (09 Jun 2020 02:46 UTC)
Re: [TML] Do the Indomitable-class ships qualify as battlestars? Kurt Feltenberger (09 Jun 2020 06:06 UTC)
Re: [TML] Do the Indomitable-class ships qualify as battlestars? Kurt Feltenberger (10 Jun 2020 01:43 UTC)
Re: [TML] Do the Indomitable-class ships qualify as battlestars? Kurt Feltenberger (10 Jun 2020 01:41 UTC)
Re: Ranges/Turns/Hexes Re: [TML] Do the Indomitable-class ships qualify as battlestars? shadow@xxxxxx (11 Jun 2020 12:05 UTC)
Re: [TML] Do the Indomitable-class ships qualify as battlestars? Kurt Feltenberger (09 Jun 2020 02:40 UTC)

Re: Ranges/Turns/Hexes Re: [TML] Do the Indomitable-class ships qualify as battlestars? shadow@xxxxxx 11 Jun 2020 12:04 UTC

On 9 Jun 2020 at 14:10, Greg Nokes wrote:

> Most (realistic) weapons would have very short ranges. Railguns
> probally would have almost no chance of hitting after a hex or two.
> Lasers would be limited by their focal arrays, but be super accurate.
> PA´s would probably be the workhorse weapons, with reasonable range
> and punch.
>
> What does the braintrust think?

PAWs are a lot slower than lightspeed (in reality anyway). So you get
into the time lag issue. Also if they are CPAWS the beam starts
spreading from the moment it leaves the "muzzle" because the
particles repel each other.
--
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
shadow at shadowgard dot com