> I was wondering if it would be OK if I take responsibilty for
With all due respect, Mark. There are still unresolved answers to the FAQs.
The Major one is how to handle odd mass ships (3,4,5...). I prefer
to give an extra box to damage but no additional tonnage to systems. Others (I
beleve you included) prefer to provide both damage and tonnage
(making it identical, but cheaper to the next higher even toned ship). Other
prefer to provide the extra system tonnage but not the damage box.
Still other round both down. Until the rules are changed, I prefer to see the
FAQs under dispute to still be discussed on the list. If you do send
answers to the FAQs, I would prefer to see transcripts from the list sent
giving both sides discussion.
<switching chanels>
Odd thrust factors. I have my own guidelines for ships with odd thrust
factors. I have the players divide the move between the first and second
part of the move. The "extra" point of movement is applied to the first half
of the movement. That is a velocity of 5 with a 3 point turn would turn 1
point, move 3", turn 2 points, and then move 2". How do others on
the list handle the situation. The rules are silent on the subject (unless you
split it 2.5" & 2.5").
<Questionable subjects for the FAQ>
> Odd thrust factors. I have my own guidelines for ships with odd thrust
> half of the movement. That is a velocity of 5 with a 3 point turn would
> turn 1 point, move 3", turn 2 points, and then move 2". How do others
Has this really been a subjuect for debate? We've always simply split the move
in half, like the 2.5 & 2.5 split you mention above. No offense, I'm just
curious, but why would you do it any other way? Why complicate things?
> On Sun, 2 Feb 1997, John Crimmins wrote:
> Has this really been a subjuect for debate? We've always
No
> offense, I'm just curious, but why would you do it any other way? Why
Because the rules do cover this (ie, odd thrust point goes to the second
'half' of the move, both for turning and acceleration)? I'm almost certain
that's in the FT basic rules...
> turn 1 point, move 3", turn 2 points, and then move 2". How do others
I do exactly that. Half a move is half a move. It's just as easy to measure
2.5" as it is 2", so I don't see the problem in doing so.
-Michael
> At 10:11 AM 2/3/97 +0000, you wrote:
I agree. Just make sure everyone has agreed to how this is done,
before play (if it makes a differance to your group)....
> Oerjan Ohlson writes:
@:)
@:) > Has this really been a subjuect for debate? We've @:) > always simply
split the move in half, like the 2.5 & 2.5 split @:) > you mention above. No
offense, I'm just curious, but why would @:) > you do it any other way? Why
complicate things?
@:)
@:) Because the rules do cover this (ie, odd thrust point goes to the @:)
second 'half' of the move, both for turning and acceleration)? I'm @:) almost
certain that's in the FT basic rules...
I was going to make exactly the same point a few days ago and I
pulled out my FT book just so I could toss in a page number and - LO!
- the rule was not there! Maybe I just missed it. They do seem to
always round numbers down, so that may be where everyone got the idea.
> @:) > Has this really been a subjuect for debate? We've
I've looked for this rule before, but have *never* found it in the books (then
again, there are a couple other rules I've looked for,
missed totally, and someone else found them for me :-} ). So with
that in mind I always tried to avoid odd-thrust ships so I wouldn't
have to deal with this. ;-)
Mk
> >@:) > Has this really been a subjuect for debate? We've
I'm
> >@:) almost certain that's in the FT basic rules...
Okay, I've got the rules right here. While I prefer making both half's the
same ( eg. 2.5 & 2.5) the rules do say to keep everthing in whole numbers
which the second half move being one more than the first half move.
It is on page 6 of Full Thrust in the second paragraph under "Making Course
Changes".
"If the total Course change is an ODD number, then round DOWN the
initial part of the change and round UP the mid-move part."
Enjoy,
Tom G responds with:
> It is on page 6 of Full Thrust in the second paragraph under
See?? I tol' ya if I couldn't find the rule somebody would for me! ;-)
Mk
> Okay, I've got the rules right here. While I prefer making both
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This applies to the course change but not the thrust, hence the original
question. I agree that 2.5 & 2.5 is best, but if you are using cm the "fudge
factor" is fairly large. I just was curious how others handled it.
Anyway, thanks for the comments!