Re: [OFFICIAL] new ideas!

James Butler writes:

@:)	    P.S. Just some other thoughts in response to other
@:)	    people's responses:
@:) 
@:)	    I very much advocate PDAF being able to act more like a
@:) short range ADAF where PDAF could shoot to aid nearby vessels
@:) under attack or even attack fighters within a very limited
@:) range. This would be far more realistic than the present state of
@:) affairs.

  I have to disagree on this point - only because I've heard it
mentioned several times recently.  I think the PDAF/ADAF rules are
pretty good as they stand, but I think some of them are not worded as
clearly as they need to be.  This causes confusion over what the
weapons can do, exactly.  In particular, there seems to have been
confusion about what exactly the word "attacking" means when it's used
to describe the actions of fighters against ships.  If you assume this
word means that the fighter has to designate that it is attacking a
particular ship, PDAF suddenly becomes worthwhile and pretty useable.
It's still a little underpowered.

-joachim