Hunters & Gatherers... - OOC Discussion - Forums (Page 17)

The Rebel Faction » Forums » Role Playing » OOC Discussion » Hunters & Gatherers...

161 8:28pm 28/10/06

Minister of Defence

Without turning this into a massive argument/flamewar, a few points on Drayson's last post.

1. I disagree with many of the ways that you are describing Corise's arguments. He never did not allow damage to his Juraires, he just did not go along with your whole "the guns are knocked offline or destroyed (i forget which)". And that can not be considered "minor damage". (I'm not trying to reopen that argument, simply say that your initial points all against Corise aren't exactly accurate).

2. TNO complained about much of the damage Corise dished out was well. Need I mention your post which included something along the lines of "fine, i'll write a detailed paragraph on all the damage that I suffered, which would go along the lines of "pretty much nothing." To be fair you'd forgotten some of the ships attacking your ships, but you still said your ships had suffered essentially no damage.

3. Also on the issue of OOC arguments, TNO started what became a 3 page argument on the NUMBER of PSDs Kashan could have. And that thread was largely argued by you, not Kach who was the one who made the thread initially. And nearing the end you stated the only reason why you were arguing it still was in a theoretical context and cause you were stubborn. Meaning that you appear to like OOC arguments just as much as you claim Corise does.

4. If this was really ALL about writing a good, interesting story, then why did you not invest the time to describe HOW TNO found out about the convoy and such? As well, why didn't TNO lay down decent groundwork for the assault on Metalorn, rather than just have TNO members jump in with their own fleets (as I believe Kraken has said he did)? An interesting, good story includes groundwork and such, not just "so we magically knew when your convoy was coming through, intercepted it in an attempt to destroy it and then decided to launch a fleet at your planet." I'm not atempting to call you a liar or anything like that, but if you really did want to have a really good, interesting story, you could have put more effort in at the start laying the groundwork for a good, interesting story, rather than just starting off with a post that is questionable in its feasibility and that lays the groundwork for a purely competitive roleplay.

This post is not intended as a flamebait or the pre-cursor for a flamewar. Rather it is more an objection to the one-sided post by Drayson which appears designed to make Corise look horrible and Drayson wonderful (yes that sentence is a bit of an exaggeration on Drayson's last post, but the point is similar). And no I don't want to get into a long, drawn out argument over how one-sided Drayson's post is or how one-sided mine is (I know its one-sided), just trying to make a post showing that the situation isn't as one-sided as Drayson is painting it as. Neither Drayson, nor Corise are at fault, nor are either of them perfectly innocent. Both have argued points in this thread (as have I). And I hope that this post does not become the excuse for a flamewar.

Now, onto the real issues:

Corise, by that drawing Audacieuse (or whatever) could follow the EMPIRE SOb. So just RP it as such. The Audacieuse stayed firing on the EMPIRE SOb the entire time.

Reasonably Drayson does have a point about the backup shields. Some of his shots would have hit some of the shield projectors. So the backup shields (because of that) wouldn't be AS powerful. The issue over whether backup shields are automatically weaker isn't needed, is kind of a stupid issue to begin with. It all depends on how the person RPs/R&Ds it themselves. In this case I would not say they are automatically weaker.

So yeah, the EMPIRE SOb is behind the Pegasus. Yes the Pegasus's shields aren't as powerful. But at the same point the Audacieuse is, and has been, firing on the EMPIRE SOb the entire time. And the bombers and Cavaliers, as I understand it, could have just shortened their arc to compensate for the new position of the EMPIRE SOb. So they could still fire on it. The Redemption probably requires a bit of time to adjust to the new position of the EMPIRE SOb, but it wouldn't take that long (reasonably it just has to make a 90 degree turn and then travel the length of the Pegasus or so and its there).

EDIT: Well apparently Corise already responded. I'll leave my post as is, but I think this is essentially turning into a flamewar. So I point towards the last part of my post and suggest that the thread continues, and the OOC part dies down. Or we at least get back to the issues, rather than the flamewar bit.

Demosthenes X

162 11:17pm 28/10/06

fuck that duck

My mistake. You said there were no emitters or barrels for your weapons in the nose. Close enough, though.

Here's the thing, Jan: OOC talk is always going to go along with a competitive roleplay. That's a given. And yeah, I'm fine with it. We managed to work out the problem with the Gunships, for example.

But it gets ridiculous when Corise raises objection after objection to every little move I make. For example, the manouver the EMPIRE made. I am not going to debate the physics of two fake warships so that Corise can save his fake warship some damage. It's ridiculous and totally unneccessary.

But that's all he seems interested in doing. And, to be frank, it kind of bugs me. I would much rather spend my time roleplaying than arguing mundane, irrelevent points in this forum.

With regards to the size of the Kashan fleet, you'll note I was not the only one to raise that issue. Omnae pointed it out as an aside, Kach raised it, and when I looked at it, I agreed. And it was something that had potential to have quite an impact on TRF, and in all liklihood would have come up at some point if it hadn't now.

Corise's argument against the EMPIRE is of a totally different nature, and I see it as an attempt purely to save his ship some damage. And like I've said, I am not interested in debating the physics of fake warships.

If it's a major point, then it warrants discussion. The sheer fact, Corise, than even Jan agrees that the EMPIRE's manouver was legit, speaks volumes to me about your intentions in raising it.

And your previous post speaks volumes about the kind of person you are.

Never once in this thread have I dared to insult your writing. I think it is quite good, in fact. And it really disturbs me that you've reduced yourself to level of insulting someone writing in order to "win" a petty OOC argument/IC thread.

With regards to an interesting story involving the discovery of the convoy et al.: this roleplay, as I have said, was intended to be an interesting competitive roleplay. Certainly the back story could be interesting, but it's not the purpose of the thread. The purpose is, as you well know, a competitive engagement.

With regards to damages: I'll take your last damage appraisal as accurate. That means my two Cruisers have suffered zero damage, great!

Give me a break. I've got two ships out of comission, and this is fine. It's part of the game. Ships get damaged, ships get destroyed.

You, on the other hand, claim to have sustained ZERO damages. And, once again, you claim that this is because of some magical ubertecnology you found on CUSWE.

You're repeating yourself on the bombers, and once again I can only say that what you're R&D document says is not the word of God. It is how they are played, and you are playing them as "then they shoot and no one can see them cause they're invisible and really fast!!!".

No, Corise. You're going to lose some ships - how many is a matter for debate, but when you fly them in a straight line at a big ship, I'm going to say a significant number. Their speed doesn't make a difference when all a gunner has to do is target one area of space and hold the trigger down, which is EXACTLY what happened based on how you attacked my line.

So yeah, you've lost a decent number of fighters.

As far as the Gunships: they were attacked by a ship twice their size with a very heavy main weapon, and they suffered failures in two weapons. And again, that is simply by virtue of your design: you put a weapon in a vulnerable position like that, it's gonna get hit.

I would hardly qualify that as heavy damage. They still have shields, most of their other weapons, full engine power and manouverability... still very capable performers, by and large.

Let's take a look at the damage estimates in the world of Corise:

-a few fighters lost
-three gunships SEVERELY DAMAGED OMG!!! but in reality, only lightly damaged
-one Pegasus SD, totally fine cause of its superduperAMAZING backup shields

Oh, and two TNO Cruisers crippled.

Don't even begin to talk to me about whose underrepresenting damage claims. I've given you that my two Cruisers are more or less out of the fight. And you...

You fight possible damage to your PSD based on unprovable physics between two pretend warships.

I could have said that you making a microjump in a single post is bogus. Generally (though not always), hyperspace jumps took two posts (even with your superduper battle computer). You might notice that, as a matter of fairness, all of my microjumps have taken two posts to complete.

Otherwise my last post can be extended to include what happens when those ships complete their jumps.

So, Corise: try and get over this newfound superiority complex of yours, and stop being afraid of letting your fake warships get damaged. Enjoy the writing of the story - that's why we're all here. And hey, battle scars only make a ship's history more interesting!

[size=1]"So the woman asked me what I wanted on the sandwich and I said I do not care it is for a duck, and she was like oh then it's free. I was not aware that ducks eat for free at Subway. It's like give me a chicken fajita sub, but don't worry about ringing it up, it is for a duck.”
-Mitch Hedberg
[/size]

Corise Lucerne

163 8:58pm 29/10/06

Confederation Admiral

Here's the thing, Jan: OOC talk is always going to go along with a competitive roleplay. That's a given. And yeah, I'm fine with it. We managed to work out the problem with the Gunships, for example.

I agree. OOC talk in these rps are pretty much always going to be unavoidable, even if the rp is friendly, misunderstandings do happen.

With regards to the size of the Kashan fleet, you'll note I was not the only one to raise that issue. Omnae pointed it out as an aside, Kach raised it, and when I looked at it, I agreed. And it was something that had potential to have quite an impact on TRF, and in all liklihood would have come up at some point if it hadn't now.

Noted, but they are all TNO members. The Coalition has other enemies, and there haven't been any objections from them, and I'll note that I am actually following a TNO member's guidelines for my fleet. And thus far, I haven't seen Telan object to them.

Never once in this thread have I dared to insult your writing. I think it is quite good, in fact. And it really disturbs me that you've reduced yourself to level of insulting someone writing in order to "win" a petty OOC argument/IC thread.

You're right, you haven't. You just insulted and accused me several times. Saying "Ha! pwned" in your previous post is either an attempt to insult me, or goad me. Neither is particularly good. I generally will fight in the same level as my opponents after my opponent has set the level, which in this case, is you.

With regards to damages: I'll take your last damage appraisal as accurate. That means my two Cruisers have suffered zero damage, great!

What?

Give me a break. I've got two ships out of comission, and this is fine. It's part of the game. Ships get damaged, ships get destroyed.

You have two ships without engines. They still have full weapons and shielding. That's still pretty formidable. The Curaisseurs aren't exactly helpless and out of the fight. If you want, it's still possible to get them involved and be useful to your fleet.

You, on the other hand, claim to have sustained ZERO damages. And, once again, you claim that this is because of some magical ubertecnology you found on CUSWE.

Hardly true. We both know that I was the first person within the thread to post damages to my ships, the gunships. We both know that I agreed that your STL cannons on the EMPIRE would puncture the Pegasus's armor, and that's how I've rped them. Nowhere do I say that I have not suffered damage.

You're repeating yourself on the bombers, and once again I can only say that what you're R&D document says is not the word of God. It is how they are played, and you are playing them as "then they shoot and no one can see them cause they're invisible and really fast!!!".

Well, technically, I don't see a reason they wouldn't be the case. Are you going to argue with me how you've detected the bombers? Because you ignored and/or dropped the topic every time I ask how you've detected them. Are you going to tell me that they're not fast?

No, Corise. You're going to lose some ships - how many is a matter for debate, but when you fly them in a straight line at a big ship, I'm going to say a significant number. Their speed doesn't make a difference when all a gunner has to do is target one area of space and hold the trigger down, which is EXACTLY what happened based on how you attacked my line.

Yes, I'm going to lose bombers, and I accept that. Here's the questions: How would you gunners know where to shoot, and how are the guns in position to hit the fighters to begin with?

I don't doubt there's enough firepower within your ship to destroy the entire group of bombers, but most of a Curaisseur's guns are casemented(or casemated), not turreted. This gives them unusually good protection, making them harder to destroy, but also severely limits their field of fire. With the Curaisseurs being designed in the broadside mentality, there is little firepower available to focus on the rear of the ship where it is getting attacked.

As far as the Gunships: they were attacked by a ship twice their size with a very heavy main weapon, and they suffered failures in two weapons. And again, that is simply by virtue of your design: you put a weapon in a vulnerable position like that, it's gonna get hit.
I would hardly qualify that as heavy damage. They still have shields, most of their other weapons, full engine power and manouverability... still very capable performers, by and large.

Heavy damage is an opinion. If I took out half of the EMPIRE's weapons, would that not be heavy damage? I could say the same, that the EMPIRE still has its shields, full engine power and maneuverability, but would it really be as capable of a ship?

Let's take a look at the damage estimates in the world of Corise:
-a few fighters lost
-three gunships SEVERELY DAMAGED OMG!!! but in reality, only lightly damaged
-one Pegasus SD, totally fine cause of its superduperAMAZING backup shields

Oh, and two TNO Cruisers crippled.

Not true. I'm saying that you wiped out at around a fourth of my bombers when they attacked the Curaisseur. See above for the gunship comment. And the PSD has lost some of it's engine power and has hull punctures as well as weapons, shields, and other damage to one side. That's some damage..

I could have said that you making a microjump in a single post is bogus. Generally (though not always), hyperspace jumps took two posts (even with your superduper battle computer). You might notice that, as a matter of fairness, all of my microjumps have taken two posts to complete.
Otherwise my last post can be extended to include what happens when those ships complete their jumps.

Fair enough. I will do that then.

So, Corise: try and get over this newfound superiority complex of yours, and stop being afraid of letting your fake warships get damaged. Enjoy the writing of the story - that's why we're all here. And hey, battle scars only make a ship's history more interesting!

Yet again, another insult. And yes, battle scars do make a ship more interesting.

And for the third time, can you show me where thick hull plating reduces ion damage? Thanks.

Demosthenes X

164 9:56pm 29/10/06

fuck that duck

No, Corise, I have no insulted you to any degree during this discussion. You, on the other hand, have developed this superiority complex about you being a better writer/whatever.

This is not an insult, this is simply a statement of fact. If you disagree, that's fine, but you spent an entire post outlining exactly why you think you're a better writer.

Do not even begin to talk about who is insulting whom. You're snide comments began long ago, and while tame by TRF's old standards, have hardly gone unnoticed.

But I digress.

My point is not that you have accepted damage to your ships - it is that you have fought on any ground you can come up with that damage before finally relenting. Yes, your ships have taken damage, but not of your own accord. Only when you discover you have no recourse left and that you were wrong to begin with do you accept damages.

I have not claimed that my ships were undamaged. I accepted very quickly the damage to my Cruisers. But you still claim that your bombers are somehow avoiding reprisal.

Am I arguing that they are fast? Yes and no. You already know that I consider your R&Ds overly powerful, and you have provided no contention that says otherwise, save "no they're not". As it stands, they are faster than TIE Defenders, better armed, better armoured, and invisible. And in return, oh, well they're not very manouverable. Which really is not a defect at all when they can outrun anything that manages to target them.

But you keep on coming back to what the R&D document says, as if it's the word of God on earth. Which, as I've said, it is not. It is only accurate insofar as it is fairly played, and as I've said, I do not think you've presented them fairly.

That said, how am I targetting them?

Your ships are still present, and while they may bend space around them, they still intercept sensor signals. It is a relatively simple matter to ping them, and watch where my sensor signals begin to break up. It will not return information on the ship itself, but it will certainly give a location, which is enough for gunners.

As I've said, the destruction of your fighters otherwise is a function of your post: you lined them up, meaning my gunners didn't really have to track them, they just had to sit there and hold down the triggers.

And you're claiming that somehow they essentially flew into a field of fire and survived. I think, realistically, if a commander ever did that, he would lose his entire force and probably his rank, to boot. For the purposes of story, I find 50% casualties a fair compromise, because your fighters are more difficult to target than usual, and some of them probably would manage to escape.

With regards to your fleet size, and something you never really did explain, you'll notice the only concern was not with size, but with the speed which it was built. As Omnae pointed out, taking a planet (or 8) does not mean ships simply spring into existance - they still need to be built. But we've settled that issue, so I'll refrain from discussing it further. Simply note that if you're going to reference it, you should do so properly and fully, not only borrowing the part(s) that suit you.

With regards to the Curiassier, the only weapons described as being casement mounted are its turbolasers. The antistarfighter canons, by nature of their purpose, clearly are not. Further, as I said, your bombers flew straight at the side of the ship in a line. There is little tracking involved in attacking a line of fighters of that sort. And again, your losses are in part born to your tactics there. A more conventional starfighter attack would have yielded less effective results (less concentration on the spine), but less losses as well. You made the decision, so now live with the consequences.

There is a difference between number of weapons and relative power of weapons. If you rely on two major weapons, then yes, they're being knocked out is going to severely compromise the effectiveness of that ship. However, when taken as a whole, the ship has the majority of its weapons, shields, engines, etc. It is hardly heavily damaged. Even your IC comment about hoping to have them repaired by battle's end reflects that they are not heavily damaged. Your Gunships are still able to fight to a large degree, simply minus two rather potent weapons. And that, again, is a function of design - weapons in the nose ARE vulnerable.

The Curiassiers, on the other hand, have lost most or all of their manouvering capability, and a large degree of their structural integrity. They still have guns and shields. That is counted as heavy damage by my books, but yes, they are still able to fight to a limited degree. Again, this is to some extent a function of design: a thin neck connector is vulnerable (although Telan makes reference to it being heavily defended).

With regards to ion damage, this one should be easy:

1) greater area to disperse energy. Ion canons are energetic - when they hit a small area of metal, it heats quickly because there is little space to disperse it. More space = more dispersal = less effective weapons.

2) resistance. More metal between the impact and systems means more time for the weapon to lose it effectiveness.

I have no problem with the ship being effected, but it is hardly crippled. All the more so considering it is not really being targetted by the Pegasus given their respective positions, and you only just brought the second PSD into serious play.

I could be wrong on this point, but I also believe that starship ion canons do not possess the power to shut down an entire ship the way the Hoth canon did. To hurt a turbolaser, for example, it needs to hit the turbolaser, not just hit the ship. Given the EMPIRE's cloak, I think while you may well have hit some individual guns, it is by luck and not by way of coordinated fire.

*shrug*

Either way, one post is not enough time to entirely disable a ship the size of the EMPIRE, methinks.

[size=1]"So the woman asked me what I wanted on the sandwich and I said I do not care it is for a duck, and she was like oh then it's free. I was not aware that ducks eat for free at Subway. It's like give me a chicken fajita sub, but don't worry about ringing it up, it is for a duck.”
-Mitch Hedberg
[/size]

Corise Lucerne

165 10:57pm 29/10/06

Confederation Admiral

I don't think we're ever going to agree on what we think of the other person and his personality. It's opinion, which is gray. And moreover, it doesn't merit any more inclusion in this thread because like you said, we digress.

My point is not that you have accepted damage to your ships - it is that you have fought on any ground you can come up with that damage before finally relenting. Yes, your ships have taken damage, but not of your own accord. Only when you discover you have no recourse left and that you were wrong to begin with do you accept damages.
I have not claimed that my ships were undamaged. I accepted very quickly the damage to my Cruisers. But you still claim that your bombers are somehow avoiding reprisal.

You're no different than me in this regard. Sure, you posted damage to your cruisers, but it too was too light and had to be amended, just like my gunship's had to take more damage.

Am I arguing that they are fast? Yes and no. You already know that I consider your R&Ds overly powerful, and you have provided no contention that says otherwise, save "no they're not". As it stands, they are faster than TIE Defenders, better armed, better armoured, and invisible. And in return, oh, well they're not very manouverable. Which really is not a defect at all when they can outrun anything that manages to target them.

I already have; that they're based on statistics of canon craft. The A3 is based on the Missile Boat, which probably seems pretty obvious. It has the same shield rating as it, lower speed, and less missiles. I'm going to point out that it's only faster than the Tie Defender with its SAS engaged. THe Missile Boat has SLAM which takes it up to 244 MGLT, which is much faster than the 175 MGLT max that the Nemesis can go. I'm going to point out that it can't outrun missiles, nor a Missile Boat. And I know TNO has used Missile Boats, at least in the past.

Your ships are still present, and while they may bend space around them, they still intercept sensor signals. It is a relatively simple matter to ping them, and watch where my sensor signals begin to break up. It will not return information on the ship itself, but it will certainly give a location, which is enough for gunners.

That's debatable, but that's also where the Vanish 2 Sensor Mask comes in. The Vanish 2 sends back false sensor data that would tell your sensors that it's just normal, mostly empty space.

With regards to your fleet size, and something you never really did explain, you'll notice the only concern was not with size, but with the speed which it was built. As Omnae pointed out, taking a planet (or 8) does not mean ships simply spring into existance - they still need to be built. But we've settled that issue, so I'll refrain from discussing

Fair enough.

As I've said, the destruction of your fighters otherwise is a function of your post: you lined them up, meaning my gunners didn't really have to track them, they just had to sit there and hold down the triggers.

And you're claiming that somehow they essentially flew into a field of fire and survived. I think, realistically, if a commander ever did that, he would lose his entire force and probably his rank, to boot. For the purposes of story, I find 50% casualties a fair compromise, because your fighters are more difficult to target than usual, and some of them probably would manage to escape.

With regards to the Curiassier, the only weapons described as being casement mounted are its turbolasers. The antistarfighter canons, by nature of their purpose, clearly are not. Further, as I said, your bombers flew straight at the side of the ship in a line. There is little tracking involved in attacking a line of fighters of that sort. And again, your losses are in part born to your tactics there. A more conventional starfighter attack would have yielded less effective results (less concentration on the spine), but less losses as well. You made the decision, so now live with the consequences.

Yes, the defence banks obviously aren't casemated. But they are also fewer in number and much less powerful. As bombers, they were designed to take a beating against starfighter grade weaponry, which has been rped before. Well I'm up for a compromise, I think 50% casualties is a bit much for weaker and fewer weapons with, at the very most, would be gettin inaccurate targetting data.

There is a difference between number of weapons and relative power of weapons. If you rely on two major weapons, then yes, they're being knocked out is going to severely compromise the effectiveness of that ship. However, when taken as a whole, the ship has the majority of its weapons, shields, engines, etc. It is hardly heavily damaged. Even your IC comment about hoping to have them repaired by battle's end reflects that they are not heavily damaged. Your Gunships are still able to fight to a large degree, simply minus two rather potent weapons. And that, again, is a function of design - weapons in the nose ARE vulnerable.

It's heavy damage in terms of battle performance, which is my main point. The ships will probably take a week or so to get fully repaired. And weapons in the nose shouldn't any more vulnerable in terms of protection than any of the other weapons onboard. But I don't think that significantly affects anything within these threads.

The Curiassiers, on the other hand, have lost most or all of their manouvering capability, and a large degree of their structural integrity. They still have guns and shields. That is counted as heavy damage by my books, but yes, they are still able to fight to a limited degree. Again, this is to some extent a function of design: a thin neck connector is vulnerable (although Telan makes reference to it being heavily defended).

They should have some maneuvering capabilities based on how they were rped in "Tidings of War". From what I can recall off-hand, Telan never rped the extent of how badly that affected maneuvering. Your call. The engine block aside, the rest of the ship should be just as sound as it is normally.

With regards to ion damage, this one should be easy:
1) greater area to disperse energy. Ion canons are energetic - when they hit a small area of metal, it heats quickly because there is little space to disperse it. More space = more dispersal = less effective weapons.

2) resistance. More metal between the impact and systems means more time for the weapon to lose it effectiveness.

I have no problem with the ship being effected, but it is hardly crippled. All the more so considering it is not really being targetted by the Pegasus given their respective positions, and you only just brought the second PSD into serious play.

Number one makes sense to me. Number two not so much, since metals tend to be conductors, so the resistance should be pretty small, barely existent with that sort of energy and the length of metal involved. The second PSD would have been firing at the EMPIRE at roughly the same time the Pegasus started to return fire to the SOb. Not overwhelming damage to be sure, but a reasonable amount.

I could be wrong on this point, but I also believe that starship ion canons do not possess the power to shut down an entire ship the way the Hoth canon did. To hurt a turbolaser, for example, it needs to hit the turbolaser, not just hit the ship. Given the EMPIRE's cloak, I think while you may well have hit some individual guns, it is by luck and not by way of coordinated fire.

You're right. That deals with the magnitude of the weapon compared to the target. And the quad ion cannons are much smaller than a KDY v150. It would mostly be by luck and the occasional visual picture, but I think that the STLs would be fairly easy to pick out simply because of their size.

Demosthenes X

166 11:31pm 29/10/06

fuck that duck

I would not consider the anti-starfighter guns on the Curiassier starfighter grade per say. They should be subsantially heavier than whats on a TIE, for example - like the Falcon's quad lasers, which I believe are actually more suited to small freighters and the like. Also note that, while the turbolasers are not designed to track starfighters and are encased, they are also very plentiful and not doing too much tracking, given your tactics.

With regards to the Vanish unit, true. But the calibration of the sensors is not relying on sensor feedback, simply on the first ping. The best example of what you're imagining is echolocation, the principle most sensors operate on. What's happening here, though, is rather than waiting for the signal to come back with data, the operator simply watches the signal: where it stops moving forward there is obviously somethere there. So I get a location, but not a lot more (that is, if we were talking about Star Destroyers, I couldn't really say "oh, it's an ISD". But certainly enough to get some kind of location.

With regards to the ships themselves, as I said, the Missile Boat is not really a very good ship to base yours off. Just like the Strike Cruiser is not.

It's about how the ships are played, though, not what their stats say.

With regards to the hull plating, yes, metal is obviously conductive. I would imagine starship armour would be less so than a lot of others, but still conductive. My point was simply that thicker armour would provide more resistance than thinner armour, and the EMPIRE has exceptionally thick physical armour.

With regards to visual sighting, possible, certainly. But I think you're forgetting the cloak.

[size=1]"So the woman asked me what I wanted on the sandwich and I said I do not care it is for a duck, and she was like oh then it's free. I was not aware that ducks eat for free at Subway. It's like give me a chicken fajita sub, but don't worry about ringing it up, it is for a duck.”
-Mitch Hedberg
[/size]

Beff Pike

167 11:37pm 29/10/06

Bounty Hunter

omfg

OOC x10.

Corise Lucerne

168 1:02am 30/10/06

Confederation Admiral

The banks, as in all previous mountings, possess ten quick-firing droid controlled laser gatlings, but have a much more tight-beamed shot than others and as such are much more powerful.

That's from the Astrus R&D, so I'm not quite sure what to think. So laser gatlings of some sort, which certainly gives a good rate of fire, probably not power,but the effect is still basically the same.

Is there any info on this sensor "ping" somewhere? I understand the concept of the idea behind it (like Sonar), but what is it using (obviously not sound waves)?

I wasn't forgetting about the flicker cloak, at least from my understanding of it. The SOb flickers when it's activated if I remember correctly. So, it is visually apparent for at least a milli-second. Certainly too fast for an organic to get a good look at it, but not enough for a machine to get a glimpse of it, relay that too the targetting computer. It won't be completely accurate, but it should get it the rough area of where the weapon is.

Beff Pike

169 1:21am 30/10/06

Bounty Hunter

SOb?

Oh come on. That must be like the SOL and the FUBAR eh?

Corise Lucerne

170 1:41am 30/10/06

Confederation Admiral

The worst part is that I always think of the more common meaning of SOB whenever I think of the ship.

<<<>>>1510141516171819