Re: Announcing

> Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 18:49:11 +0200
> From: "Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com>
> Subject: Re: Announcing.....
> >16). Take a look at the rules at
> >http://www.innotts.co.uk/~paulradford/ft/ft.html
>
> General questions/comments:
>
> * Which movement system is used - Vector or Cinematic?

Cinematic. Can't believe i overlooked that major point!

> * How big are the gaming tables?

Unknown. Not seen them myself until Gencon UK.

> * "Measuring the distance between ships will be 
allowed after a ship
> has
> declared its intention to to fire, but not before." 
This is a rule I
> personally find rather... strange (to use a non-
offensive word) if you
> assume modern tracking equipment; but it might be 
necessary to keep the
> game time down <shrug>

It has been known for players to have rules which 
specify that players must declare actual targets before 
measuring their distance rather than declaring which 
ship is going to fire. Thats the difference i am trying 
to make. It might just be worded badly.

> Fleet Action-specific questions/comments:
>
> * I note you copied Allan Goodall's human fleets 
straight off, warts
> (or rather mis-spellings) and all <g> Take another 
look at the names of
> the NAC CHs and the NSL BBs, will you?

They were copied, with Allan's permission of course! 
But yes, i see about the spelling mistakes. 
Incidentally, when i get home, the updated version of 
the rules will be posted. 

> * If Phalon fleets are used in the Fleet Action 
tournament, when and by
> whom are the Pulser configurations determined?

Good point. By players at the start of the game, as it 
says in FB2. They may be reconfigured in subsequent 
tournament rounds.

> * In the Phalon Carrier fleet, the Tuuloth-class 
Warrior is listed as a
> "BC". While I agree that its NPV (and combat power) 
are closer to most
> human BCs than to their CHs, its listed "Human Class 
Equivalent" in FB2
> is "CH", not "BC".

My mistake. I must have misread it.

> * Should the abbreviation for "Phalon Conglomerate" 
really be identical
> to
> the one for "Politically Correct"..?

Errrm true. Any alternate suggestions?

> * The Kra'Vak Carrier fleet is worth 1514 points, not 
1494. (The NPV
> for the Do'San CVL given in FB2 is wrong; it should 
be 691 rather than
> 671.)
> Replacing the Ka'Tak with a Lu'Dak reduces the 
fleet's value to 1479
> points, which is more in line with the other fleets.

I'd missed that one. Back to the drawing board for that 
fleet.

> * Why don't the NSL or ESU have any Carrier fleet 
options in the Fleet
> Action tournament? (Fleet composition for the NSL > 

ESU will have, when the changes are uploaded!

NSL do not have an offical CVL i.e. in FB1. Although 
Dean Gundberg's is fine, its not in FB1 and has been 
left out. (Sorry Dean! :( )

Cheers,

Paul