(please people, change the subject line if you talk about something else)
> For the record, I thought the official answer was that you don't
I wasn't asking about rounding on movement, just ranges.
> As with the range bands, unless you see a contrary statement...
So what range band is a target in at 12"? 12 1/16"? 12 1/2"?
0-12 or 12-24? I've seen this on charts. Looks contrary to me.
Re: speed and velocity
I know there is a difference, but to a 11-year old, or anyone not
into math/physics, they are not going to care. (of course, these days
a
11-year old is going to say "no cards? game sucks" :( ).
But, whatever; guess I'm being picky about easing into the game and keeping
terminology at a minimum (and then I want to add systems, silly me.:))
Re: firing out rear arcs Frankly, I think that rule is stupid, but that's my
opinion. What sf show do people might see regularly? Star Trek. What do Star
Trek ships do? Shoot rearwards. But that's a "universe" specific thing. B5
never shot backwards (they spun instead, but you cannot do that in cinematic
movement). Didn't the Millenium Falcon ever shoot its turreted weapons
rearward? It looks like it could even with drives activated. Yeah, we house
rule it away.
So I shouldn't place a couple sheets of these rules next to a Fleet Book
sitting on the shelf in my store?
Don't misunderstand me, those Lite rules are great and keeping it down to one
page is fantastic. I agree, if there's only one thing to add it would be pulse
torps to show another weapon system.
Glen
(please people, change the subject line if you talk about something else)
Mea culpa.
> So what range band is a target in at 12"? 12 1/16"? 12 1/2"?
Remember that I'm the one that admitted confusion concerning how to split
the move. However, I understand those who've said '12+ is more than 12,
and
therefore 12-24', end of discussion. Exactly 12 mu's, and we pretty much
agree that all measurements should be in mu's, I think, if you wish to
maintain mechanics, is the only point of confusion.
I think my local group always said it as 'from 12 mu's on', but can't recall
any thing that hit right on the boundaries of range bands.
Worth keeping in mind for further descriptions, though.
The_Beast
> Glen wrote:
> I wasn't asking about rounding on movement, just ranges.
You don't round ranges, either.
> So what range band is a target in at 12"?
The first range band. The range bands are 12" long. Some people say,
'12" - 24"' for the second range band, but this is just sloppy. It's
actually '>12" - 24"', which is what I tend to write.
> 12 1/16"? 12 1/2"?
Second range band.
> Frankly, I think that rule is stupid, but that's my opinion. What
It's actually a tactics thing. Without the "no firing in rear arc" rule,
there's a lot less tactical maneuvering in FT. I like the rear arc rule
because it gives players a reason to get into another ship's rear arc, and
thus a bit more tactical complexity. There is so little tactical complexity in
a standard FT meeting engagement to begin with that any little bit helps.
That having been said, I have stripped it out of games that I didn't want to
use it with. For instance, I did ships based, very roughly, on
the Russo-Japanese War. I allowed rear-arc firing, but I designed the
ships myself, making them long and skinny with better broadside firing than
fore or aft firing. There was tactical complexity built into the ship designs.
Of course, some players do away with this rule _and_ have simultaneous
fire in FT. *shrug*
> So I shouldn't place a couple sheets of these rules next to a
Ask Jon. He probably wouldn't mind.
--
Allan Goodall agoodall@att.net
http://www.hyperbear.com agoodall@hyperbear.com
> (please people, change the subject line if you talk about something
> I wasn't asking about rounding on movement, just
It is just a (convenience) typo, should read:
0 to 12, 12+ to 24, ect.
(0-12, 12-24, ect; Is a short form designed to
save space on a quick sheet, it does cause some confusion if not interperated
properly.)
Bye for now,