I played with the proposed change to an all tonnage based system and here is
what I came up with. These are NOT proposed by GZG. And personally I would
like to stay closer to the original system with some revisions, not a
re-write.
Brian Bell
-------------------------------
FT III
Control 10%
Structure 10% (partial streamlined, 8% none, 20% full) FTL 10% Engine 10% per
Thrust Point (x.50 Cruiser, x.25 Escort)
System Tons Range Damage
A Beam Casement 4* 36,24,12 1,2,3d6(beam)
A Beam Turret 8* 36,24,12 1,2,3d6(beam)
AA Beam (C) 5 54,36,18 2,3,4d6(beam) *Chance of Jam
B Beam (C) 2 24,12 1,2d6(beam) B Beam (T) 4* 24,12 1,2d6(beam) C Beam (T) 1 12
1d6 (beam)
Fighter *move +/- 12
Std 6 6 1d6/fighter(beam)
Hvy 7* 6 1d6/fighter(beam) *screened
Fast 7* 6 1d6/ftr(beam) *move +/- 18
Intercepter 6 6 1d6/ftr(beam) *bonus vs ftr
Attack 6 6 1d6/ftr(beam) *bonus vs ship
Long Range 7* 6 1d6/ftr(beam) *long endurance
Torpedo 8* 6 1d6 actual *one shot
Mine Layer Rear 3 0/3 2d6(beam)
Missile (F) *move +/- 18
Std 2 6 2d6 actual EMP 2 6 threshold check Needle 2 6 1 system on 6
Needle Beam (C) 2 6 1 system on 6
Nova Cannon Line 16 72,48,24 2,4,6d6 actual *area effect
Planetary Bomb 3 orbit special
Submunition (T) 1 18,12,6 1,2,3d6(beam) *one shot
Torpedo (F) 5 24,18,12,6 1d6 actual *hit 6,5,4,3
Wave Gun (L) 10 36,24,12 2,3,4d6 actual *area effect
In message <961212041224_103311.1205_IHH67-2@CompuServe.COM> Brian Bell
writes:
> I played with the proposed change to an all tonnage based system and
This is horrible. It seems to oblige ships to mass in multiples of 10, or get
shafted by arithmetic.
FTL should be 25%, in line with the rules on non-FTL ships, BTW.
It would be this sort of design system that I would like to head
off...
I know I already put my two cents in on this issue but after reading all the
posts on the subject I thought of another idea. Have Jon write an FMA space
ship combat system that is designed to be compatible with DSII and SGII. This
could be different than FT eg. planetary assaults in a solar system vs. fleet
actions in deep space. I know this will not make everyone happy but it does
give another product for GZG to sell and might make the players who wish to
integrate all three systems content as well as not requiring a rewrite on FT.
What does everyone think? Mike J. Murtha The Adventurers Club
> MJMurtha@aol.com wrote:
Actually, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If you can play without a
planet on the board, then its essentially "deep space" and you now have two
lines competing against each other in your stables. This is a Bad Idea(tm).
> I know I already put my two cents in on this issue but after reading
fleet
> actions in deep space. I know this will not make everyone happy but it
Why not? It 'preserves' FT for those who don't want to play the ground combat
stuff (or haven't the time, etc), and allows for ship-to-ship
interactions
for SG2/DS2.
Still wanna see another FT expansion, though. ;-)
Mk
> On Thu, 12 Dec 1996 MJMurtha@aol.com wrote:
> I know I already put my two cents in on this issue but after reading
Gah!
The Full Thrust combat system is simple, and for the most part it works well.
There are a few problems that need to be solved, but all in all it's a great
game! Why change it if it isn't broken?
In a message dated 96-12-12 17:05:25 EST, you write:
<<
> I know I already put my two cents in on this issue but after reading
Gah!
The Full Thrust combat system is simple, and for the most part it works well.
There are a few problems that need to be solved, but all in all it's a great
game! Why change it if it isn't broken?
> [quoted text omitted]
To make my point a little clearer I don't think FT is broken, sure it could
use a little tweaking and I would like to see an expansion/fleet
book/campaign book, ect. There do seem to be quite a few players who
would
like a clean link between FT/DSII/SGII using the FMA rules. It was more
to preserve FT as it is and make those players happy I posted my idea for the
new system. I hope that clarifies my position. Mike J. Murtha The Adventurers
Club
What will the main differences be in version 3?