Oooo, the dreaded O-word! Shock of creeping evil empire-ism! ;->= Ok, so
it
was appropriately used, and it was officially wishy-washy (subject to
change at any minute). Feels weird in our laid-back atmosphere.
Long as it's creeping in, I was curious on how you were setting up the
'official'-ness of the book, Jon. Obviously, lists(total of each
'nation') of ships, and points of each. I'm also assuming scenarios with
enumerated fleets(to be run in the scenario by each side). Any other
guidelines or fleet lists(to be run in a particular point game)? Funny, I used
to be able to express myself clearly.
As far as moving fighters 'before or after big ships', of course it's
effectively 'at the same time as or after' since the orders are already
written for the big ships. To my way of thinking, agility and 'moving inside a
decision loop' are NOT equivalent phrases, as, for the concept of the decision
loop to be more than moot, you have to be able to decide your action yourself
inside that space, and you are giving pilots PERFECT info.
I see agility as covered by FT II psuedo-vector system(anybody coin a
better phrase?) for ships while fighters get to move anywhere. I almost wish
they had some vectoring themselves, but accept the way things are.
One possibility, and one I'd like to hear about but WON'T be testing myself is
to allow the fighters to move at the ships half way point. Problems include:
you'd have to move, at least, all the possible target and APDS ships halfway
so that fighters would have a clear idea of what's
important(book-keeping headache). Artificial 'obvious' movement of some
ships using maximum turn, though the fact that you are using maximum makes
obvious earlier makes sense, you have the weird case of max 1 pt turn ships
don't give away, max 2 pt give full turn away, max 3 pt give only direction,
and max 4 pt is back to giving away full info.
*whew* Anything obviously wrong with what I just said?
Again, I'd like to hear how it tests out: I'm willing to fly FT II fighters; I
prefer MT fighters, though. Chose your own PSB.
The_Beast
P.S. I post to newsgroups from a mainframe, so it's automatically 80 character
lines. Do I need to insert Cr's when I post to the list from my new mailer?
It's hard to tell with proportional fonts, but I'd try if requested...
> Oooo, the dreaded O-word! Shock of creeping evil empire-ism! ;->= Ok,
I, for one, appreciate the [OFFICIAL] designation. This allows Jon to
differentiate between when he is acting a just a fellow gamer, and when
he is acting as the author of Full Thrust/Dirtside II/Stargrunt II.
> Oooo, the dreaded O-word! Shock of creeping evil empire-ism! ;->= Ok,
Just in case any newcomers to the list don't know, I occasionally put
[OFFICIAL] in a posting when it has to do with actual rules ideas,
modifications etc., or when I'm asking for specific input or reactions to
something; it's nothing to get paranoid about, we're not going to start making
you paint your starships with only official, genuine GZG Paint
Brushes (TM)......
> Long as it's creeping in, I was curious on how you were setting up the
Basically, the book will consist of the new rules stuff (which will
effectively make FT2 into "FT2.5", ready for FT3 when it comes along), and
then the illustrations, specs, ship diagrams and a bit of data on each ship
from the four main human fleets. Although the ships will be specific to the
"Official" (aaagh, there's that word again...) background, anyone who doesn't
use it will still be able to use the book as a resource of pregenerated ship
designs that can be renamed and modifed to whatever you like. The designs in
the book certainly won't mean that you can't make your
own designs as well, even if you are using the GZG background - we will
only be showing one example of each type of ship (maybe some with alternative
refits), and the navies can safely be assumed to have plenty of other types of
the same size class in service as well. For example, the illustrated NAC
destroyer class will of course be the Ticonderoga, but (like modern navies)
they will undoubtedly have at least half a dozen other DD types in service at
the same time, some older and some newer. There won't be any scenarios in this
volume, since it will be pretty full with the rules and designs.
> The_Beast
> I, for one, appreciate the [OFFICIAL] designation. This allows Jon to
> I, for one, appreciate the [OFFICIAL] designation. This allows Jon to
> Doug_Evans/CSN/UNEBR@UNebMail.UNeb.EDU wrote:
...(Snip)... (JTL)
XXXX I have no problem with the word 'OFFICIAL' in communications that Jon
sends out. The word indicates the direction of thought
and in no way implies/requires obediance. (Lets face it folks,
We are all going to do our own thing.) JTL
XXXX
> One possibility, and one I'd like to hear about but WON'T be testing
XXXXX Besides the fact that I didn't really understand it, nothing. (I admit
to being slightly brain dead and highly overstressed at
the present time.) JTL
> Again, I'd like to hear how it tests out: I'm willing to fly FT II
I feel that the 'fighters move last' is the proper format
to use. It just would not 'feel' right to have a mass 100, thrust
two ship outmaneuver a group of fighters.
Bye for now,