Prev: Re: [FT] Cancon 99 (Australia) and Supership Models Next: Re: [FTFB] More on Fighter Bays and Hangers . . .

Re: [FT] Fighter Launch Variant (Was Really Big Ships...) Snip when commenting :)

From: Channing Faunce <channing@g...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 22:01:31 -0500
Subject: Re: [FT] Fighter Launch Variant (Was Really Big Ships...) Snip when commenting :)



Denny Graver wrote:

> Another option is to break the mass used for hangar bays down into two
> parts, launch bay and hangar.  The current mass for a fighter bay is
9pt
> (Fleet book)
>
> Hangar     6 Mass
> Launch Bay 3 Mass
>
> Reasoning : If you can have SML's with magazines, why not treat
fighters the
> same?
> (Ducks...)
>

This is similar to a post I made in Oct. (posted below). I still like
the idea
of being able to build ships which can launch multiple flights at the
expense of
ship mass.

Chan

------------------------------------------------------------------------
This variation in the fighter bay mass requirements came about because
of the rule of only being able to launch 1 fighter squadron at a time (2
for carriers). We wanted a way to be able to construct ships which could
launch more (or all) of their fighters at once.

For each fighter flight that a ship wishes to be able to launch in one
turn the Mass of the fighter bay is 12 (x2 the Mass of the fighter
flight). All other fighter bays are Mass 9 (x1.5 Fighter flight Mass)

This means that if a ship has 8 fighter flights and wishes to be able to
launch 4 flights a turn buys 4 bays at 12 mass and 4 bays at 9 mass
each.

The only change we considered was making the "non-launch" bays Mass 6.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
---

Prev: Re: [FT] Cancon 99 (Australia) and Supership Models Next: Re: [FTFB] More on Fighter Bays and Hangers . . .