Prev: Re: Combat films Next: Re: Balancing for vector

Balancing for vector

From: "Thomas.Barclay" <Thomas.Barclay@s...>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 13:42:07 -0500
Subject: Balancing for vector

I dunno about anyone else, but we know cinematic and vector balance
differently (arcs have different impact as does the thrust rating of a
but that doesn't seem like an excuse to mangle vector movement to me.
I'm too much of an SG2 player (Look, Ma! No Point System!) and too used
having to balance with careful attention to the scenario and using
experience and thought as a guideline, but I don't find the fact that
balance is off in vector to be a great worry. Some guidelines on how to
adjust would be handy, but if I don't get it spot on, I'll learn from

I think the stipulations that you can main drive, rotate, push, and roll
that you can't split those up (can only do one of any given type of
manoeuvre in a round) is sufficient. 

I agree with the fellow (forget who) that suggested you turf the push.
neat on the game board, but it makes little sense and vector is (I
think) a
little more hard-sci than cinematic (with tie fighters swooshing about).
Pushing from docking thrusters won't have much impact in a 15 minute
where distances may be measured in 1000's of kms. I don't agree with the
suggestion to make ships ponderous to turn... in a 15 minute turn, it
shouldn't take much to revolve the ship 15 times around!  

Of course, you can argue for a smaller timescale and distance scale, in
which case you could argue for pushes, but then his other suggestion of
limiting turns makes sense. So if you want to keep pushes, then yes, its
fine to make more ponderous turns and accept a faster/smaller presumed
time/distance scale. If you like the 15 min/1000 km scales, then ships
should be able to rotate cheap and the push just shouldn't exist. 


Thomas Barclay
Software UberMensch
xwave solutions
(613) 831-2018 x 3008

Prev: Re: Combat films Next: Re: Balancing for vector