_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOkay, I will admit
that I've stayed out of this because my group is still
happy with the current fighter & missile rules. But I noticed when
rereading the Beta test rules.
Evading for Fighters. I think this is something fighter shoud be able to do
without burning combat endurance, reasoning for my thoughts. Fighter,
can move up 36 for Normal or 48 for Fast fighters a turn. I would assume that
these fighter should be able to "Duck and Weave" easy especial when Fighters
don't build velocities from turn to turn. Now while I have no issis
with a B4 able to hit a fighter at out to 48mu, I do have a problem with that
same B4, able to hit more then 1 1 mass craft. If U can spread fire over a
mass 1 or
mass 1.5 (Large Fighters [non-FB2.5 rules]) then why can't I spread fire
[aka=overkill power] over other targets after the 1st ship is destroyed.
Now I have
no issue with the PDS, killing multi small craft or fighters as that how they
are designed to work, but Beams should be limited to 1 target ship/small
craft/ or fighters. Also, I would like to see the fighter Morale Rules
included, and for those whose Fighters are "Computer Drones" [aka not effected
by
morale] a simple fix, make them easier to hit by 1. After all these
fighters are not concerned about their survival.
On the current Salvo Missile debate, I don't look at them as a Guided Missile,
but as a WWII Torpedo where U fire it and hope U get fire solution correct. If
U want a Guided Missile, use the Heavy Missile.
Well that my $0.02...
> Evading for Fighters. I think this is something fighter should be
But they why wouldn't a ship evade at max every turn? The PSB is that the
types of erratic movement needed to evade is similar to the extreme thrust
needed to attack or dogfight, so it burns one or more CEF and now it forces
the player to choose, evade and burn CEF but make sure the fighters get to
their target but with less CEF left for attacking, or take your chances on
loosing fighters but if they do make it to their target, they have lots of CEF
left for multiple attacks.
Choices and decision points are something FT lacks compared to other games and
this set of choices add some nice tactics to the games I have used it in.
> Now while I have no issis with a B4 able to hit a fighter at out to
I see beam weapons as firing many, many shots during a turn (15 minutes or so)
or at least sweeping an area so hitting multiple fighters fits how I see it,
fighters in a group staying close enough together to get hit. Small ships on
the other hand don't stay that close to each other (due to drive interference
etc) so they don't have a chance to get hit by the same
'shot'.
A pulse torpedo on the other hand is a single concentrated blast, so it hits
and massively kills a single fighter, if it hits.
> On the current Salvo Missile debate, I don't look at them as a Guided
One of the complaints I had heard of the original Full Thrust was the lack of
weapons that make a player maneuver. The Heavy Missile and later the Salvo
Missile did show up (with more later) so players have to consider them in
their movement, weather they are fired that turn or not. I would not like to
see them changed to a direct fire mechanic and loose their ability to effect
players movement choices.
Dean said:
> One of the complaints I had heard of the original Full Thrust was the
But he doesn't know that he needs to maneuver until after he's written his
orders. If you want to force him to maneuver, perhhaps just before writing
orders we should announce "launching ordnance"...
And then maybe not place the missile markers until ships have made the first
half of their move.
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lIf a player is not
smart enough to proactively maneuver when facing Salvo Missiles it makes for a
short game.
As far as I am concerned the only problem with SMs is they may take up a bit
too much space and cost a bit much.
They are fine in one-on-one duals but are a bit week in Fleet actions.
Roger (FSE and Salvo Missile player with a fairly high accuracy.)
> On 6/29/06, laserlight@verizon.net <laserlight@verizon.net> wrote: