Am 10.01.2013 um 17:47 schrieb Onno Meyer <[email protected]>: > […]
> Thomas replies to Johannes: >> For my understanding, grav technology comes with vectored thrust always. >> With vectored thrust, grav ground vehicles would not make that sense, at >> least not in daily life: if the grav (anti-grav) is just doing the hovering, >> you still need something that pushes (or pulls) the vehicle. In one of the >> Star Wars movies you can see a "grav cart" pulled by some beasts, but this >> is dissipation. > > In the 3E rules, contragrav provides just lift, but it requires > a separate thruster, see above. > > This could be a walking person or a ground vehicle. Possible but > not likely. > > It could be a non-vectored engine. Reactionless thruster, jet > engine, propellers, whatever. The vehicle would turn with fins > or rudders or the like, which gives very little agility at low > speed, but it is possible. A propeller or a jet engine or a like - but would you like stand where the jet or propeller that is capable to move (and brake …) a 40 ton vehicle is blowing to? So what I should have said is that grav vehicles for the mass (as personal vehicle in urban areas) would only make sense with vectored thrust because of the desastrous side effects of jets or propellers (that can be handled for large mass transports - see our airplanes) or the uselessness of "frictioned" motion through pulling beasts or wheels (on a grav vehicle!). A reactionless thruster would be an alternative, but I categorised that under vectored thrust - even if this might not be correct from the rules. A tank is not a personal vehicle, and we know that the military is always willing to accept some collateral damage. But I doubt that a battallion of 40 ton, jet engine thrusted grav tanks in an urban area would leave something worth to defend - even without firing any shot … Therefore I think that we can assume that grav tanks will always have vectored thrust. This may be different for a gunship ... > […] > >> But again: for the game you can have any design, if your players will buy >> in and/or you can rationale it … but that would be too easy ... > > But as a GM, I should know if my choices are a logical > conclusion of the setting tech or narrative fiat. That's what I meant - and what I prefer as well. But unfortunately not all players will honour that: if it does not have a turret, it is not a tank, no matter if a turret (for example) would make sense or not. Replace "tank" and "turret" with any term you like … but this is another discussion > > Regards, > Onno > _______________________________________________ > GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> > http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l -- Thomas Thrien Geo 51° 28' 12" N 7° 32' 17" E Es heißt: "Der Klügere gibt nach". Doch wenn die Klügeren immer nachgeben, dann passiert nur noch, was die Dummen wollen ... _______________________________________________ GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
