Attack Vector:Tactical is a new space combat game, but the bit that interested
me and I thought the list might be interested in was the last page of the
flyer (link below) where the designer discusses stealth and later fighters.
Another link on the downloads page is a direct "attack" on Full Thrust.
http://www.adastragames.com/downloads/AVT_ToC.pdf
http://www.adastragames.com/downloads/vms_vs_dv.pdf
As for the issue of stealth, Power Projection Fleet uses the same rational in
their discussions of the nature of space combat.
I've talked to Ken Burnside in the past, and I wouldn't say that AV is an
"attack" on Full Thrust as it is a more detailed way of handling things.
At
last year's RockCon, we discussed ideas on how to make FT's vector system more
in line with the issue of displacement, and his answer was simple: Only allow
the ship to move half it's final velocity on any turn where it uses thrust.
Of course, to each his own. AV is for those who like ultra-realistic
(whatever that means in a sci-fi genre) representation of space combat
with one or two ships per size. FT is for those who like more "cinematic"
games. There is more than enough room in the space combat gaming community for
both.
I do like AV's ship designs, just the ticket for the "near future" ship
designs I've been wanting. Someone in the miniature sculpting world should at
least TRY to tackle ships like this.
Later, Mark
[quoted original message omitted]
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 12:43:15PM -0000, Christopher Downes-Ward wrote:
> Another link on the downloads page is a direct "attack" on Full Thrust.
If you don't have all day to work out movement, FT vector is a reasonable
approximation.
I have worked up a system for fully realistic vector movement, but it's not
what you'd call quick to resolve.
R
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 06:56:03AM -0600, Mark A. Siefert wrote:
Actually, you can only allow it to move half the distance of the
acceleration used on the current turn - the residual velocity from
previous turns remains the same. This is certainly doable for small-ship
duels; for fleets it's not really an option.
R
There was a reason that I put quotes around the word attack, maybe critique
would have been a better work. I was actually more interested in the stealth
rationale, it seems at odds with GDW's Star Cruisers idea that stealth is
everything approach but fit better with Full Thrust where everything's on the
table to start with. I can't really comment on the accuracy of either
approach.
I like the ship designs to, but I like the UNSC ships because they don't seem
to have been designed with their plane of gravity at 90 degrees to their plane
of thrust like the NAC ships.
On Monday, Mar 15, 2004, at 12:43 Europe/London, Christopher
> Downes-Ward wrote:
> Another link on the downloads page is a direct "attack" on Full
I think that's an overly harsh interpretation of the file. Ken argues
displacement vs vector quite well but doesn't have a particular axe against
FT. It gets mentioned because there aren't that many mainstream VMS games.
Ken's a nice guy from my dealings with him, and yes, I pre-ordered DV
and have an order for AV:T. I'm not sure I'll ever play them but it's kind of
reassuring that people can work so hard to get something so hard so easy.
YMMV.
> On Monday, Mar 15, 2004, at 12:56 Europe/London, Mark A. Siefert wrote:
> As for the issue of stealth, Power Projection Fleet uses the same
Yup. Both of us heavily influenced by Bruce Macintosh.
> I've talked to Ken Burnside in the past, and I wouldn't say that AV is
> an
> it
I've also discussed this with Ken and have a set of notes that may go on
PowerProjection.net as an optional rule.
Cheers,
> Ken's a nice guy from my dealings with him, and yes, I pre-ordered DV
I'd be curious to see a review by someone who has actually played it. It may
be accurate, but it's not obvious to me that it's playable.
<bad memories of paying for a WW2 tank game which turned out to have been
designed by someone who dreamed of ballistics tables>
> On Monday, Mar 15, 2004, at 22:40 Europe/London, Laserlight wrote:
> I'd be curious to see a review by someone who has actually played it.
There are a number of after-battle reports on sfconsim-l, from Ken and
others. I've not played it yet.
Cheers,