Re: Vector Movement

On 20-Aug-99 at 11:59, Okay, new day. Time to be happy. (- Cat)
(KOCHTE@stsci.edu) wrote: > >On 20-Aug-99 at 11:02, Sean Bayan
Schoonmaker
(schoon@aimnet.com) wrote:
>
> >You are going to have to point this one out.  This is one thing I
> >was watching for and didn't see it.	It doesn't make sense anyway,
> >if I can shoot at you then my computer knows how far away you are.
> 
> And where you might end up in the next movement phase, etc.
> 
> I couldn't find the 'no measuring ranges' rule anywhere in the FT
books,
> either. But then I've always had a real hard time subscribing to the
'no
> measuring ranges' in FT.

I've always been a bit bothered by the "I am expert at eyeballing
distances
so I have a significant advantage" school of miniatures wargaming
anyway.
Does the fact that you can judge distances on a gaming table to the 
millimeter mean you are a better commander?  I've often wondered if
those
that push the "no measure" rule are the same ones that are good at
guessing the distance.

Roger (Fair at judgeing distance, can play both ways but I feel like
       slime when my opponent throws stuff away because he doesn't have
       radar range-finders in his eyes.)