Hi everybody - I was sitting at the keyboard this morning trying NOT to
think about work too much, as I had the season's first show yesterday (Sunday)
at Newark and am totally shattered (six hours drive there and back after 2
hour's sleep on Saturday night...). I just thought I'd share the
following with you, in case it might be amusing -
------------------------------------------------------
RETRO THRUST: The first ever incarnation of the rules that eventually
developed into FULL THRUST!
A little bit of history: This is a rewriting (as near as I can remember
- I
don't have a surviving copy anywhere!) of the first "back of a postcard"
rules for space battles that I designed in the mid-seventies, while
still at school. They were never designed for publication, but many battles
were
happily won and lost on the dining-room table with vast fleet of the
little
starship models that Minifigs made around that time - they made just
three ship sizes in each "fleet", hence the three classes used in the game; as
I recall, they cost about 11p for the small ones ("destroyers"), about 20p
for the "cruisers" and a massive 35p or so for the "battleship" - the
fleets were built up though many small mail-orders of pocket money!
Somewhere in a deep drawer I still have some of these ships...
Over the years the rules got steadily refined, added to and rewritten until I
arrived at the first published version of FULL THRUST in 1991. What is written
here is a far cry from FT, but you will see the roots of many of
the ideas - it still makes a great "beer & pretzels" game, so give it a
try sometime!
1) SHIP CLASSES: There are three ship classes: DESTROYERS (little ones),
CRUISERS (medium ones) and BATTLESHIPS (big ones). All ships of the same class
have the same specs (no racial variations).
2) MOVEMENT: Orders are written secretly in advance, just as in FT. The same
12 "courses" of the clockface are used to indicate direction (usually with a
fixed plane of reference on the tabletop, so course 12 is always towards the
same point and not relative to the ship). Velocity does NOT have to be
recorded, as ships can be ordered to move any distance up to a set maximum for
each class (forget realism, think E.E. Doc
Smith - can you say Bergenholms...?). Orders specify just course and
speed for that turn. Originally we allowed any course change in a turn, so
ships could move in any direction they wished ( a real "inertialess drive"),
but you could limit course changes to 3 points (90 degrees), or different
limits per class if you prefer.
Maximum moves (speeds) are: DESTROYERS 18", CRUISERS 12", BATTLESHIPS
6".
3) TURN SEQUENCE: Write orders; Move ships; Alternate fire by ship (as per
FT).
4) COMBAT: There is only one type of weapon (beam): it has a range of 18", and
rolls
1D6. Damage/hits are as per basic FT, ie: 1-3 = no hits, 4-5 = 1 hit, 6
= 2 hits. Ships have FORE and AFT fire arcs, each 180 degrees.
DESTROYERS have ONE beam system, mounted FORWARD only - no rear
armament. CRUISERS have one beam FORE and one AFT. BATTLESHIPS have TWO beams
forward (which can fire at same or different targets) and one AFT.
5) DAMAGE: DESTROYERS can take 2 hits, CRUISERS 4 and BATTLESHIPS 6. When a
ship has taken all its hits is is destroyed and removed. Ships may move and
fire at full capability until destroyed (ie: no critical hits or thresholds).
SHIP STATS SUMMARY:
DESTROYER: Max Speed 18"; Fore armament: 1 beam; Aft: none. 2 hits (damage
points). CRUISER: Max Speed 12"; Fore armament: 1 beam; Aft: 1 beam. 4 hits.
BATTLESHIP: Max Speed 6"; Fore armament: 2 beams; Aft: 1 beam. 6 hits.
In message <199702171146.LAA19196@gate.flexnet.net>
> jon@gzero.dungeon.com (Ground Zero Games) writes:
Everyone say "Hi Jon".
> I was sitting at the keyboard this morning trying NOT to
Is there any likelyhood of you making available out-of-print GZG
rules available? G-Cav? 1st ed. Dirtside? Or maybe that little
Tac-ship game in the Ragnarok Compendium?
> At 11:50 AM 2/17/97 +0000, you wrote:
Rather interesting....How about some expansion rules: Carriers, fighters, a
points cost system, more weapons...:-))
I guess I can't look at any game without thinking how to make it
better....
> So, there it is - the seed that grew into Full Thrust (or the bits that
Happy
> lasering!
Got a question....If your in england where everything is in metric, how come
the FT game is in inches?
SNIP
> Got a question....If your in england where everything is in metric, how
We only pretend to be metric- really, we walk miles to drink pints, to
grow to a height of several feet and inches and a weight of numerous stone...
:-)
> Donald Hosford wrote:
--I guess I can't look at any game without thinking how to make it
better....
I think SFB started out as a nice simple game in a ziplock bag and looked what
happened to that. Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS) is a favourite axiom. Trading
off between complexity & playability is a fine line. IMHO FT & MT are, at the
moment, in the right bounds of each constraint, especially as you can just
play core FT.
--Got a question....If your in england where everything is in metric,
how come
--the FT game is in inches?
Don't ask, it depends how old you are - the current schools teach metric
measurement - oldsters may still think in ft & inches which is probably
what was
current when Jon was at school, it was when I was - all the road signs
are still in miles and milk & beer still comes in imperial pints.
Sincerely Tim Jones
> hosford.donald @ email.acd.net @ CBISINET wrote:
[In response to a message from Jon]
> Got a question....If your in england where everything is in metric,
"...england where everything is in metric..." - This message is
obvoiusly talking
about some strange parallel version of the UK :-)
We're only offically metric, and then only just. ( schools: metric,
pre-packed food: metric [but only after a fight],
fresh food: imperial, road signs: imperial petrol: metric)
I think we're waiting for the people who like the imperial system to die
out...
In message <9702181527.AA14044@worf.molbiol.ox.ac.uk>
> rpaul@worf.molbiol.ox.ac.uk (Robin Paul) writes:
And some of the metric units, which I am _required_ to use, come in
damned awkward sizes. Ten square chains is a lot more sensible to work with
than 10000 square metres.
(And, for those interested in scenery modelling, a ten acre field is a square
furlong)
> Got a question....If your in england where everything is in metric, how
Simply, everything ISN'T metric quite yet, though it is slowly turning that
way thanks to the interfering ******* in Brussels. OK, Imperial measures
aren't taught in school any more, but I still like inches for gaming -
centimetres are too fine for miniatures IMHO. And of course we've got to think
of you colonial types who don't use metric at all....:)
> Is there any likelyhood of you making available out-of-print GZG
David -
Nice idea, unfortunately the problem is that none of these exist in an
electronic form - they were all done on a typewriter and photocopied!
I've still got copies around somewhere (hey, maybe I should auction 'em off...
:)) but haven't got the time to transcribe them onto disk. Of course, as you
say, Tacship IS available in the Rag compendium, and I may even get round to a
new version of it someday.
> On Tue, 18 Feb 1997, Ground Zero Games wrote:
get a scanner with some small degree of text recognization software. Since
most of them are typed, a poor text recognization software (aka cheap one)
should do the job.
BTW.. WELCOME TO THIS LIST!!!
************************************************************************
*
*"To be or not to be that is the question."
*
*To be is infinite better then to be in the limbo flowing around...
*
*So..... Get a life... :)
*
> At 03:27 PM 2/18/97 +0000, you wrote:
AHA! I knew it was all a great english put on! :-))
> At 03:34 PM 2/18/97 GMT, you wrote:
Trading
> off between complexity & playability is a fine line. IMHO FT & MT are,
I take it then that your still struggling to convert fully to the metric
system too?
Here in the US, you don't see much changing on that front, but it is creaping
in slowly.
> At 04:24 PM 2/18/97, you wrote:
Yeeesssss You have entered the Twilight zone...
> At 09:56 PM 2/18/97 +0000, you wrote:
I understand you will use what you like...just curious.
> At 08:13 PM 2/18/97 +0000, you wrote:
> with than 10000 square metres.
This is most interesting. This is the greatest number of replies I have had
yet...
I hope I didn't kick a bee hive with some of you englanders.... My
apologies...
> Alan Brain wrote:
Yeah - Keep your condescending terms of reference aimed at the right
people - the Yanks are EX-Colonials and We here in OZ are Soon-To-Be
EX-Colonials (and our head of state will still feel up the regency...
:-) ).
I work in the fishing tackle supply biz and we are forced to use imperial for
dealing with our items simply because these are the terms
of reference most used internationally - despite our extensive
application of the metric system - games are like this I guess......
> hosford.donald @ email.acd.net wrote:
> I wrote:
[nothing]
Funny, just when you change your mind and decide not to send a reply after
all, someone talks at you while you're answering the question "Do you want to
mail or save this new document?"...
Sorry :-(
> Ground Zero Games wrote:
> Simply, everything ISN'T metric quite yet, though it is slowly turning
About all this imperial measurement stuff....
Isn't it interesting then that GDW when they did Traveller The New Era they
chose to use an entirely metric system because the numbers worked better.
horses for courses I s'pose
Dan