textfilter: chose text/plain from a multipart/alternative
Jon, just in case you're not following the Yahoo group discussion, I'm the
Doug.
Yahoo 'Full Thrust' Group Re: Fighter vs Fighter
I would say that is one 'free round' not a free round per disengaging group.
Does that mean you can shoot regularly in dogfight AND at disengaging groups?
Actually, I'd say no. In every discussion I've seen that included Jon, I got
the impression it was 'free round' just because you got to shoot, but not fear
a response shot.
Until Jon sez different, I suppose you'll play as you read it, and I as I've
understood it.
Doug
--- In
FullThrust@yahoogroups.com<http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/FullThrus
t/post?postID=vf_uFJMP_pmAEAGDep-psDiHCHUK-MpTmX1cqiuycted54jUErXCCrjMSR
F3LM0mlcVhMHMkyqZ7oJz07w64ynaqI0s>, "johnlunderwoodjr" <johnlunderwoodjr@...>
wrote:
> Thanks Adam, what throws me that in the disengagement section it says
<johnlunderwoodjr@> wrote:
> > > Question: There is a furball of 3 fighter groups, 2 for side A and
Well, here's the flaw in this reasoning: if you're not allowed to shoot back
if you've already taken a free shot in a turn at a disengaging enemy, this
effectively means that taking that free shot means you're giving up another
free shot to whoever else may be lurking. If that's the case, I'm going to get
seriously tempted to leave some interceptors lurking around the battle just to
put it into my opponent's head that maybe that free shot isn't such a good
idea.
E
[quoted original message omitted]
Okay, I'm lost.
I'm not sure what 'lurking' means here. Sounds like the interceptors are
already in the battle, and will be taking shots anyway. My point was, in a
furball, I expect only one attack, however that translates into weapons
expended.
And, an extra attack against each fleeing squadron bothers me even more; I'd
rather be able to take multiple shots at the juicy, say
torpedo-laden, birds, which seems even more reasonably doable than
swinging attacks against several retreating targets.
But, again, I'm lost, don't play with fighters oft, and need to
re-re-read the associated sections.
Thanks for the reply, Eric!
I've been talking myself into trying BSG battles, and obviously will have to
figure out fighters there.
Doug
[quoted original message omitted]
Hello chaps - OK, I've been watching this discussion for a while
without contributing, because it is interesting to see the different views and
options offered; within your own playing groups you can of course do it
whichever way feels best to you, but for those of you who are interested, this
is the way I'd define it within the spirit of the way I wrote the rule
originally:
The use of the term "free shot" is, in hindsight, a little misleading
- what I was attempting to convey was not an ADDITIONAL attack, but a
volley of shots without risk of return fire - if one player moves
into dogfight contact with an enemy group (or if resolving an ongoing dogfight
from a previous turn), and that enemy decides not to hang around and engage in
the dogfight then the attacking group gets to
fire at them anyway as they disengage - with the disengaging group
NOT being able to shoot back (they are pointing the wrong way and pouring on
the thrust!). Now, if you have multiple groups engaged on both sides of a
furball, then I would say that in order for the "free shot" rule to apply, ALL
groups on one side must choose to disengage; if they do so, then the
other side gets to fire at them as they flee - but if they leave even
one group engaged in the furball, then the opposing fighters may NOT
take their "free" shot at the withdrawing groups - they are still
engaged in skirmishing with the remaining enemy. This would mean that there is
a perfectly allowable tactic of leaving one "sacrificial rearguard" group in
contact to tie up the enemy, while
the rest of your fighters slip away without being fired on - just the
sort of heroic act that you might get in the movies! ;-)
Best,
Jon (GZG)
> Okay, I'm lost.
FullThrust@yahoogroups.com<http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/Full
> >
Thrust/post?postID=vf_uFJMP_pmAEAGDep-psDiHCHUK-MpTmX1cqiuycted54jU
> > ErXCCrjMSRF3LM0mlcVhMHMkyqZ7oJz07w64ynaqI0s>, "johnlunderwoodjr"
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 14:36:09 +0100, Ground Zero Games <jon@gzg.com>
wrote:
> The use of the term "free shot" is, in hindsight, a little misleading
And if you're in a Starfury, pointing the right way and pouring on the thrust?
My impression was while 'pointing the right way', they couldn't pour on the
thrust.
While their pursuers WERE. The whole time. Including while the persuees were
stopping thrust to take snap shots.
Better example would be large fighters with 360 turrets. You want rules THAT
fiddly, go ahead.
Thanks, Jon! I'll cogitate a bit to see if I have any counters of my own to be
shot down, then post it to the Yahoo! group.
Doug
[quoted original message omitted]
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 14:36:09 +0100, Ground Zero Games <jon@gzg.com>
There always has to be one...... ;-)
> My impression was while 'pointing the right way', they couldn't pour
I think you're right, Doug - yes, the Starfuries maneuvered
"properly" with attitude control jets, and could indeed "fly
backwards" to shoot at pursuers - but their main drives were
definitely rearward-facing only - spinning to fire lost you valuable
acceleration time if you were trying to escape......
Jon (GZG)
> While their pursuers WERE. The whole time. Including while the