Re: Bigger--not always better

On Mon, 31 Mar 1997, Oerjan Ohlson wrote:

> Hopefully it'll be possible to balance weapons by changing the costs 
> alone - after all, that's the basis for a descriptive design system!

I'd prefer mass/space/whatever limitations on the side. I generally
don't
like systems where you can just plunk down money (i.e. points) and get
anything, like a man-portable 16" cannon. 
 
> The native English-speakers will undoubtedly correct me, but I've
always 
> interpreted "screwed up" as something very similar to "gone straight
to 
> hell" rather than simply "changed"...

Maybe I should have said "skewed" instead...
 
> No. My designs usually have mid-range weapons, and I _am_ going 
> to notice that you don't fire back when I keep the range open (and 
> against a new opponent, I will be fairly cautious) so I keep keeping
the 
> range open, and blast you to pieces :)

Hmmm... that would work, because in FT no weapon is better at long range

than short.

--
maxxon@swob.dna.fi (Mikko Kurki-Suonio) 	  | A pig who doesn't
fly
+358 50 5596411 GSM +358 9 80926 78/FAX 81/Voice  | is just an ordinary
pig.
Maininkitie 8A8 02320 ESPOO FINLAND | Hate me?	  |	     - Porco
Rosso
Http://www.swob.dna.fi/~maxxon/     | hateme.html |