From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 11:27:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Gate defence
> As much as I hate to risk tweaking John's nose, these are David There is a repeated over-abundant surplusage of excess redundancy.
From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 11:27:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Gate defence
> As much as I hate to risk tweaking John's nose, these are David There is a repeated over-abundant surplusage of excess redundancy.
From: david smith <bifsmith207@h...>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 09:27:57 +0000
Subject: Gate defence
Gate defence will always be decided by the rules that you are using for whatever game you are playing. In starfire, you need to have a functioning drive field (which precludes the use of mass bombardments or sending fighters/missiles through unaided, you need to use a ship to deliver the weapons). Whenever I played a wormhole type game, using FT as the rules, I had the very simple rule that a ship to use a wormhole/jumppoint had to have a functioning FTL drive and a thrust of at least 1. This meant that any defending fortification had a 10% mass bonus immidieatly. If you also put a limit on the velocity of anything comming through, you can use the FT mine rules as well. This makes any attacking force have to be larger mass and points wise that the defender, meaning while you are smashing away at his fixed fortifications, where are the extra points/mass that you had to bring that he did not have to use? (probably sneaking around and attacking your planets). BIF