Search SJML Archives! (Powered by Google)

Previous Message: Re: Size of Fleets
Next Message: Re: SJ on Worlds
Month Index: September, 1996

From:     Paul Westermeyer <westermeyer.3@???.edu>
Date:     Sat, 21 Sep 1996 12:33:46 -0400
Subject:  Re: SJ on Worlds (was Re: Size of Fleets)
>  Some of the bye planes reached speeds of up to 230 miles per hour (if I
>rember right) and some winds can reach speeds of up to 280 miles per hour so
>if normal saling ships can withstand that kind of stress spelljammers shold
>be able to handle slower speeds with little or no problimb. Rember that the
>ability to build a spelljamming ship requires its own proficency. So if an SR
>raiting of 9 = 150mph then it should be designed to handle that kind of
>stress. But I can understand your frame of thinking because game balance is
>important. But think the ship is going to much faster and have better weapons
>and just like the WW! planes they are going to need to set up for run's just
>like the planes. While the flying creatures don't need anywhere neer as much
>space to do the same thing. There would be tactical advanatages to both. The
>ship would do best at a high allitude with very little to get in its way
>besides the enemy. While a flying creature would do best at the lower
>alitudes where its greater maneuverbilty would all the creature to litury fly
>rings around the ship. As both know where the advanatge lies the trick is to
>"bring the enemy to you".

Yeah,  those are more good points.  I admit I changed the speed because of
strategic/operational reasons as well- I wanted to decrease the advantages
of SJ ships in long distance movement a bit as well.
On the tactical front,  an SJ ship can hover so the speed differential
doesn't make quite as much difference as it would between the F-14 and the
Biplane (BTW you were correct concerning WWI biplanes on speed,  some
interwar metal skinned biplanes could achieve 300-320MPH:))  I still stand
by my feelings on the construction techniques not holding up to those
stresses at high speeds though.  I realize this is a rather esoteric
real-world arguement,  and YCMV,  but for me  the relative lack of more
advanced weaponry indicates that the general level of technical skill
available is still at the Rennaisance level (WWI engineering skill was a
vast amount more advanced),  and thus unlikely to produce vessels able to
withstand those strains.  I have a few tinker gnome players in my game,
and my general rule of thumb is that if it reminds me of DaVinci's
drawings,  it's possible,  but if it reminds me of Top Gun,  it will always

Of course,  as you say, the trick is to bring the enemy to you:)

For those who play higher magic/level games high level mages make the best
anti-SJ weapons.  cast Fly,  then cast teleport,  the cast Meteor Swarm.
Bye-bye SJ ship in most cases.  In my game 18+ level mages a bit too rare
for this technique though.

In regards to my SJ/Battlesystem playtest,  it got postponed to Sunday,
but I'll be writing up the sides tonight.  I'll post them to the list so
those interested can make some guesses (maybe even post them?) concerning
the likely outcomes.  I always try to keep in mind during these playtests
that the outcomes are dependent upon the players abilities as well as the
scenario and troop sizes (and the luck of the dice)  So if the losing side
should have won,  that means I probably played them myself:)

"We look on the same stars,  the sky is common,  the same world surrounds
us.  What difference does it make by what pains each seeks the truth?  We
can not attain to so great a secret by one road..."
Symmachus,  "Memorial on the Occasion of the Removal of the Altar of
Victory from the Senate House" (392 AD)

Paul William Westermeyer

Previous Message: Re: Size of Fleets
Next Message: Re: SJ on Worlds
Month Index: September, 1996

SubjectFromDate (UTC)
SJ on Worlds (was Re: Size of Fleets)    Paul Westermeyer    21 Sep 1996 16:33:46
Re: SJ on Worlds (was Re: Size of Fleets)    Eugene Shumu1insky    22 Sep 1996 06:13:09
Re: SJ on Worlds (was Re: Size of Fleets)    ADEPT@???.com    24 Sep 1996 00:32:57

[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]