[OFFICIAL] Fighters in Vector Thrust

OK chaps, its late on Friday evening and I've just had an idea, so I
thought I'd throw it out to you all now so that you can cogitate on it
(I
think I'm allowed to say that...).

There has been a lot of discussion about how fighters (and missiles)
should
work in a "true vector" movement system of the kind we've been kicking
around for a while. The most "realistic" answer is to make them move as
ships do, with recorded velocities, vector markers etc., but for a long
while I've been trying to avoid doing this for fighters in order to
avoid
the additional complexity.
The following idea occurred to me while I was thinking about the
rationale
behind fighter movement.

The suggested rule is this:
Allow fighters to move "freely" as per normal FT rules (whereabouts in
the
turn sequence you move them is not really relevant to this), but with a
much greater maximum move (maybe 36"?) provided they do not change
course.
For every 1 point course change the group makes during its move, deduct
an
amount (6"?) from its maximum move. Course changes could be made all at
one
point, or spread over the move distance, at the player's choice. In
other
words, it is actually very much like counting movement points in a
hex-based game, and using up points to turn one or more hexsides. The
way
the group is pointing at the end of the turn does not affect its combat
ability (assume all-round fire, with fighters spinning as necessary to
bear
guns), but it DOES give the heading/course for the start of the next
turn.

Now, as I see it, this actually simulates an "abstracted" vector
movement
quite well; the amount by which the group can alter course depends on
how
far (ie: how fast) it is moving - a group could make a radical course
change but not move very far, or else travel a long way without much (if
any) change of direction.
I think this fits OK with the concept that the fighters would have to
carefully use their limited fuel/power resources - they could either
stooge
around at low speed, retaining the ability to manoeuvre easily, or could
commit to a high-velocity vector in the hope that their target would be
in
the right place when they arrived.
One tweak that we might add is to say that if a group ends up just a
little
too far away from a target to make an attack, it could sacrifice one
turn
of "combat" endurance in order to make an emergency manoeuvre (perhaps a
bonus move of up to 6" in any direction?) to bring it into attack
position.
Combat endurance might be upped from 3 to 4 (or 5, or more) turns if
this
was to be used; as in MT, one combat endurance turn is expended for any
turn in which the fighters engage in combat (offensive or defensive);
we'd
probably remove the time limitation for return to carrier after
expending
all combat endurance - they can trundle back at whatever speed they
like,
but won't be able to fight.

So, this is really just a bunch of random thoughts - the physicists and
mathematicians out there will probably shred it, but I'm more concerned
about whether anyone thinks it will work as a GAME MECHANIC rather than
a
mathematical model!! Does it feel "right"?

Over to you... :)

Jon (GZG)