PBeM new tactics

9 posts ยท Mar 10 2000 to Mar 11 2000

From: Roger Books <books@m...>

Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 15:37:16 -0500 (EST)

Subject: PBeM new tactics

Many of us here are used to playing on a table measure in inches. It is rather
amazing what happens once you go to large scales.

I'm involved in a PBeM game with a friend while developing perl scripts to
manage the whole thing. One thing I've incorporated
is auto-sizeing the maps with ftmap.  (smallest X -30 units, smallest
Y -30 units, largest X +30...)  We no longer have the constraints
about what happens if you fly off the table edge. I am definately going to
have to go to metric play when I play next. I am currently
pushing 30MU/turn and it doesn't feel awkward or too fast at all.
I'm getting the maneuverability out of my FSE ships I expect.

Just an observation.

From: Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@t...>

Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 23:25:17 +0100

Subject: Re: PBeM new tactics

> Roger Books wrote:

> Many of us here are used to playing on a table measure in inches.

[snip]

Yet another convert to the True Path :-)

This is one of the few situations where size actually does make a
difference...

Later,

From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>

Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 18:46:10 -0500

Subject: Re: PBeM new tactics

> Many of us here are used to playing on a table measure in

Oerjan intoned:
> Yet another convert to the True Path :-)

It is possible to have too much of a good thing, though.

Which is irrelevant to the discussion of FT scale, of course. I notice that in
FTF play, in inches, there is less maneuvering than there is in PBeM games. I
haven't gotten up to 30 MU velocities yet, but at least the plan isn't
"they'll charge us, we'll charge them, and we'll meet in the middle in a
horrendous crash." This may be a function of table size, or it may just be a
function of playing time.

From: John Leary <john_t_leary@y...>

Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 17:14:11 -0800

Subject: Re: PBeM new tactics

> Laserlight wrote:

> Which is irrelevant to the discussion of FT scale, of course. I

    Timing is everything when doing speed 20+.
Try it, you'll like it!!!

:-)

Bye for now

From: Indy Kochte <kochte@s...>

Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 11:14:34 -0500

Subject: Re: PBeM new tactics

> Laserlight wrote:

Could be both. I've found when I've played on the floor that we've maneuvered
a *lot* more (although our velocities haven't reached
'Oerjan Speeds'  ;-)  than when we've played on tables. More often
than not I suspect the edge of tables sets up a psychological 'boundary' that
players feel they cannot send their ships beyond
(though in at least two games at GZG-ECC players who had ships
going off the table were accomodated - either by the addition of
another table ("Berserker"), or floating the map ("Mission of Merci")
A little more time-consuming, but not much. Next year I'm seriously
considering doing a game on the floor, rather than on a table.

Mk

From: John Leary <john_t_leary@y...>

Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 08:47:22 -0800

Subject: Re: PBeM new tactics

> Indy wrote:
...Next year I'm seriously
> considering doing a game on the floor, rather than on a table.

I'll consider that an incentive to attend.

Bye for now,

From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>

Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 12:01:03 -0500

Subject: Re: PBeM new tactics

> Oerjan intoned:

I think you normally play cinematic? Do you also approach O
("the velocity of Oerjan", here defined as 3x10^1 Mu/Turn or
higher) under vector movement?

From: Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@t...>

Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 18:50:35 +0100

Subject: Re: PBeM new tactics

> Laserlight wrote:

> > Oerjan intoned:

From: kwasTAKETHISOUT@o... (Kr'rt)

Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 22:47:54 GMT

Subject: Re: PBeM new tactics

Quoth Indy <kochte@stsci.edu>...
> Next year I'm seriously considering doing a game on the floor, rather

Guaranteed, there will be a need to "float" the wall....

-=Kr'rt