Re: FT III, BIg ships and such.

>As I have been watching these two threads, I've noticed what I consider
to
>be a disheartening effect to make the game more COMPLICATED.  I see
that
>there are problems with mass vs points or with big ships vs small ships
but
>I personally like the game AS IT STANDS.  I have DS II & SG II but I
would
>rather play Full Thrust based on it ease to play.  If I want a complex
game,
>I'll dig out my 50 pounds of Star Fleet Battles.  The direction seems
like
>Car Wars.  It started out as a fun, easy to play, yet extendable game,
then
>it became "Car Fleet Battles" with way too much stuff (optional rules,
rules
>revisions, and such).	
>Let's not take FT there.

>   +		  Eric Fialkowski		+

I agree absolutely!

	I like the immediacy of FT, and the fact that even non-gamer SF
fans
(they do exist!) can pick it up very quickly.  

	I still enjoy coming up with ideas to extend the game, but in
terms
of house rules and "let's try X for a change" rather than the "Car Fleet
Battles" ( an excellent phrase I hadn't heard before) syndrome with the
possibility of obvious mathematically optimum solutions.

I must admit I'm a bit leery of "FTIII" based on what I've heard so far.

Rob Paul
NERC Institute of Virology 
Mansfield Road, Oxford OX1 3SR	  Tel. (01865) 512361
rkp@mail.nerc-oxford.ac.uk
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
  "Once again, villainy is rotting meat before the maggots of justice!"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--