Prev: Re: Background Irrelevancy--and Poll (was Re: AIs and such...) Next: Re: Background Irrelevancy--and Poll (was Re: AIs and such...)

RE: Background Irrelevancy--and Poll

From: Brendan.ROBERTSON@E...
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 00:26:24 -0400
Subject: RE: Background Irrelevancy--and Poll

1) Not really, but it gives scope for conflict when not using any other
background.
2) Yes, I read it.
3) B5, & occassionally startrek.
4) Probably a half-page on the major powers, & a quarter page on minor
powers. about 7-10 pages all up.
5) Yes, although I have enough trouble getting hold of current novels.
6) Current mix is fine, as science shouldn't stand in the way of a good
fight.
7) I prefer mano-a-mano, as it means casualties actually have meaning.
(I sacrifice 20 escorts to destroy your battleship....)
8) Yes, please stop the hardcore science posts to the list.

(w) Brendan.Robertson @ employment.gov.au
(h) Denian @ Shepparton.net.au

'Neath Southern Skies
>The Oceanic Union lives!
>

Prev: Re: Background Irrelevancy--and Poll (was Re: AIs and such...) Next: Re: Background Irrelevancy--and Poll (was Re: AIs and such...)