Re: New FTJava Scenarios

[Oerjan Ariander <oerjan.ariander@xxxxxxxxx>]

Tony Christney wrote:

>Right. I guess I've been "OA"ed <g> That wasn't so bad <G>

Not this time, at least...

>What I meant was that to modify 2) to allow aft arc
>fire for the special case of zero-thrust/no main drive
>ships is just as hard as case 3).
>
>The fundamental problem is that firing is resolved at the
>weapon level, and weapons have NO knowledge about the
>ship they are mounted on. So when the ability to fire into
>a target arc is determined, the weapon cannot check the
>owning ship's movement orders or its drive system status.

If firing is resolved at the weapon level and weapons don't know what ship 
they're mounted on, how is it that weapons can be out of range and/or out 
of arc depending on the relative locations of the ship they're mounted on 
and the would-be target?

I'd guess that it is because *target selection* is resolved at the ship 
level, even though the actual *firing* is not. If I'm right, then FB1's 
conditional (A) arc restriction is simply another restriction on what 
targets the ship may be ordered to shoot at - the ship itself has to know 
what movement orders it had this turn, after all.

(Note that in the Fleet Book rule the (A) arc restriction is *not* tied to 
whether or not the drive is currently intact, but to whether or not the 
drive was used this turn - so the ship would only have to check its 
movement orders, not the drive status).

Later,

Oerjan
oerjan.ariander@xxxxxxxxx

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
-Hen3ry