Fighter standoff attacks was Re: Fighters and Hangers

2 posts ยท Mar 5 2004 to Mar 5 2004

From: Jared Hilal <jlhilal@y...>

Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 11:11:17 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Fighter standoff attacks was Re: Fighters and Hangers

> --- Steve Pugh <steve@pugh.net> wrote:

I see how that can be inferred from the description of part 6 of the game turn
("Allocate Fighter and Missile Attacks") as described in FB1, however the
original description of fighter attacks quite clearly
implies a stand-off capability:

FT2, pg 16-17, 1st para. under "Fighter Attacks"
"Each Fighter is armed with a single weapon, similar to a
shorter-ranged "C" Battery in effect.  The RANGE of the Fighter
weaponry is 6"..."

From: Jared Hilal <jlhilal@y...>

Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 11:13:40 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Fighter standoff attacks was Re: Fighters and Hangers

> --- Steve Pugh <steve@pugh.net> wrote:

I see how that can be inferred from the description of part 6 of the game turn
("Allocate Fighter and Missile Attacks") as described in FB1, however the
original description of fighter attacks quite clearly
implies a stand-off capability:

FT2, pg 16-17, 1st para. under "Fighter Attacks"
"Each Fighter is armed with a single weapon, similar to a
shorter-ranged "C" Battery in effect.  The RANGE of the Fighter
weaponry is 6"..."

This was the way that I always understood it to work, and it meshes nicely
with how I imagine it to work, as well as meshing well with settings like B5
and SW that show long range firing.

J