Prev: Re: Re[2]: FTL capable fighters <<B5 Spoiler Alert, if you haven Next: Re: SGII Scenarios?

Re: Re[2]: FTL capable fighters <<B5 Spoiler Alert, if you haven

From: She stands on things I can't understand <KOCHTE@s...>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1997 08:42:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Re[2]: FTL capable fighters <<B5 Spoiler Alert, if you haven

>I agree the tender looked like it was purpose built, did not appear to
be a 
>"warship" but in B5 universe who knows? 

It looked like a freighter or transport type ship similar to what we've
seen before. Compare it to some background shots of other ships (gonna
have to watch a *lot* of B5 to do that, though ;-).  Warships on B5 have
been pretty obvious for the most part (well, to me, imo, anyway :)

>I like the idea of fighter tenders 
>myself. May not be cost effective  for "front-line" units but for 
>long-range/standing patrols , raider/privateer/pirate interdiction,
ferrying 
>fighters to CVs or stations it seems to be just the ticket. 

Mike Wikan drummed up some FT rules to use for piggybacking fighters
on ships (like external grapples or something). You can prolly find
them in the archives, maybe on Mark Seifert's FT page, or convince
Mike to post 'em again!  ;-)

Mk
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Only the bravest try where eagles and angels dare to fly
<*>

Prev: Re: Re[2]: FTL capable fighters <<B5 Spoiler Alert, if you haven Next: Re: SGII Scenarios?