Multi-Grade FTL (Was Re: Launching non fighters (FTL drive))

2 posts ยท Aug 6 1998 to Aug 6 1998

From: Jared E Noble <JNOBLE2@m...>

Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1998 09:59:04 -0900

Subject: Multi-Grade FTL (Was Re: Launching non fighters (FTL drive))

> On Wed, 5 Aug 1998, laserlight wrote:

I personally like the idea of defining Civilian,Military, and Superior* FTL
at different Mass percentages - while this may not make a decided
advantage
in a one-off game, I am more favor the one-off games that seem to
accurately encompass the 'feel' of a campaign, if nothing else. With these
systems (say, 5%, 10%, 20%)* things still stay pretty much abstracted, but can
be easily fit into many backgrounds. The Milennium Falcon definately has
Superior FTL, and TOS series Trek ships, while definately FTL capable,
are not as fast as TNG-era, and the Borg are faster still (in the same
era). And why shouldn't military ships be able to outperform bulk freighters
in FTL?

* I have included Civilian,Military, and Enhanced instead of Standard,
Enhanced, and Superior. pick your poison. ** Military is set at 10% so all the
current designs would not be
invalidated - it would suck if the ministry of defense suddenly realized
that after the massive cost layout their entire fleet was outfitted with
civilian drives.

Now if you stick with the GZG description for Jump drives, we are told "The
fastest cycle possible is around one jump per six hours, but this
requires _Military Drives_ and power plants along with thte most
sophisticated jump navigation software..." So there exists an idea of graded
drives in the descriptions. Also, since there is a limited, but apparently
variable range to jumps, and increasing inaccuracy with range, It may be
reasonable to assume that more advanced drives also reflect the special
navigation software.

So strategically: (enhance those campaign games) More advanced drives allow
faster travel time, attributed to faster
turn-around and longer jumps.

Tactically: True, there is not a lot of use for FTL in tactical game, but
here's some ideas:

1) Leaving under FTL - FT p23 last 2 paragraphs say that on turn of
announcement ship may not thrust or use any weapons, but still moves full
distance, next turn is half-movement and then leaves the board.
Civilian
FTL could be full-movement for both turns (or even longer), while
Superior FTL could be single turn of full movement with no second turn at all.

2) Dangerous translations (the suicide jumps) - FT p.24 says that
Anything within 6" of translating ship force a die roll for problems. First of
all, anyone that tries to deliberately use this tactic to damage enemy ships
as anything but a dying ship's last gasp should be slapped. But beyond that,
Civilian drives could have a larger 10" radius, Superior drives a 4" radius
(tighter, more controlled jump field, useful for squadron operations)

3) Entering the board under FTL - FT p24 - Civilian ship deviate from
intended position be 1d6x2, Superior by 1d3.

4) Towing Capacity - FB defines a Tug to the have 10% FTL for itself
(presumably a military grade tug?), and 20% of it's "Towing" capacity. So
maybe allow Superior FTL to be down-graded to Military level, and Tow up
to 50% of it's own mass. You may not want to do this all the time, but the
flexibility would be nice. OF course you could extend this idea to a
"Civilian grade Tug", at 5%/10% - which means that your standard
military ships could tow 50% of their mass at civilian speeds. I don't think
we need
worry too much about standard civilian tugs in a campaign game - I know
I don't want to track all my civilian traffic, but it does explain how the
battered survivors of Task Force 27 could limp home with their crippled
cruiser in Tow...

> Or points cost increased.

I'm not sure this is a solution, unless you increase it a lot, which may make
sense, but seems out of whack. In the FB, you pay 1 pt for each Mass, then all
Drive and Hull (Integrity and Armor) installations are 2 pts per mass, FireCon
and ADFC are 4 per mass, and almost everything else is 3 per mass. at only
10%, you really need to jack the FTL up quite a bit to really make a bite. It
also doesn't seem to encompass the flexibility of
Multi-Grade FTL (but the again I could be biased...)

> I personally don't like this idea, as the FTL really has little

Of course, I think "Most FT games" need to take in a broader world view
-
What is going on and why - With very little effort, it becomes easy to
encompass many other ideas:

"OK, Tom has pretty much decimated John's defending force, and your task force
follows the fleeing survivors towards the Nimbus 3 colony. John, the only
units that can respond are the Rapid Response Force stationed at Colos. For
next week's game bring the ships for this Force, which must all be equipped
with Superior drives to respond in time. They will be your
only support for the fleeing survivors - I will determine what damage
control the surviors of can muster by then."

> > I could see a campaign game situation where

From: Thomas Barclay <Thomas.Barclay@s...>

Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1998 14:57:13 -0500

Subject: Re: Multi-Grade FTL (Was Re: Launching non fighters (FTL drive))

Jared spake thusly upon matters weighty:

> * I have included Civilian,Military, and Enhanced instead of Standard,

ROTFL!

("Admiral, that Stock Freighter is outrunning us!" "Captain, that is no
*STOCK* freighter.... it has military
drives....."
"Admiral, but we do also don't we?" "Unfortunately Captain, the Cabinet, in
all its *WISDOM* decided it
would be far cheaper to buy surplus trash-barge drives. In an effort
to make us feel better, they painted them black and silver and installed some
new blinking lights. But they're still just barge
engines.....")

> Now if you stick with the GZG description for Jump drives, we are told

So would Superior Drives cut this time (to say 3 or 4 hours)?

> So there exists an idea of graded drives in the descriptions. Also,

And the more advanced drives can probably jump down non-standard jump
lanes easier (the plotted ones being normal traffic routes used by merchants
between known points).

> So strategically: (enhance those campaign games)

And less odds of a misjump (if you like the Traveller ideas) or
loss-in-transit.

> Tactically:
Civilian
> FTL could be full-movement for both turns (or even longer), while

Good idea.

> 2) Dangerous translations (the suicide jumps) - FT p.24 says that
radius
> (tighter, more controlled jump field, useful for squadron operations)

Or one could argue the more powerful jump field of Superior drives means they
should be the ones with the 10" radius. (Especially if it is the suicide
manoevre).