Well, I've now played and watched some more FT games in action.
Basic lessons learned: 1) If your only advantage is range and mobility, ie
Escorts vs Bulk Tankers, don't close. Don't let yourself be pressured by a
time limit into attacking quickly in order to do more damage.
2) When fighting several ships with the same firepower, concentrate all your
firepower on the ship with the weakest defenses. The only difference between
some of the book heavy ships is how many shields and fighter groups they have.
3) Everybody seems to have their own house rules for how exactly movement
works, so make sure everybody agrees ahead of time.
> Michael Sandy wrote:
> Well, I've now played and watched some more FT games
Good points, Michael. I find it strange that the movement
> Jon Davis wrote:
...Snip...(JTL)
> > 3) Everybody seems to have their own house rules for
Jon, Jon T.s rules are clearly written, that is not the (perceived)
problem. The movement and firing sequence is not consistent, it
is based on tacitical advantage. I have tried out a move system
based on thrust (thrust value, low to high) that the group (I think)
can live with because it is consistent. (Ships fire in reverse
order of move.) Fighters have had the firing range removed, and must be in
base to base contact to have combat. (This removes the 'ambush' style of
fighter combat that I used so well in Phil P.s last game.) What I have seen on
the list makes me think that many different
forms of house rules exist. These rules make the 'cloudy' areas
go away. Everybody in the 'house' group winds up on the 'same page'.
Even the comments about problems seem to have a common background. This would
indicate that the rules 'violate' some peoples 'perceived reality of space
combat' and that the 'house rules' are the most common means to 'correct' the
problem.
It's getting late and I am starting to babble.
Bye for now,