From: | Gurth gurth@******.nl |
---|---|
Subject: | Ballista missiles |
Date: | Thu, 13 Apr 2000 12:31:28 +0200 |
> Well, that is understandable, but then what's the point of a Mk III? ;)
It could have been an attempt at an improvement, with so much publicity
around it that they _had_ to build it even when it turned out to be a
piece of crap :)
Anyway, here's the way it breaks down:
Mk. I: direct & indirect fire, no guidance
Mk. II: direct fire only, no guidance
Mk. III: direct & indirect fire, guided (strangely, it has _three_
guidance systems: one for laser, one for microwave, and one for radar...)
> I don't have the book in front of me right now, but I remember as I was
> reading from it that aside from the avail # being higher for the Mk
> III, there was no difference, as far as the charts can tell me.
You have to look in the text on page 28 :)
--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"There are millions of people who've got nothing to say to each other,
and who do it on mobile phones" --Ian Hislop, on Have I Got News For You
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL P L+ E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998