Re: Thoughts on FB3

Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> 
> Andrew Apter wrote:
> 
> >So the real defense is using mobile units to intercept.  To raid, you
> >must evade pickets without expending your missiles, almost like a
> >bomber penetration.
> 
> Intercepting high-speed, high-thrust ships is about as impossible as
> hitting said ships with missiles, unless those ships want to close
with
> you. With virtually infinite missile ranges, they don't want to close
> with you.

I think what Oerjan is trying to point out is that the original play 
mechanic has some issues which make it a 'game-breaker' in terms of
tactics, given certain assumptions.

For example, the balance in FT changes when ships are travelling
at high velocity versus low velocity (e.g. fighters and SMLs are 
much more deadly with low average velocities.)	Since I play 
on a small table (whenever I have time to play, which is a different
problem (8-) ), I never see high speeds.  My feel of FT is different
from Oerjan's since he plays on large tables in cm (if memory serves.)

If you play on a small table, with hard boundaries, you don't have
to worry about effectively unlimited missile ranges - extreme
ranges only become a problem if you have the space for extreme 
range.	

This is actually my one small gripe with FT. (oh God, I'm going to 
start a flame war, aren't I?  (8-) )  The feel of the game is
so dependent on the size of the table you have.  It's true for 
miniature games in general, but the FT movement system makes 
it more apparent.  It's something that can't really be 'fixed' ->
it's just an artifact of the movement system.	I love the 
game in general, and I don't usually worry about it.

Now, I'll go back to lurking, and let myself get toasted.  (8-)

J.

-- 
    / Jerry Han - Canoe - jhan@canoe.ca - http://people.canoe.ca/jhan \
perl -e 'use StdDisclaimer;' // ** Check out Canoe ->
http://www.canoe.ca **
   "I could really use, to lose my Catholic conscience; cuz I'm getting
  sick of feeling guilty all the time" -- Great Big Sea, Consequence
Free