Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	Danyel N Woods <9604801@********.AC.NZ>
Subject:	Cyberpirates errata?
Date:	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 12:35:21 +1200

Message no. 1 I just borrowed a copy of Cyberpirates off someone, and after reading
it, it occurred to me that either the Stuart-class corvette has a
misprinted Hull attribute, or it's horrifically under-armed for a
thousand-ton ship. Hell, there are 250t missile boats *today* that
mount heavier loads than an autocannon and sixteen anti-tank(?)
missiles. So, would someone please direct me to the on-line
Cyberpirates errata sheet, or tell me where I can find the discussions
in the list archives?

Danyel Woods - 9604801@********.ac.nz
'God hates me, that's what it is.'
'Hate him back. It works for me.'

From:	Fade <runefo@***.UIO.NO>
Subject:	Re: Cyberpirates errata?
Date:	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 06:24:39 +0000

Message no. 2 Danyel wrote:
> I just borrowed a copy of Cyberpirates off someone, and after reading
> it, it occurred to me that either the Stuart-class corvette has a
> misprinted Hull attribute, or it's horrifically under-armed for a
> thousand-ton ship. Hell, there are 250t missile boats *today* that
> mount heavier loads than an autocannon and sixteen anti-tank(?)
> missiles.

Now that you mention it, it appears a bit underarmed. I'd add two
torpedo tubes to make it a better balanced ship - that way it has
weapons to sink both larger ships and subs, and torpedoes cannot be
shot down by missile defence. (The other option for anti - ship work
would be missiles, but as it would only be able to carry very few
N-class missiles, they would not unlikely be shot down.).

As for other underarmed ships, the Vaneyev hunter-killer sub is
unarmed.

An idea for runners out there interested in salvaging...

There's a north Korean boat, whose name eludes me. It is equipped
with a light naval gun, two mg's, and... a MLRS missile
artillery system! (BG-21). A rather inventive, and typical, third
nation boat. The gun turret is a T34 tank turret, the missile
system is a regular artillery system, etc. It's not designed for
naval combat, but for shore bombardment, at my guess.

> So, would someone please direct me to the on-line
> Cyberpirates errata sheet, or tell me where I can find the discussions
> in the list archives?

I've been led to believe there isn't one and hasn't been any, and
when it will be is when the third edition comes out so that they can
add modifications necessary from the change in edition.

--
Fade

And the Prince of Lies said:
"To reign is worth ambition, though in Hell:
Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven."
-John Milton, Paradise Lost

From:	Danyel N Woods <9604801@********.AC.NZ>
Subject:	Re: Cyberpirates errata?
Date:	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:01:40 +1200

Message no. 3 Quoth Fade (1825 16-06-98 NZT):

>Danyel wrote:
>> I just borrowed a copy of Cyberpirates off someone, and after reading
>> it, it occurred to me that either the Stuart-class corvette has a
>> misprinted Hull attribute, or it's horrifically under-armed for a
>> thousand-ton ship. Hell, there are 250t missile boats *today* that
>> mount heavier loads than an autocannon and sixteen anti-tank(?)
>> missiles.
>
>Now that you mention it, it appears a bit underarmed. I'd add two
>torpedo tubes to make it a better balanced ship - that way it has
>weapons to sink both larger ships and subs, and torpedoes cannot be
>shot down by missile defence. (The other option for anti - ship work
>would be missiles, but as it would only be able to carry very few
>N-class missiles, they would not unlikely be shot down.).

Hmm. I happen to have Cyberpirates with me today, so here we go:
"The _Stuart_ class of fast attack craft is produced in large numbers
for the CAS Navy. The CAS Navy makes wide us of these small missile
boats for coastal patrol and defense and also to provide supporting fire
for its light surface action groups (usually in a cluster around a
_Merrimac_-class missile cruiser." (p.176, Cyberpirates.)

That paragraph, to someone as versed in the military (and not a little
pedantic) as I am, is a little self-contradictory: small missile boats
are just that, 150-750 ton boats armed with six or eight anti-ship
missiles, maybe some SAMs, and a light gun or two but not blue-water
capable. A ship fit to escort a capital ship like a cruiser must be a
good size - at least a 'true' corvette or a light frigate.

Basically, the GM has two choices here:
A) The _Stuart_ is just a littoral-warfare missile boat. Drop the
Hull rating to 2, replace the forward Outlaw launcher with a light naval
gun, and the aft Outlaw launcher gives way to two three-shot clusters of
Sea Sabre anti-ship missiles.
B) The _Stuart_ is a corvette or light frigate. Replace the
forward Outlaw launcher with Vogeljager SAMs, fit a light naval gun
forward, shift the Victory right aft (if it isn't already), and fit two
four-shot Sea Sabre clusters in place of the aft Outlaw launcher.
Of course, there may be 'low-threat environment' ships where the Outlaws
are enough (ripple-fire four of those, and you'll blow an Ocean
Commander to kindling), so you can vary the design from either my
standards or the book's, to keep the players guessing.

Personally, I also think that the _Aohana_ class is oddly armed - the
heavy ASW armament is fine for war-fighting, but against pirates? By
the same token, the surface-surface and surface-air capabilities are too
limited for true war-fighting capability. I know it's a corp-designed
and -utilised ship, but it's too lightly armed for full-scale combat
(e.g. Omega Orders), and it's too heavily armed for just plodding the
trade routes, swatting any silly slot with a rowboat and a gun who wants
to lift a TV set from a freighter. Add half again the VLS capacity
(making a total of 36 weapons), and fit it with a mix appropriate to
what the ship's owners perceive the ship's role and the regional threat
to be - lots of SAMs for heavy aircraft/dragon threat, loads of
anti-ship missiles for those island-hopping surface raiders, more ASROCs
for submarine raiders who forget their good sense - but no more than 12
ASROCs and/or 12 Sirocco/Sea Sabre missiles. This makes it a legitimate
warship without going too far overboard.

>As for other underarmed ships, the Vaneyev hunter-killer sub is
>unarmed.

Yep, noticed that too. I just figured that was another misprint and
gave it four tubes forward, none aft, and a total of fourteen
torpedoes. It's pretty to close to RL standards for a diesel-electric
sub.

>An idea for runners out there interested in salvaging...
>
>There's a north Korean boat, whose name eludes me. It is equipped
>with a light naval gun, two mg's, and... a MLRS missile
>artillery system! (BG-21). A rather inventive, and typical, third
>nation boat. The gun turret is a T34 tank turret, the missile
>system is a regular artillery system, etc. It's not designed for
>naval combat, but for shore bombardment, at my guess.

Don't know about that one, but I know that the NK Chaho-class patrol
boat mounts a twin-23mm cannon aft, twin 14.5mm machines guns forward,
and a single BM-21 MLRS. I think the one with the T-34 turret is called
the Tanpo class, or something like that.

>> So, would someone please direct me to the on-line
>> Cyberpirates errata sheet, or tell me where I can find the
discussions
>> in the list archives?
>
>I've been led to believe there isn't one and hasn't been any, and
>when it will be is when the third edition comes out so that they can
>add modifications necessary from the change in edition.

Can't come soon enough.

Danyel Woods - 9604801@********.ac.nz
Who has visions of four of his modified Aohanas slugging it out
with _Sovereign_ and coming off even, at best...

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Cyberpirates errata?
Date:	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 12:33:16 +0100

Message no. 4 Danyel N Woods said on 12:35/16 Jun 98,...

> I just borrowed a copy of Cyberpirates off someone, and after reading
> it, it occurred to me that either the Stuart-class corvette has a
> misprinted Hull attribute, or it's horrifically under-armed for a
> thousand-ton ship. Hell, there are 250t missile boats *today* that
> mount heavier loads than an autocannon and sixteen anti-tank(?)
> missiles.

The hull rating might be about right, after all the Japanese
Akihito-class nuclear aircraft carrier (125,000 tons) has a Hull of
9. The table on page 163 of Cyberpirates gives Hull ratings based
on displacement, and from that the Stuart masses between 1000
and 5000 tons.
I'd still like to see the ship design rules, though, to see about
designing a ship like that myself... I'm wondering if FASA could
be persuaded to post them on their web site...

The armament seems a bit light, although Outlaw missiles aren't
anti-tank, they're "multi-platform" missiles according to Rigger 2,
being launched from aircraft, ships, and ground vehicles -- sort of
like the American Harpoon or Standard missiles, I imagine
(although those are only fired from two types of vehicle, I know).

> So, would someone please direct me to the on-line
> Cyberpirates errata sheet, or tell me where I can find the discussions
> in the list archives?

I don't think we had a discussion about that, and on-line errata
sheets are hard to come by for SR books AFAIK (unless
somebody's made them and hasn't mentioned it anywhere I
could have read it).

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
An intelligent computer would be one that doesn't work most of the time.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U 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

From:	Alfredo B Alves <dghost@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Cyberpirates errata
Date:	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 16:42:41 -0500

Message no. 5 On Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:28:52 -0400 "Ojaste,James [NCR]"
<James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA> writes:
>Gurth wrote:
>>Okay, bringing this back round to SR: a MMS should be possible
>>for SR helicopters, but how would you implement it? I'm thinking
>>of letting the helicopter buy two sets of sensors, one in the main
>>body and one on top of the rotor. Then add a few design points to
>>allow one set to become the MMS, and perhaps multiply the
>>MMS's Load reduction by 125% or so to account for the
>>mechanics necessary to stop it turning with the rotor.
>>
>>Any other ideas?

>To keep the costs up (instead of just adding a few DPs):
>the sensor rating of the MMS system may not exceed (match?) that of the
>main body sensors.
>
>James Ojaste

Why? can't a copter just have the MMS? I don't see why not ...

D.Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, and RuPixel)
"Let he who is without SIN cast the first stone"

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

From:	"Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject:	Re: Cyberpirates errata
Date:	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:35:32 -0400

Message no. 6 Alfredo B. Alves wrote:
>>>Okay, bringing this back round to SR: a MMS should be possible
>>>for SR helicopters, but how would you implement it? I'm thinking
[snip]
>>>Any other ideas?
>
>>To keep the costs up (instead of just adding a few DPs):
>>the sensor rating of the MMS system may not exceed (match?) that of the
>>main body sensors.
>
>Why? can't a copter just have the MMS? I don't see why not ...

Well, it should be more expensive to have an MMS system than to have
a normal system, right? The dual-sensor thing is just a mechanic to
make the cost of an MMS more expensive than a normal system (about
twice as expensive). Plus, one of the systems could get shot out...

James Ojaste

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer