Re: Hello and some FT & DS2 questions

On Fri, 14 Mar 1997, Edmund Hon wrote:

> I just bought both FT and DS2 a couple of weeks ago. After going 
> through the rules and only one game of FT, I've been wondering how 
> could I have missed two such fine sets of rules. Anyway, one thing 
> leads to another and here I am another subscriber to this mailing 
> lists. 
> 
> Here's some questions I have for both games:
> 
> FT:
> i) If I design a ship using special hulls instead of the standard 
> ones in p.14, what is the minimum mass of a ship that can carry a 
> fighter group (my guess is 60 as this is the mass of a standard 
> battledreadnought)?

The minimum mass is 12, unless it's a non-FTL ship in which case it has 
to be at least mass 8. That's the smallest hulls you can fit a fighter 
bay in :) The rules give no minimum size for carriers; in More Thrust 
you'll find... Oops. I forgot it is out of print. Anyway, in More Thrust

there's an Escort Carrier built on a Battlecruiser hull. The rules gives

no minimum size for carriers.

For launching purposes (carriers can launch up to two squadrons per
turn, 
other ships only one - according to the rules) many on this list say
that 
a "carrier" is any ship using at least 50% (...some say at least 2/3) of

their available mass for fighter bays.

> ii) Do sub-munition packs require a fire control?

No.

> iii) Anyone scratch build their own ships?

Anyone _don't_ scratch build at least some of their ships?

> DS2:
> i) If I design a vehicle with transport capacity, do I have to 
> designate exactly what it will be carrying? e.g., a vehicle with 8 
> pts of capacity left, do I have to specify that it will be carrying 
> two infantry elements (and nothing else), or can I also use it to 
> carry a power infantry instead (or a couple of arty ammo load or even 
> a V.SMALL vehicle)?

No need to declare what it will be carrying.

> ii) What is the advantage of designing an Open Top vehicle?

None that I can see, but if you're unlucky enough to have some open 
topped models...

> iii) Can I design a towed direct fire gun piece (i.e. towed AT guns), 
> since the rulebook already has rules for towed arty piece.

Sure. Soft-skinned, no power source (...at least unless you want to use 
Railguns or HELs)

> iv) Can LAD be used for missle defence? (The rulebook didn't say so 
> but why not?)

Can a Stinger missile be used for anti-missile purposes? (I don't know -

that's why I'm asking - but I envision LADs as similar to Stingers.)
 
> v) When resolving multi-barreled DF weapons fire against infantry, do 
> I total all the chits or do I resolve them separately, one barrel at a

> time? i.e. a triple barrel DFFG/1 fire at infantry, do I draw all 
> nine chits and total them or do I three separate attack at three 
> chits each?

Resolve them separately. The advantage with multi-barrel weapons is that

you get an extra chance to hit. The disadvantages are that each barrel 
draws fewer chits and that the mass goes up very fast.

> vi) What is the capacity requirement and point cost of Backup 
> Systems?

No capacity requirement what I can see. OTOH there is no capacity 
requirement for ECM or fire control either... The cost is either in the 
back of the book (together with all the other points costs) or in the 
rules section on Backup Systems; don't remember exactly where, though.

Two things you haven't asked, but which may be pretty important:

In the section on Vehicle weapons against Infantry, there are
conflicting 
notes on chit validities. Use the validities from the weapons table.

If a vehicle has multiple APSWs, it can fire each of them against a 
different infantry base. This is the only time a vehicle can aim and 
fire weapons at more than one target in a single activation. (SLAM and 
artillery can hit more than one weapon, but they only aim at one point!)

Later,

Oerjan Ohlson

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