TL10 Spee Class 30,000 ton Pocket Battleship
ewan@xxxxxx
(25 Feb 2023 14:38 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] TL10 Spee Class 30,000 ton Pocket Battleship Rupert Boleyn (25 Feb 2023 23:56 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] TL10 Spee Class 30,000 ton Pocket Battleship
Ewan
(02 Mar 2023 11:26 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] TL10 Spee Class 30,000 ton Pocket Battleship
ewan@xxxxxx
(05 Mar 2023 12:10 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] TL10 Spee Class 30,000 ton Pocket Battleship
Jeff Zeitlin
(05 Mar 2023 20:06 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] TL10 Spee Class 30,000 ton Pocket Battleship
Rupert Boleyn
(05 Mar 2023 22:47 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] TL10 Spee Class 30,000 ton Pocket Battleship
Postmark
(05 Mar 2023 22:36 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] TL10 Spee Class 30,000 ton Pocket Battleship
Rupert Boleyn
(05 Mar 2023 22:45 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] TL10 Spee Class 30,000 ton Pocket Battleship Rupert Boleyn 25 Feb 2023 23:56 UTC
On 26Feb2023 0338, ewan at quibell.org.uk (via tml list) wrote: > And this is the Robust Class with a Jump drive attached to it. > > 30,000 tons for a jump capable battle ship seems a bit small, but it is what > it is . > > I'm might look at more armour, but I'm not sure if it's worth it . comments > welcome As I recall, back in the days of the LLBs and High Guard, the goal was to keep 'small' combatants under 20 KTons, because that was one of the breakpoints for hit chance (the next being under 75 KTons). So by that measure it's in the low end of its size range. By another it needs to lose some weight. It easily passes the most important HG test though - it's big enough no spinal weapon of its TL can get auto-crits on it. -- Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>