Re: [FT] Questions from a new Full Thrust player

on 8/29/00 20:10, Brian Thomas at bthom37@eagle.cc.ukans.edu wrote:

> Hello; 
> 
> My name is Brian Thomas; I'm 21, and have been wargaming for about 3
years
> now (help!  I can't stop;).  I, and my gaming group, are relatively
new to
> Full Thrust, having mostly done GW mini games, with some Clan War and
B5
> Wars thrown in.  With that in mind, a few questions have come up
regarding FT.

Welcome to the support group for furthering this "addiction".

(snip)

> 2) What sort of size fleet are people normally playing?  We've played
a
> 2000 and 3000 pts per side (2 players per side) game, and are leaning
> towards 2000 each person.  What has people's experience been for
'ideal'
> size fleets?

I find running 1000-1500 points worth of ships my preferred fleet size
if
using a mix of escorts, cruisers and heavier vessels.

(snip)

> 5) What sort of success have people had with the NAC?  (my most likely
> fleet choice, using Superior minis)

Nice all around fleet.	The ships have some staying power, a fair number
of
beam weapons and a fair mix on non-beam weapons.  I issue I have with it
is
that it sometimes feels like a jack-of-all-trades, Master of None type
of
fleet.	Regardless though it's a lot of fun to run and

> 6) Just how unbalancing, if at all, have people found DIY fleets from
FT1?

I haven't found there to be a problem with DIY related to FB1.	I've
heard/seen players occasionally getting caught flat footed by a
specialized
design.  Some of the specialized techs that are not really part of the
Tuffley Universe might be unbalancing to a small extent, but I haven't
heard
of anything too gross.	More of the balancing issues mentioned in the
past
seem to be issues with tactics and/or lack of use or modifications of
regular FT/FB1 rules that might benefit some weapons over others
(fighters
come to mind here).

Then again I was involved in some of the play-testing so I might be a
bit
bias here.  ;-)