Re: Fleet Control System

I would be against a 'free-form' style movement, except in very small
engagements, or if there were only 1 or 2 ships held back.  I realize
not
many ships would be able to benefit from the FCS hold-back, but I just
see
free-form as more open to abuse.  Just holding a second orders phase for
these ships would work fairly well.  BTW, this also requires another
step
in the play sequence - the pre-orders planning phase, in which you
determine FCS ratings available, so you know how many ships you can keep
back!  I also think that's a good time to do sensor-work, but that's a
different post I already made.

Jared Noble

John and Roxanne Leary <realjtl@sj.bigger.net> on 11/01/98 07:13:49 AM

Please respond to FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk

To:   FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk
cc:    (bcc: Jared E Noble/AAI/ARCO)
Subject:  Re: Fleet Control System

Sean Bayan Schoonmaker wrote:
>
> Thomas Barclay <Thomas.Barclay@sofkin.ca> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >> Each point gained from a FCS allows you to hold back movement
> >> of one ship. Movement for all other ships is plotted for both
> >> players, and these ships then move. Then, both players get to
> >> plot and move ships designated by the FCS.
>
> I like this idea much more than the rewrite idea. Instead of allowing
a
> player to peek, they simple wait until after all the other ships have
moved
> before writing their orders.
>
> This makes a player have to guess which of his ships he thinks are
going
to
> be in the thick of it, and hold their movement accordingly.
>
> Schoon

     Save some time for both sides, just have the ships use a 'free
form' movement after all ploted ships have moved. (But I suggest
that the lower thrust ships move first.)

Bye for now,
John L.