[GZG] Vector vs. Cinematic

> Let me post a minor amendment to what Mr. McCarthy wrote:

The consensus is, continues to be, and shows no sign of changing from the
decision to maintain cinematic movement (hack spit hiss!) as the primary
movement system for FT. Vector will remain an optional movement system I
expect. To say no one would advocate vector as the primary system might be a
bit of a stretch. Let us just say, we are fewer in number.;)

Another note OO didn't post regarding playtests:

One thing that makes us like to see die rolls is this:

Plenty of times even in playtests on the test list, people have said "well, I
got my clock cleaned, this is pretty powerful" and the real truth is their
side had statistically poor dice and the other side had statistically good
dice. Had both sides rolled in a more average fashion, the results might have
been much more even. This also goes to explaining why it is good to play a
scenario, change players, and play it back. It gives two sets of results and
multiple executions tends to ameliorate or eliminate conclusions drawn from
one (potentially skewed) set of die rolls. More rolls = more regression to
mean behaviours. (Note however analysis of best and worst case situations is
also worthwhile...)

One other thing I like to see in games involving placed markers is this:

Do you allow or not allow measuring before placing (or as part of placing)
template weapons? Do you force people to declare placement location and then
measure? Do you allow measuring before firing? I have noticed that in games
where placed ordinance is used and declaration precedes measurement, sometimes
shots are invalidated (and either removed or moved to max range) as a
consequence of poor estimation. If you can
pre-measure, this
eliminates this aspect. It has a small impact except for the fact that one
good SML or SM salvo can really change the outcome of a battle....

Tom B