FT: weapons vs hull, tech

I'm glad I got more FT talk going, I was getting tired of seeing mostly SG and
DS posts. I'd rather be a "spacer" than a "mudder".:)

What is the feeling about having a weak hull and more weapons vs a strong hull
and lower amount of weapons?
Those weak-hulled ships too fragile?  Weapons cannot
dish out enough damage to make up the difference? (don't tell me, its been
discussed before and is in the archives. What a chore. Can't they be arranged
by subject?  And anything pre-FB seems of little use.
Plus, I can't find some of the dates.)

I'm recalling the big DS9 battles and it seemed like many ships were gone in
moments when taking hits. My guess is that the ST ship design is lots of
firepower and dependence on shields for ship defense, or phasers are a bit
stronger than the FT beam weapons which would make the FT screens more
important (since almost every ST ship has shields, even little runabouts).

Speaking of tech differences, any such tech "levels" planned for FT3? Say,
something of lower tech before the current rules and something of the next
level?

> Glen Bailey wrote:

Howdy!

Yeah, I haven't had time to put up any of the June archives. They're saved,
but I still have to index them, and they're installed by hand.

You can 'search' the Archives by using an engine like AltaVista. Instructions
how to do so are up on the web site, thanks to Tom Anderson

and Tim Jones for pointing this out. I used to have a built in search, but
then our web policy changed to 'no CGIs on staff pages.'
(8-/

Do people have any other suggestions of how to restructure the archives?
Should I retire the older archives, move them offline?

Thanks,
J.

In a message dated 99-06-25 13:51:04 EDT, you write:

<< Do people have any other suggestions of how to restructure the archives?
Should I retire the older archives, move them offline?
> [quoted text omitted]

Zip 'em
-Stephen