trynda1701's STSTCS gaming groups' House Rules

[trynda1701]

Here I'll repost some of the house rules from the old forum that our gaming group used in our STSTCS games. Stay tuned!

[trynda1701]

ORION STEALTH TECHNOLOGY by trynda1701

I mentioned these house rules during the old forum discussions about trititanium having sensor blocking properties on the Orion ship in "Journey to Babel" that had been remastered into having the 'spinner' type warp drive.

When I created these rules, it was a combination of the SFB idea of the angular 'stealth' hulls the minis have (they look like modern stealth aircraft!) giving the ships an automatic ECM shift in the SFB rules. I think mention is also made of special hull coatings as well.

The rationale in FASA terms would be that Orion technology has a stealth bonus due to the combination of hull design, trititanium construction and compact technology (see the Construction Manual, light weights and superstructure costs of components compared against the other races equipment).

Rules are:

A -1 to hit or acheive sensor lock on pure Orion designs would be costed by designing the ship as normal, and then adding 10 percent to the final Defense factor of the Combat Efficiency figures, thereby raising the cost of an Orion vessel by 10 percent to reflect the harder to scan vessel.

A -2 to hit stealth bonus would be worked out by adding 20 percent to the Defense figure.

If you wish to use foreign power systems or shield technology, using heavier and bulkier equipment lowers the stealth capabilities. Orion ships using foreign equipment would only gain a -1 bonus, and would be costed at 20 percent added to the Defense Factor.

I hope that the 'spinner' designs that were posted on the old forum that were modified to use these rules get posted again.

Mark

[Meteo Ascension]

...Any phaser proximity or torpedo spread rules there, matey?

[trynda1701]

ORION PLASMA WEAPONS by D Young and trynda1701

One of our players in our group liked designing his Orions with RP-3 and RPL-3 missile weapons. Our design ratifier thought that excessive. The player and I thought about designing our own 'Orion' plasma weapon based on the graze table of the RPL-3. We then designed these two Orion plasmas weapons that assign damage in blocks of two points, NOT five points of damage. (I believe that one of the versions of the Construction Manual had all the Romulan plasma damage in this manner).

First of all the weapons stats...

OPL-1 by D.Young
110mt, 1.9SS, Power to arm 4, Damage Chart OL-1, Chart T (Range 18), WDF 7.1

Chart OL-1 Orion Plasma Damage

Note: Damage is in blocks of 2, NOT 5 points, after shield penetration

Range - Damage/Graze
1 - 14/7
2 - 14/7
3 - 14/7
4 - 14/7
5 - 12/6
6 - 12/6
7 - 12/6
8 - 12/6
9 - 10/5
10 - 10/5
11 - 10/5
12 - 8/4
13 - 8/4
14 - 6/3
15 - 6/3
16 - 4/2 ?
17 - 2/1 ?
18 - 1/0 ?

OPL-2 by trynda1701
150mt, 2.5SS, Power to arm 6, Damage Chart OL-2, Chart O (Range 14), WDF 9.7

Chart OL-2 Orion Plasma Damage

Note: Damage is in blocks of 2, NOT 5 points, after shield penetration

Range - Damage/Graze
1 - 28/14
2 - 26/13
3 - 24/12
4 - 22/11
5 - 20/10
6 - 18/9
7 - 16/8
8 - 14/7
9 - 12/6
10 - 10/5
11 - 8/4
12 - 6/3
13 - 4/2
14 - 2/1

These Orion plasma weapons can be potent piracy weapons. The reasons for this are two-fold. The smaller damage blocks means there are smaller hits to the superstructure on freighters per damage block. This is the main problem with the sequence of play when pirates attack freighters with beams then torpedoes, as you need the devisible beams to be high enough to knock down the shields, leaving the undevisible torpedoes to scream into the freighter! The only way to bring the beam weapons into play as devisable weapons would be to reverse the sequence of play of firing beams then missiles for pirate vessels, achieving a similar effect to hits after shield penetration, with freighters taking the torpedo hits on the shields first. But this always seemed unpopular with our players.

Secondly, if Orions use these plasma weapons using 2-point damage blocks, then when defending against escorts, the same small damage blocks means you only cripple the escort through the partial loss of more systems, and only be charged with piracy if caught, not attemped genocide when using any type of photon torpedo! The suggested stats give Orion vessels more chance of fulfilling their mission of piracy, rather than just slugging it out with the Federation "Baker of the month!"

Technobabble wise, you could describe the Orions as having tried to duplicate the plasma technology, but instead of causing an enveloping plasma implosion, per the standard Romulan weapon, which would concentrate damage (see, 5-point of damage per block), it exploded on impact, spreading the damage (ie, 2-point damage blocks!). They realised the advantage of this result, and exploited it. See, simple!

By the way, when we developed these weapons, back in the late 90's, one of our players had worked out what he thought were formulae that gave close enough results to the FASA weapons WDF figures. But they may not exactly fit anyone elses formulae that I know people have mentioned here in the past.

Mark

[trynda1701]

Jun 27, 2012 15:57:32 GMT -7 Meteo Ascension said:

...Any phaser proximity or torpedo spread rules there, matey?

Haven't any of my own, but I'm sure I've seen some somewhere. Let me put my thinking cap on where I may have seen them, meteo.

[trynda1701]

Meteo Ascension

There were photon torpedo spread rules in the site from T Olson had up on Geocities before it closed. I think it was markfasast here that archived them for us.

They're also archived here...

www.reocities.com/tolson55/FASA_Opt_Starship_cmbt_Rules2.htm

Enjoy.

Mark

[trynda1701]

TARGETING RULES by trynda1701

1) The point of targeting is to try and cripple a ship in the least destructive manner to allow capture for intelligence or commercial gain purposes. Attempted targeting of the power sources would bring the victim down fairly quickly (cannot power weapons, shields or maneuver).

2) Penalties to the normal to-Hit probabilities apply due to the precision fire being attempted over distance (it is hard enough to hit a moving target without being choosy over where you hit it!) These penalties are cumulative with any other suffered per other game rules.

3) Penalties are calculated as follows.

Beam weapons

A -2 penalty is applied for the first third of the range of the particular beam weapon type (round down). A second range bracket of the same size as the first rounded down bracket has a -4 penalty. Further than this range no targeting is possible (the to-Hit probability usually becoming too low to allow a third higher penalty). Examples are shown below.

Range 24 weapon, Range 1-8 = -2 penalty. Range 9-16 = -4 penalty
Range 20 weapon, Range 1-6 = -2 penalty. Range 7-12 = -4 penalty
Range 14 weapon, Range 1-4 = -2 penalty. Range 5-8 = -4 penalty
Range 8 weapon, Range 1-2 = -2 penalty. Range 3-4 = -4 penalty

4) Damage resolution is as follows:

If attacking ship fires on shield 1, use Shield 6 Damage Chart!
If attacking ship fires on shield 2, use Shield 5 Damage Chart!
If attacking ship fires on shield 3, use Shield 4 Damage Chart!

I hope this makes sense. As was said, damage is being attempted to the engineering aspects of the ship as the engines are a fairly large part of any vessel. We decided not to allow targeting on weapons and sensors, ala TNG. So although the shield arc being hit is as normal, using the alternative charts uses an existing chart (no additions are being made to the Damage Chart handouts) and it gives the bias towards engineering hits, even taking into account which side of the ship you are attacking!

Getting behind an enemy ship would have the same effect, but this is not always possible (and usually players just try and blow the other sucker up anyway!).

The new penalties are calculated as being slightly easier than the to-Hit penalties for firing at cloaked vessels, so it's based on an existing FASA rule.

Option: Missile weapons - photon torpedoes.

We originally only allowed beam weapons to be targeted. We modified that to allow photon torpedoes to be targeted at -2 over the first quarter of the missile range, and the -4 penalty up to half the range.

Designer notes

When I created these rules (in 1998!), I noted that this actually only works on Damage Chart C vessels. But I created them because most ships in the game are Chart C. It IS playing on a bit of a fudge this way, but the intent of the rule gives a nice bias towards the engines (which tend to be the big glowing things at the back of the enemy vessel!). Targeting for the reasons given above in paragraph 1) explains how captured vessels fall into enemy hands. Hopefully these targeting rules are in the spirit of the original FASA rules.

Players may want to experiment with, modify or drop the missile weapon optional rule. I think it should only apply to photon torpedoes, and not plasma weapons. After all, plasma weapons already spread damage anyway. We originally only had beam weapons targeting allowed, and decided later on the shorter range for targeting photon torpedoes, so as to stop missile cruisers with lots of torpedoes ruining the whole game. You can decide!

Mark

[thescreamingswede]

We occasionally use specific targeting for weapons fire, but only beam weapons may do so. I look at the beam weapons as the rapier, for pinpoint shots, but the torpedo is the club of Star Trek; bash'em in kind of weapons.

We use a radically different way to determine the success of pinpoint shots, however, and allow anything to be so targeted. It is range dependent in the sense that it is easier to hit a larger part of the ship than it is to hit a smaller one, and it accounts for your angle of fire by using the damage tables. It works with all the tables, even starbases!

theSwede

[Anthony Scott]

This is exactly what this part of the forum was intended for. I am very pleased to see new house rules being posted or old being recovered and reposted!

[Gorn]

To reference one of my own instruction sets:

Orion Pirates: if present, are in it for the money. They will hire themselves out to whatever ship offers the most bonus points in payment for their services. If a ship reneges, the Pirates will try to capture them for the slave/scrap market. Destruction of enemies is a regrettable, but preferable goal to being robbed blind by the very ships YOU hope to rob blind. They especially want to obtain the merchant ships’ cargo, 4 pts for each one boarded and raided – 2 phases!
__________________________
Any Dilithium taken by any ship can be used to replace any burned out crystals.

[Meteo Ascension]

...Thank you, I have, and will again, they're awesome. By the way, he took some Starship Creator Cross-Section parts, and used 'em, with an archaic 1990s' computer model, to create a cross-section, and occasional animated GIFs, of the Larson.

[trynda1701]

adam

Coming in from this thread to keep it clear...

ststcsolda.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=ststcsoldagame&thread=61&page=1#895


...this is a transcription of a proposed turn mode variant rule in the Version 3.0 "Admiral's Edition" of the STSTCS Rules that has a few SFB influences.

PROPOSED TURN MODE FOR STSTCS by leadhead_andy

Posted on Morena Yahoo Group, November 20, 2008 by leadhead_andy

Re: Star Trek: TCS 3.0
Hi All,
Here is an proposed optional rule for trun mode based on MPR.
Constructive Criticism is welcome.

C2.9 Turn Mode (Optional)
A unit's turn mode is the minimum number of hexes which the unit must
move in a straight line [straight ahead, with same facing, see
(C1.2)] before it can turn 60° (one hex side) right or left. After
each 60° turn, the unit must again move the stated number of hexes
straight ahead before it can turn again.

C2.91 Calculating Turn Mode: Turn Mode is the sum of MPR + (Speed/10-
MPR) discarding fractions. Speed, for the purposes of this
calculation is the speed at the time of the last turn.

Example: A ship with an MPR of 4/1 is traveling at a speed of 8. It
makes a starboard turn. It must continue on the new course for 4+
(8/10-4) or 4+(8/6) or 4+1.33. Discarding fractions this is a total
of 5, so the ship in our example must travel 5 hexes before turning
again. If a ship has an MPR of less than 1/1 (e.g. 1/2 or 1/3) treat
it as 0 for the purposes of calculating turn mode.


I've never had a chance to try these out, and I never heard back from the author about them either. Does anyone hear either know the author, or maybe IS the author?

By the way, in the v3.0 Rules, speed is constant once thrust is applied. So, for example, using the standard STSTCS MPR to set up speed, if you start from a standstill, and applied speed three in turn one, if you didn't apply any more speed in turn two, you would still be maintaining speed three. If you spent 2 in speed in turn three, you could accelerate to speed five, or decelerate to speed one.

In any case, what do people think about these rules?

Mark

[Gorn]

This makes no sense at all to me.
Can anyone explain the rationale behind it?
The first thing I would point out is

those hexes are BIG

[krebizfan]

The adjusted turn mode rule would make ships cover much larger circles at speed and small ships turn inside of larger ships. Any ship under STSCS can do a complete circle in 6 hexes. The revised rules would make an Excelsior need at least 30 hexes to make a circle; going up to a 48 hexes if the Excelsior was moving at speed 10. That is circumference of the circle (really hexagon) not diameter.

The new rule proposal seems a bit too restrictive but the FASA rules have always seemed a bit more manueverable than the ships on screen looked.

[Gorn]

maybe make it simpler - each class up requires one more hex to turn; making battleships taking 4 spaces then turn, disregarding move points...making it a 24 hex no matter what.

I think I might playtest this, in fact. I will assign battleships TWO hexes to turn, cruisers one, frigates none, and destroyers can turn 2 for one move if they wish.

Will make the game more wild especially for destroyers - but they will get manouverability.
I think in terms of cruisers, they will be almost identical in movement to frigates; most people change heading and then move and maybe change heading again so that their firing arc is maximized (I don't follow FASA firing arcs - port and starboard are waaaay too generous).

[adam]

Jul 10, 2012 7:00:24 GMT -7 Gorn said:

maybe make it simpler - each class up requires one more hex to turn; making battleships taking 4 spaces then turn, disregarding move points...making it a 24 hex no matter what.

I like this. Gonna test it, too, if I ever have a free second.

[trynda1701]

Jul 9, 2012 21:50:58 GMT -7 krebizfan said:

The new rule proposal seems a bit too restrictive but the FASA rules have always seemed a bit more manueverable than the ships on screen looked.

When I was talking to leadhead_andy over at Morena Yahoo about this, he proposed the posted rule after a few discussions about how you would tie the FASA MPR into the speed/turn thing. He said he would run a few statistics and get back to us, and the proposed option rule is what he posted.

I'll be curious to hear how people try their own variants of this proposal. Go to it, folks.

Mark

[thescreamingswede]

I think instituting a speed/turn limit is not necessary. Why overcomplicate the issue by adding more information to the game that wasn't there initially. One could simply use the stress charts and penalize players who make more than one turn per phase. At sublight, the damage could be based on the speed the ship is moving by substituting the Warp Speed column to represent the number of MP the ship spent in that particular phase. For example:

Let's take the Constitution Mk-III vs. the Klingon D-7M (from The Big Bad Wolf Scenario).

Both ships are travelling at sublight speed and both ships have 12 MP for this turn. The Connie Mk-III has G and L as stress charts, while the D-7 has J/M. Each is going to expend 4MP per phase (assuming that the players are using the 3 phases/turn format). This means that if the Connie trys to execute two turns in one phase, it is going to automatically take one point of damage to each the Superstructure and the Engines as per the rules on Emergency Heading Changes (pg. 26). The first turn is free, however the second turn may generate additional damage. In this example, the Constitution will not take any additional damage due to its better stress charts, however the D-7 will take an extra single point to each engine since its stress chart of L for the engines indicates that it will.

Now this idea could be expanded on by saying that the total number of MP in a whole turn is what is counted by the chart, so that Warp 10 actually means 10 MP spent in a turn, however there are vessels out there (a good many of them, actually) that can generate more than 10 MP in a whole turn, so how will it work if the chart only goes to ten?

This system could also be compounded while moving at warp, with additional damage being given for travelling at a certain warp speed as well as the number of MP spent.

It's less of a limitation on the number of turns and more of a penalty for trying to turn very sharply in less space while moving at a considerable rate. It does penalize smaller ships, though, that have excellent power to movement ratios and can generate high MP, but have substantially less Superstructure.

Just as an idea.

[Meteo Ascension]

Yeah, why overanderiunderestimcomplicate the issue? It's not wasn't that intersting to begin with.

...Also, I have more caretuned-random rules on speed, and wihle eating Nachos, I came up with the optional Torpedo Rules (a few).

[Gorn]

Whatever floats the Nerd Boat:

I've been playing around with firing arcs, ship designs and optional rules.

[trynda1701]

Jul 18, 2012 15:09:43 GMT -7 Gorn said:

Whatever floats the Nerd Boat:

I've been playing around with firing arcs, ship designs and optional rules.

Willing to open a new thread and share your optional rules, Gorn? Go for it, you know you want to!

Mark

[trynda1701]

Fighters in STSTCS by G. Short and D. Young

The following system can allow you to simply add fighters to your STSTCS games. Our group had the basis listed below as guide lines. We do not claim it to be perfect, and if you don't think fighters should be allowed in the game, that's up to you! lol

1) Fighter design - by G. Short

a) Fighters are limited to Class I tonnage, and are NOT warp capable. If you design something this small with warp drive, even in Class I, its a corvette like the Federation Scorpio class.

b) You can have more than one impulse drive, up to four max, I think it was. Yes, we know the Construction Manual text said you couldn't have more than one impulse engine, but that was because it interfered with the warp field. So, no warp drive, no problem!

Federation Impulse Engines available

Engine type	Total mass (mt)	Power each	Computer / WDF (Class I also allows)	Tonnage class	Superstructure
FIA-1	150	1	L-12 / 2 (L-13 / 5)	I	0.1
FIA-2	150	2	L-12 / 2	I-II	0.1
FIA-3	150	3	L-12 / 2	I-III	0.1
FMIA	10	1	L-12 / 2	I	0.1

Klingon Impulse Engines available

Engine type	Total mass (mt)	Power each	Computer / WDF (Class I also allows)	Tonnage class	Superstructure
KIA-1	213	1	ZD-1 / 2 (ZD-2 / 7)	I	0.1

Romulan Impulse Engines available

Engine type	Total mass (mt)	Power each	Computer / WDF (Class I also allows)	Tonnage class	Superstructure
RIA-1	188	1	R1M / 3	I	0.1
RIA-2	188	2	R1M / 3	I-II	0.1
RIA-3	188	3	R1M / 3	I-II	0.1

Orion Impulse Engines available

Engine type	Total mass (mt)	Power each	Computer / WDF (Class I also allows)	Tonnage class	Superstructure
OIA-1	23	1	Mark I / 2	I	0.1
OIA-2	23	2	Mark II / 8	I-II	0.1
OIA-3	23	3	Mark II / 8	I-II	0.1

Gorn Impulse Engines available

Engine type	Total mass (mt)	Power each	Computer / WDF (Class I also allows)	Tonnage class	Superstructure
GIA-1	238	1	1AG / 5	I	0.1
GIA-2	238	2	1AG / 5	I-II	0.1
GIB-1	363	1	1AG / 5	I-IV	0.1

Tholian Impulse Engines available * per my Tholian Construction Rules

(see here ststcsolda.proboards.com/thread/213/trynda1701s-tholian-construction-systems )

Engine type	Total mass (mt)	Power each	Computer / WDF (Class I also allows)	Tonnage class	Superstructure
RIA-1	188	1	R1M / 3	I	0.1
RIA-2	188	2	R1M / 3	I-II	0.1
RIA-3	188	3	R1M / 3	I-II	0.1

c) There are two types of fighters, a 'fighter' with beam only armament , and a 'bomber' with torpedo only armament. It gives a bit of flavor without going overboard. (EDIT: I suppose you could have a third 'fighter/bomber' type, if you can somehow squeeze a lightweight beam weapon AND a torpedo tube on-board. But it probably won't have too many impulse engines!)

d) No shield generator. At this small a vessel, it's really a waste of time. Use a value of one for the values for shields (DPC/SER) in the construction formula.

2) Carrier fighter capacity - by D. Young

a) When designing a dedicated carrier, decide what type of carrier you want, Maybe a freighter for merchants would have a max six fighters, a 'true' military carrier could have nine, twelve, eighteen, twenty-four, whatever. You decide your own subtypes per your game universe.

b) You need to calculate a 'cargo' capacity of how many fighters your carrier can carry per the excess tonnage your engines can carry over the vessel tonnage per the Warp Engine tables in the Construction Manual. When you work out the 'cargo' capacity needed, you have to add 50 percent to allow for the support facilities, eg, hanger deck facilities, fuel, weapon supplies (torps?), spare parts etc. This ends up with your engine MPR being altered up the Construction Charts, thereby giving you your Loaded and Unloaded MPR figures for your carrier. It's a bit hit or miss at first as you work out what engines work for your projected design, but if you are used to the Construction Manual, it's not too hard. Just try and design balanced ships with Empire specific flavor in design.

Thoughts on the above system

Yes, it's basic, and you can decide your own details as a basis for a more detailed system. Things such as launch and recovery rates, where in the turn sequence this should occur, ammo capacity of 'bombers' etc.

When we were still playing, we had a test of a Federation task force with a CE total of about 120 attacking a Gorn defense outpost based on a R-1 design, and a small defense task force supplemented with fighters and bombers. It was quite a interesting game, as the Federation firepower was tied up with the attacking fighters and bombers. It therefore gives a rationale for sub-warp craft - outpost/Starbase defense support. Carriers are designed to get this extra firepower to other systems if needed.

Yes its a bit of a fudge, but it gets fighters into the game easily if you want.

For more thoughts on fighters in the STSTCS game system and the FASA universe, I'm going to start a discussion over on this thread below...

ststcsolda.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=ststcsoldagame&thread=172

Mark

[trynda1701]

Bridge Crew Ratings for Campaigns by I. Wilson and G. Short

In The FASA rules you can roll up a Captain's Rating and a Crew Rating for each vessel. When we devised our campaign guideline rules, the authors added a First Officer and Second Officer rating score as well, to allow for Command Crew casualties.

Captain's rating = 3D10 + 45 (per FASA)
1st Officer rating = 3D10 + 40
2nd Officer rating = 3D10 + 35
Crew Rating = 3D10 + 25 (per FASA)

In the event of a normal bridge hit, an additional D10 roll was made to establish if any of the Command Crew were killed.

Roll of 10 - Captain dies
Roll of 9 - 1st Officer dies
Roll of 8 - 2nd Officer dies

(After two campaigns, we considered adding a Chief Engineer rating. We didn't finally add one, but a rating of 3D10 + 35 was the rating proposed.)

If the fleet flagship was engaged and the bridge hit, the one extra D10 is rolled and the following applied!

Roll of 10 - Supreme Forces Commander is killed
Roll of 9, 8, 7 - Flag Admiral 1, 2 or 3 is killed
Roll of 6, 5, 4 - Visiting dignitaries 1, 2 or 3 killed
Roll of 3 - Second Officer of flagship is killed
Roll of 2 - First Officer of flagship is killed
Roll of 1 - Captain of flagship is killed

Isn't life on a starship fun!

Design notes

I think the rules were devised to give a bit of flavor and possible role-playing potential to our campaigns. After all, what's the fun of commanding a starship if you're dead!

Mark

[trynda1701]

EMERGENCY WARP SPEED DURATION in STSTCS GAMES by trynda1701

The following guide lines were compiled to give a bit of tactical detail in our campaign games. It is in NO way based on any of the Technical Manuals or blueprints for Star Trek ships (Booklet of General Plans - Constitution Class, Ships of the Star Fleet etc) or any real figures that could be implied from the TV series. The Enterprise is lucky in having her on-board 'miracle worker' in the guise of Lieutenant Commander Montgomery Scott anyway!

Emergency Warp Speed duration limits

For campaign games, I went through the Construction Manual and found the following three possibilities in differences between the Maximum Safe Cruising Speeds and Emergency Warp Speeds of vessels. For each three permutations, there is a limit on how long you can run at that higher speed before taking engine damage. It also allows faster ships with a difference of 2 Factors or more to run at only one Warp Factor or more over their rated Maximum Safe Warp Speed.

1 Warp Factor (eg Warp 6/7) = 24 Hour limit
2 Warp Factors (eg Warp 6/8, Warp 7/9) = 12 Hour limit
3 Warp Factors (eg Warp 4/7, Warp 5/8, Warp 6/9) = 8 Hour limit

(The three Warp factor differences DOES exists, check out the low end of the Orion Warp Engine tables!)

If the ship travels less than the limiting time, no damage is taken, but if it does, it will start to take engine damage per the vessels rated Stress Charts. If it drops to Maximum Cruising Speed, it can't accelerate faster again for the same time it ran faster, or it will immediately take engine damage per the Stress Charts.

(If you want technobabble, ramble on about recalculating Emergency Intermix formulae, dilithium crystal recalibration for optimum engine balance etc, until someone tells you to put a sock in it! )

Design Notes

The simple rules above were to make it interesting in chase scenarios, which happened early on in our Gorn/Federation border skirmish campaign. It made the Captains think a bit more tactically (how fast should I push it?) and meant that with the smaller ships of that campaign, the Federation didn't have it all their own way by just running down the Gorn rebels, due to having no limit on the Emergency Warp Speeds.

I think I tried to work some figures based on the 'Endurance in Years (18) at Light Year Velocity' duration figure (at Warp 1?) mentioned in the original Constitution Blueprints by Franz Joseph, and the WF^3 formula to calculate the multiple of c you were traveling at (Warp 6 = 216c etc). But it wasn't giving me any workable figures, so the listed above limits were adopted.

Mark

[james43a]

like what I see & will need some time to understand them all
and that will be fun