[GZG] Multi-level rules sought. [TBC] [SEC=P] & FTverse colinies

2 posts ยท May 2 2008 to May 2 2008

From: Doug Evans <devans@n...>

Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 11:49:56 -0500

Subject: Re: [GZG] Multi-level rules sought. [TBC] [SEC=P] & FTverse colinies

Mainly, I argue on the basis of granularity; it's as easy to say that the
dimples, in which that external craft nest, increase the bulk of the hull
enough to call it the overhead in the rules. *shrug*

JGH wrote on 05/02/2008 10:51:04 AM:

> Plus the fact it makes external maintenance on said small craft a lot

****

Parts of the colony size discussion happens fairly regularly; the possible
population increase has been given some impressive analysis, and searching the
archives is left to the reader. It's too embarassing for me to look at
suggestions offered me that I failed to follow up sufficiently.

http://lists.firedrake.org/gzg/

How this translates actual economies and fleets tends to be a bit more
handwavium, and each player has free rein to push his own view.

Before you get too excited in comparing a homegrown fleet to the canon ones,
be sure you don't take the fleet books as being exhaustive as to numbers.
Several places, old classes, variants, and new builds are eluded to. I always
assumed the books were to be 'representative', and the full fleets could vary
significantly from the totals you get working from JUST the lists.

The_Beast

From: Doug Evans <devans@n...>

Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 12:43:37 -0500

Subject: Re: [GZG] Multi-level rules sought. [TBC] [SEC=P] & FTverse colinies

alluded

English-R-Us

The_Beast

Me wrote on 05/02/2008 11:49:56 AM:

*snippage**

> numbers. Several places, old classes, variants, and new builds are