More Thoughts on Real Thrust

I'm glad to see GZG's rules do allow side-slip and braking maneuvers and
are very reasonable without slowing the game down. As to Daryl Poe's comments
on fighters, I did some number crunching: Given from FTII that for a fighter
squadron in a ship costing 20 FTP and 6 Mass. I assume that 6 FTP are expended
for the hangar bay itself, leaving 14 FTP for 6 fighters. Assume that 1 point
is devoted to engines, 1 point
devoted to the basic weapon system and 2/3 points for hull, systems etc.
I'm also assuming that a fighter has a mass of.5 In the currently published
rules a ship with mass 18 costs 1 * Mass per 4 thrust. This would mean that
fighters would have a thrust rating of 8. With the momentum rules and free
turning ability, this is not bad. However, the endurance rules would still
make it difficult to operate fighters. With the current discussion regarding a
new Thrust Efficiency rating based on Mass, I might be pursuaded that a
fighter of Mass.5 would be on the table at 1 * Mass per 8 thrust leaving a
fighter squadron with a thrust rating of 16. Now fighters make a lot more
sense... But if we operate fighters with momentum rules, it had better apply
to mines, missiles etc. We would also have to start looking in old source
books for other items that become effective with momentum such as sand casters
from traveller (David Brin's water ballon) and varients of these such as
sidearms (dumb rockets with a fixed thrust rating that have sand as a
warhead). This also means that it may have to be a phased system of
movement... Therefore all movement is plotted and all objects move at the same
time. This works for my B5 Game but is mostly for fighter to fighter combat...
Again this all requires some realism vs. playability playtesting. Phil P.