Re: [OFFICIAL] new ideas!

In message <01IFQ426HVJ6EE8WHX@avion.stsci.edu> I want to be on 'Cops'
writes:

> I agree that there should be rear-firing weapons - unless your
universe
> calls against it. Starfire uses this limitation and explains it away
with
> the distortion field that the ion drives create behind ships. My
question
> was then how do you target someone through a distortion field if
you're
> behind them?	;-)

Map it's parameters... and shoot where the generating ship ought
to be...

> I've been trying to follow (in my copious spare time lately) the
fighter
> thread a bit and like the idea that fighters should/could be treated
as
> tiny ships with 12 thrust. It's simple, doesn't screw too much up, and
> eliminates one (sub)step in the turn sequence.

This would it very difficult to land the little bleeders within the
three turns allowed after they hit bingo.

> I also am a proponent of fighters going *after* ships if they don't
move
> at the same time ships do (thus simulating their better ability to
follow
> the larger monsters). However, at the same time, I am also a proponent
of
> upping the damage potential of *DAFs - have them take out a fighter on
a
> 4 or 5, and 2 ftrs on a roll of 6. Ditto against missiles.

Now, if we make it easier to shoot down missiles... what will we use
as a balance against stupidly big ships? It's the only useful function 
missiles fulfill.

Just some random observations.

-- 
David Brewer