Meson Bays

Gypsy Knights Games said:
AndrewW said:
No you aren't missing anything. One of those orders from above things.

I'll be kind and spare everyone the long string of expletives I just uttered. Unbelievable.

Apart from regional variations John, it would have been similar to what I said. Totally unimpressed.
 
This should be good.

Fisics may make focussing the death beam with anything less than a spinal mount size impossible. Though that would rule out meson sleds as well, except as expensive communications mobile posts.
 
Gypsy Knights Games said:
What's the thought process behind not keeping them as they were in 1e?

Canon directive, they are to be spinal mounts only. So, not in the core design rukles, but tyhis is why we have the High Technology chapter...
 
msprange said:
Gypsy Knights Games said:
What's the thought process behind not keeping them as they were in 1e?

Canon directive, they are to be spinal mounts only. So, not in the core design rukles, but tyhis is why we have the High Technology chapter...

To be honest Matt, that is not what you call "canon directive"

Meson bays have been part of High Guard since LBB book 5. That is over thirty years.

A change of mind rather than "canon" is a more apt and correct description.
 
madmike said:
To be honest Matt, that is not what you call "canon directive"

Canon is what ever Marc decides it is - his universe, his rules!

They will still, however, be in the book.
 
Aye. I too was at amiss not finding the meson bays. But it seems they've been replaced by a "poor man's" version, the Tachyon Cannons. Similar principle but doesn't penetrate through all armour. It also looses its penetration ability vs. molecular bonded armour. Apparently that stuff is it's kryptonite.

Now I need to build a ship with these cannons and see how they work out. New toys intrigue me.

As for the meson bays being in the high tech chapter, thumbs up to that. 100 tonners were TL13 and 50 tonners TL15 in HG.
I think those Meson Sleds were at the bleeding edge of TL15/16 anyway and introduced in TNE? I seem to recall a certain manufacturing company in the Domain of Deneb took the idea and slapped it on a ship and called it a barbette... :roll:
 
But TL16 armour is not in the OTU, and so we need to be careful of Tachyon cannon balance. Unlike Mesons - screens dont work on Tachyons so technically, there is no defense.

I think Tachyon Barbette is a perfect example of balance. Consider:

4D Particle Barbette
2D Tachyon Barbette/cannon - with AP 10.

With each die being an average of 3.5, you can see Tachyon has the following advantages:

a) Better overall damage vs high armour targets
b) Better power consumption

Meanwhile, Particle:

a) Better Range
b) Better Damage vs low/un-armoured targets

This is what I love about well balanced games. It gets you thinking about hmm.. I have more than one valid choice. Which in-turn increases replay value, 'richness' of the universe, and customization.

I think we just need to do some work on the small/med/large versions of Tachyon - which scale way too quickly in comparison. Some of us can always make "meson bays" more 'offical' in our worlds anyways :)
 
Someone needs to remind Mr Miller of the law of unintended consequence. Or is it not his order from above?

Battlefield meson artillery is part of the OTU - is that being removed as well?
 
Just found out on CoTI that T5 still includes meson bays - which raises the question:

why can T5 have them but MgT can't?
 
Sigtrygg said:
Just found out on CoTI that T5 still includes meson bays - which raises the question:

why can T5 have them but MgT can't?

Oh!... that is a very interesting question.. :) Hopefully Matt can chime in
 
Can we presume that in the new Mongoose Traveller setting the Imperial Navy won't have bay meson weapons?
 
Chas said:
Can we presume that in the new Mongoose Traveller setting the Imperial Navy won't have bay meson weapons?

The Imperial Navy might not, but the warships in Clement Sector will certainly have meson bay main armament.
 
Back
Top