Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	Archive through December 06, 2006	25		12/06 02:49pm
	Archive through October 31, 2007	25		10/31 11:41pm

* sigh * Can't please everybody.

If it had been on 2 sheets, somebody would complain that they couldn't reference it all at once.

But 2 is easy enough to do if people would like it that way.

Ummm...or maybe not so easy since I'd have to readjust everything. But, still doable.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, October 31, 2007 - 10:15 pm: Edit

Post both. That is leave the original posted but I would LOVE to have a two sheet version. Maybe divide the torps into East/West (Feds with west).

I'll print it on photo paper. I think at Fry's they have two sided photo paper that would be perfect.

I managed to print it out borderless on my snazy new printer but it is still very small for the middle-aged eyes to see easilly.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, October 31, 2007 - 10:48 pm: Edit

It's actually amazing how common; "2" is, in arming.
Standard Photons...Standard Disruptors...Standard Fusions...Standard Plasma G and up!

By Gary Bear (Gunner) on Wednesday, October 31, 2007 - 11:32 pm: Edit

OK. Both versions (single page and double-page larger type) are up.

By John Erwin Hacker (Godzillaking) on Wednesday, October 31, 2007 - 11:41 pm: Edit

Gary Bear:

I can't upload that chart that you put on this thread. Can you e-mail it to me (my address is in my profile). It says there is something wrong with the security of the document.

Thanks

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, November 01, 2007 - 01:48 am: Edit

JEH, just select to continue. I got that too but if you trust Gary then there's no problem. That is mainly a warning against stuff you don't know about. (It's IE7 beign extra protective.)

His site is safe.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, November 01, 2007 - 01:58 am: Edit

Gary, that is sweet and the added charts make it even more useful! Great work!

By John Erwin Hacker (Godzillaking) on Thursday, November 01, 2007 - 04:18 am: Edit

Loren:

Got it, thanks

By Michael Ma (Mma) on Thursday, November 01, 2007 - 01:01 pm: Edit

Wow that was a fast response...thanks folks.

Hmmm won't connect, no option for 'continue' I'll try it again from home tonight.

By Gary Bear (Gunner) on Thursday, November 01, 2007 - 01:14 pm: Edit

Yeah, there seems to be a problem. Usually that clears up but I'll prod somebody tonight if it doesn't.

I don't actually own the website (just have privilages to maintain web pages in one area for the VOID WAR campaign) and started posting reference resources there since the owner asked if I could post one of them, which worked out well.

The actual address is https://www.nan-elmoth.net/sfb/void/index.html where you will find all of the reference items under the "Resources" header.

By Donovan A Willett (Ravenhull) on Thursday, November 01, 2007 - 10:48 pm: Edit

Looking back at the E7D example SVC has given us. One, I prefer the 3rd of the three testing boxes for BPs within the crew units section. Why, because for commando ships, the 'B's could be replaced by 'H' or 'C' for the speciallist units. On the other hand, the half-boxes do have a disadvantage in that they may be harder to mark, especially if this is laminated or in a protector so that you are using some kind of felt tip marker.

Quick questions on the 'Known Ship Names', though. Are the names listed on the SSD 'official' for the E7Ds, or simply placekeepers showing what might go there. And do we want/need them? It is nice, but for some ships, that half of the page is going to be packed tight without them as it is, and for others, the list is going to have to be tructuated by the shear number of ships of that class.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, November 02, 2007 - 10:50 am: Edit

I seem to recall that including ship names was a joke, playing off of the sometimes ridiculous requests for certain "desperately needed information" to be included on the SSD.