WOW.
I go away on a LARP weekend and look what happens!
![Wink ;) ;)]()
In all reality, as long as a Science Fiction GAME setting stays close to Current understandings of physics and reality, that's ok with me. M-Drives are reactionless thruster plates (I think - depending on which system you use) and I'm assuming there aren’t any current physics that explain that.
Here is my ruling on the matter for my campaign.
I will combine the idea from TNE (that I have never read) and GURPS Traveller (that I have) and say that M-Drives not only provide thrust based on their rating, but also negate up to 3 G's of force, so a liner can accelerate up to 3 G's without passengers taking any notice.
I’m not physics major, but I have interest in all sciences. I can generally understand concepts, but don’t ask me to do complex equations in my head!
![Wink ;) ;)]()
Once and ship breaks orbit, the tables to travel to a safe distance comes into effect. Other than that, if a ship dose not have a large enough M-drive, the time it takes to reach orbit doubles with each G-rating above its M-rating (plus the contra-grav systems). So all ships can reach orbit on a 3g world or higher (because of contra-grav) but anything over that, their M-drives have to compensate. It may be simple and dumb and most likely doesn’t fit into a physics equation, but neither does a jump field.
So, there it is. Does this seem like a reasonable rule of thumb for a game?
My idea of a deep atmosphere setting in a high G environment wasn’t supposed to spark a heated debate. BUT, I really appreciate all the input. You guys who are the tech-heads ALWAYS impress the heck out of me. But I think sometimes the scientist and physicist you many of us get in the way of keeping this a fun “reality” based Sci-fi game. Just my opinion.
By the way Piper, the link to the meson factory was really cool. That got me thinking…. (uh-oh)
Has anyone considered breaking down a spinal weapon into individual components?
Say, 50% of the tonnage could be taken up by the main weapon with a 20:1 ratio or less, and the remaining 50% can be broken down into several rooms: “injectors”, “accelerators”, “storage”, “energizers”, and a myriad of other components. This could give characters even more possibilities of sabotaging a ships primary weapon.
Any thoughts?
Thanks for all the advice.
Jak Naz