[ft] Interceptors vs ships

What do you think about letting interceptors attack ships as PDS? (6 does 1 pt
no reroll).

Neath Southern Skies -http://home.pacific.net.au/~southernskies/
[Pirates] Dame Captain Washalot
[NPJB] Absorbent Sponge Sheesh'Ka'Baab
[MKW2] Admiral Peter Rollins - Task Force Zulu-Beta

[quoted original message omitted]

> What do you think about letting interceptors attack ships as PDS? (6

Though this does make sense, I'd have to say that I prefer the
interceptors' purely anti-fighter role (and corresponding simplicity).

> At 01:00 AM 8/9/00, you wrote:

I tried that as part of a variant scheme for fighters with my local group. We
were using the old "Imperium" boardgame by GDW as a strategic

level campaign setting.

Since fighters are secondary to capital ships in the Imperium setting, I

felt we needed to tone down and balance fighters a bit.

Basically, I used the modular fighter ideas that've been tossed around and
made the antiship attacks match either the PDS, beam, submunition pack or
pulse torp mechanics depending on the number of points spent.

Dogfighting abilities used an EFSB-style attack table and where less
extreme at both ends; interceptors wern't quite as deadly and bombers weren't
quite as helpless. Dogfighting ability was independent of the antiship
capabilities and depended on the number of points spent.

I was going to try and streamline the system by coming up with a core of

the most cost-effective designs and write them up to be more easily used

and understood, but kinda ran out of steam because all in all, the ideas

did add somewhat to the overall complexity of the game and got mixed reviews.