| From: | zebulingod@*******.net (Zebulin) |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Lightning Ball vs Vehicle. Uber Spell or How Does It Work? |
| Date: | Mon, 1 Aug 2005 07:46:46 -0700 |
#
#A LAW isn't anti-vehicle. The rules do a pretty good job of
#making it all but useless against anything more than a light
#skinned vehicle. Hence - in exactly the same way as the real
#66mm LAW - it becomes much more useful for Bunker Busting than
#anything else...
#
Thank you, I was going to mention that, myself. LAWs *aren't* "anti-vehicle"
although their name sure suggests they are.
#
#When a car is struck by lightning the occupants won't actually
#notice, they'll see a bright flash and the radio will cut to
#static for a moment...
#But none of them will die. Airliners are struck on a regular
#basis - all you get is a tiny pockmark in the paint at the
#point of "impact" and another where the bolt leaves the hull
#on the opposite side of the aircraft.
#
I heartily disagree. Having worked for GM and dealing with a customer who's
Cadillac was struck by lightning, I talked directly to the people involved
and the car was *totalled* due to the massive electrical damage. Therefore,
I disagree that the car will be "fine" although I do not believe the people
inside will necessarily be hurt, depending on the modifications they've done
(a Rigger, directly interfaced with the vehicle is going to be in a world of
pain, for example).
Zebulin
AIM: zebulingod
ICQ: 21932827
WEB: http://www.zebulin.com/
MSN: zebulingod
YIM: zebulingod
SRGC: SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ !B UB IE+
RN+ STK++ W- dk+ ri++ m-(d++) gm++ M- P++
