> Mark A. Siefert. wrote:
"this-is-the-way-I-build-ships-'cause-they-win-and-if-you-don't-too-you'
re-s
> > tupid" attitude and his patronizing (and wrong) analysis of naval
In those games, the people with the all BB fleet soon find out that without
screening ships, I'm killing their superships with fighters and PT's that can
be replaced in a fraction of the time, as well as raiding their convoy's. And
that leads to another pet Peeve of mine. I can only thing of a few "to the
last man" engagements, yet in Full Thrust, I've run into players who think
nothing of fighting to the end, even expending damaged battleships to hurt you
a little more... IMHO, strategic considerations make that harder to do.
Unfortunately, most strategic systems also have a nasty tendancy to bog down
in bookkeeping.
> Jeff Lyon wrote:
"this-is-the-way-I-build-ships-'cause-they-win-and-if-you-don't-too-you'
re-s
> tupid" attitude and his patronizing (and wrong) analysis of naval
Try telling that to the people I'm forced to game with. This is the same bunch
that produced a 80 MASS Kra'Vak ship entirely armed (all 40 MASS) with
scatterpacks. They would share the opinion of the Mars
article's author. To them, people like us are stoggey historical
gamers that want to play a (these are their words) "a WWII navel game in
space." A concept that they find "too british." Obviously, all good
Americans are supposed to play Full Thrust with the ultra-uber
Dreadnaughts of DOOM! that compose my playgroup's fleets. I've seen a few
other people play FT at my game store... but they're ship designs are no
better. Now you might ask, "But Mark, why not just find another group to game
with." I've tried that. The only other local person who shares our vision of
FT is Stuart Ford. Although its great to game with him, I want to get a large
number of people together who aren't a bunch of munchkins. I've tried running
FT demos at other game stores; no one comes to them. I've tried posting my
intentions for a new FT group on
rec.games.miniatures.misc; no one replies. My ex-girlfriend used to
play FT; that is, before she became my EX-girlfriend. It looks like its
just me and Stuart, who are only reasonable FT gamers in cheeseland
> And that leads to another pet Peeve of mine. I can only thing
We use the "Strike the Colours" rule from More Thrust with the Fleet Book, but
instead of rolling like a normal Threshold roll, we roll it like a Core System
so you don't lose the ship after the first threshold roll (which can be
eternally annoying), but you can lose it after the second and third ones. That
way, we eliminate the old "To the Last Man" problem (to a degree). I've had
little Corvettes and Frigates fight until the bitter end while BB's and BDNs
have surrendered after taking their first Core Thresholds (actually, that
seems to be the only way it goes in my fleets). Makes things much more
interesting.
> At 11:24 PM 8/12/98 -0600, Mark A. Siefert wrote:
"this-is-the-way-I-build-ships-'cause-they-win-and-if-you-don't-too-you'
re-s
> tupid" attitude and his patronizing (and wrong) analysis of naval
<snip horror stories of The Munchkins of Doom (tm)>
Ack!
My condolences. I'm lucky in that I hang out with a more mature group of
"stodgy" historical gamers, most of whom are open minded enough to also
play sci-fi and fantasy games when they are being hosted. Even those
who tended to design uberships admit that the only reason they did it was
because under the FT2 design system there were no reasons not to. Most of them
seem to welcome the FB's changes as an improvement.
I've not had the misfortune of running into the "too British" argument, but
then these guys also play DBx, so they aren't prejudiced that way.
> You wrote:
> space." A concept that they find "too british." Obviously, all good
Ultra-Uberdreadnaughts of DOOM! are easily dealt with under the old
rules with swarmships firing MT Missles. Now I guess the nearest equivelant
would be swarmships firing SMRs? Dunno how effective that would be.
> You wrote:
> degree). I've had little Corvettes and Frigates fight until the
I'd modify it so that you couldn't strike colors until the end of the
turn. Most escorts that I shoot at don't end the turn damaged--massive
volleys come in one after another until they go *POOF* (Cruisers go *BANG*,
Captials go *BOOM*). I've taken down destroyers with heavy
frigates in one volley--17 points of damage with 2x2, 2x1, lots of 6s.
Which leads to another question: What is origin of expression "Rolling like a
crack whore" which is apparently equivelant to "Having the Devil's Own Luck"
Just heard it Tuesday, never before. But Capitals take a while to take down.
So they'd have time to surrender. I'd also permit ships which can break off to
do so in lieu of striking colors.
> John Atkinson wrote:
> I'd modify it so that you couldn't strike colors until the end of the
The convention used locally is that if you've taken damage, and are down to
your last hull box, you MUST strike or flee. If down to your last row you MAY
strike.
> John Atkinson wrote:
> Ultra-Uberdreadnaughts of DOOM! are easily dealt with under the old
The nearest FTFB equivalent to the MT missiles are the MT missiles themselves.
Check the Mass ratings for Optional systems in the list on
p.11...
Regards,
> You wrote:
Ah, but with PDSs now knocking out an average of 2/3 a missle apiece
(before rerolls), they are somewhat less fearsome.
> Mark A. Siefert. wrote:
...Snip
> Try telling that to the people I'm forced to game with. This
...Snip...JTL
> just me and Stuart, who are only reasonable FT gamers in cheeseland
Mark, I would like to help out with the problem, but commuting is hell.
Bye for now
On Thu, 13 Aug 1998 09:24:40 -0500 (CDT), jatkins6@ix.netcom.com (John
> Atkinson) wrote:
> Ultra-Uberdreadnaughts of DOOM! are easily dealt with under the old
That's what I've found. One little discussed advantage of a fleet of tiny
ships is you get a lot of wasted damage. As an example, a small escort might
only take 8 points of damage. Two pulse torps, on average, won't take it out.
Three, on average, will result in over damage. Against a big target, though,
all the torps' damage, except for maybe the one that puts it out of its
misery, count.
I haven't done the math, but it wouldn't surprise me if a fleet of small ships
gets maybe 10% to 20% additional hull points simply from the "over damage
effect". Add to this FT2's threshold rules that mean escorts only have to
worry about one threshold check, and you've got a big advantage.
Of course, you need a stink of a lot of models for large fleet
battles... :-)
> On Thu, 13 Aug 1998, Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> The nearest FTFB equivalent to the MT missiles are the MT missiles
Though their effectiveness is greatly reduced by the new, improved
point defense systems (which I really like -- now it's actually
worthwhile
to mount point defense) and fighters-can-shoot-down-missiles rule.