Quote:
Originally Posted by Varyon
If we apply the "add 18 to sAcc to get real Acc," we get quite sensible numbers for the real Acc of guns and missiles. In order to get negative sAcc, either the weapons need to suffer Range penalties - which they shouldn't if they're homing/guided - or they have -21 targeting systems.
The penalty might just be due to the fact that it's really, really hard to hit something at space ranges with something that has fairly low delta-v (like a "bullet").
|
If we apply that. I wouldn't, because it makes little sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered
so when they say "bullet", they are describing a missile that doesn't pack enough fuel to dodge around, or do anything other than adjust for ship course changes. That could be a LOT clearer. Not to mention it makes bullets much less generic. So whats the big difference then? the size of the attack?
|
Spaceships
never uses the word bullet to describe ammunition.
At the earliest possible point (p28) it indicates: "guns fire shell packages with small thrusters and guidance systems for limited course correction."
On page 59: "Guns, missile launchers, and ramming spacecraft all use these rules. Since the attacker is steering or homing on the target, range modifiers are irrelevant – what matters is the relative velocity."
What more do you want it to say?
Unguided bullets are completely nonsensical at Spaceships ranges unless they're fired at ridiculously high speeds. Cosmic grav guns could maybe be used with dumb bullets, but only at short ranges.
The big difference: cannons are awful, missiles are really really good. Shells are much cheaper and lighter than missiles and not prone to unwantedly blowing up your entire ship (presumably because they don't need the main propulsion), and you can have RF and VRF mounts for guns, but none of those facts are all that useful because guns are
terrible.