Hello again, I'm back on the list after about a 2 year absence. I played a few
FT games in the last week and some things came up, along with others over the
last few weeks since I bought a game store back in November. I got some FT
books on the shelf now, plus some miniatures. So where's the UN specs to go
with the minis? What's the current adjustment to Sa'vasku ships' NPV or their
systems? Didn't someone do a naval adaptation for FT and where can I find it
(my web search turned up nothing)? What's the latest release schedule (if
there is one) for FT related products (oh okay, for the store, GZG products in
general)?
Glen P.S. Happy holidays to everyone that celebrates these things this time of
the year.:)
> On Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 11:35:30PM -0500, GBailey@aol.com wrote:
No official ones. You'll find different people's takes on them at:
Brian Bell - http://www.ftsr.org/, more specifically
http://www.ftsr.org/ft/ft25/registry.asp?sort=govt
Paul Radford - http://www.innotts.co.uk/~paulradford/ft/pp-ships.html
Doubtless others that I've missed.
> What's the current adjustment to Sa'vasku ships' NPV or
Check the list archive at the extremely useful
http://www.warpfish.com/jhan/ft/Archive - list consensus seems to be
that the stinger range bands should come down to 8", but there is little
agreement on other remedies (or whether they're needed).
> Didn't someone do a naval adaptation for FT and
"Wet Thrust", http://www.swob.dna.fi/mini/gzg/wet-thr.pdf - note that
this is for straight FT2, not the FB rules.
> What's
Nothing has been officially announced.
G'day,
> >What's the current adjustment to Sa'vasku ships' NPV or
Actually I'd say taking energy for pod launches from the repair (R) pool and
spicules from the defence (D) pool are required more than dropping stingers to
9" range bands (which is worth trying out too). Then again maybe that's an
example of the "little agreement" Roger mentioned;)
Checking out the discussions in the archives should fill you in though Glen
(and welcome back!)
Cheers
> On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 11:05:42AM +1100, Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
> Actually I'd say taking energy for pod launches from the repair (R)
pool and
> spicules from the defence (D) pool are required more than dropping
I think the main disagreement here was 8" vs 9" (8" may be
better-balanced, but everything else is in multiples of 3" so it's more
to remember).
> Then again maybe that's
> Roger West Wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 11:05:42AM +1100, Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
I hope not. SV are virtually crippled by 9" bands, at least in vector where
opponents arc limitations are greatly reduced. With those bands,
they can (in a nutshell) equal the firepower of like-costed opponents
ony by diverting all power to weapons (no maneuver, screens, etc). I'm also
starting to believe the restriction is unbalancing in cinematic as well,
though perhaps not quite so much. I used to think 9" bands were logical, but
after some playing I've come down pretty solidly on the other side. Pool
revisions are, conversely, sensible enough to be
no-brainers.