From:	Steadfast laughingman@*******.de
Subject:	A couple questions
Date:	Thu, 25 Feb 1999 03:35:20 +0100

And so it came to happen that Scott Wheelock wrote in reply to
Ereskanti@***.com:
>
> "And now, a Channel 6 editorial reply to ."
> ]Actually, the rules for ramming are nice ones in this instance, IF, the
> ]operator of the ramming vehicle isn't likely to get hurt either. BUT, I
> don't
> ]think the rules for such are perfect, in that it doesn't really take a lot of
> ]consideration into effect towards the comparison of one vehicle's body with
> ]regards to another vehicle's body.
>
> That's the sweet thing about fiction. I can ignore the Body
> irregularities and just have the poor little drone get mushed.
> 'Course, I'm sure the rigger operating the drone would have to
> be occupied in some way to allow that to happen...
>
> Scott

Actually K was reffering to an example posted sometime on the old list last
year. In that example it was perfectly explained why a Bike with decent
speed could drive clean through a solid wall, while a tank would simply
shell out while he was trying to overrun a streetlantern. The SR gamessystem
for ramming is simply a mathematic procedure for calculating different
speeds and not the different sizes, stabilities and measures of the objects
that collide.
Shortly after that message was posted, some of the old listees tried to
build small mini-drones that there cheap and could simply fly through the
Banshee without taking harm. Well, that is as much as I recall.
;o)
--
__________________________________________
---> Steadfast
Selfproclaimed protector of Gerber
BABY's
Mmwahahahahaar...
"I have 'grosse bumm' in my Pocket!
Yes, a real 'GROSSE BUUMM'!"
German translation for Savalette Guardian.
__________________________________________