If we assume that gravity manipulation is at a level of vehicle sized
mastery in a setting. The laws of thermodynamics for conservation of motion
are no longer an issue. Meaning that if you can nullify inertial or
G-effect via gravity manipulation, a vehicle can make a 90 degree turn at
speed without harming the occupants. Relativistic movement is rendered
obsolete by the presumed technology level of the setting.
However if your setting only has gravity manipulation to the state of off
setting to a limited degree of inertia for a given momentum then such
vehicles would still require 'thrust' and utilize relativistic movement to
advantage.
Or if such manipulation is possible but power requirements for the gravity
manipulation are prohibitive for vehicles of such size as a tank
then relativistic movement also seems likely.
It comes down to how you want it to be and what science has accomplished in
the setting.
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Roger Malmstein <
> wrote:
> **
>
>
> I nitced that recoil rules for vehicles was missing. I had hard to
> believe that it would be possible to tout a 113Mj Fusion gun to a minimal
> sized grav vehicle with barely enough thrust to make it going.
>
> While we are on the matter. Why wasn�t there any movement rules for
> vehicles when it comes to maneuvring? And grav vehicles would realisticly
> move like a hockey puck on ice. How many squares would you need to use in
> the turn depending on the vehicle speed? And then we got those squares. Why
> squares in outdoor combats? Hexes are more intinuitive and easier to
> handle. And you don�t have to consider those pesky diagonals and how they
> affect range.
>
> --
> Roger Malmstein
> www.travellerfreeport.com
>
> *From:*
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 14, 2012 3:53 PM
> *To:*
> *Subject:* Re: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Armor XXI
>
>
>
> The main reason we didn't have rules for low-recoil guns is we didn't have
> rules for recoil effects on vehicles (unless I'm forgetting something).
> Obviously we had these grav vehicles flying around blasting fusion guns but
> didn't talk about how that might send them lurching across the sky. Nor, in
> 2300, did we address how firing those big guns would affect those ACV/GEV
> tanks, other than to realize later, "that probably wouldn't work."
>
>
>
--
If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you
would have been deserved.