Prev: Re: ADFC clarification Next: Re: ADFC clarification

Re: ADFC clarification

From: Richard and Emily Bell <rlbell@s...>
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 18:56:44 -0400
Subject: Re: ADFC clarification



Glenn M Wilson wrote:

> On Sat, 5 May 2001 12:44 +0100 ateske@hicom.net writes:
> >
> >Glenn wrote:
> >>Does that mean toprotect *two* ships you need *two*  ADFC?	Three to
> >>protect three?
> >>
> >>Suddenly I am a 'mite bewildered' by those words.
> >
> >I've been having fun with trying to get a new ISP working, so I
missed
> >what you're replying to, but your statement above is how I've seen
> >ADFC working the whole time.  Just like a regular firecon, each ADFC
> >can target only one ship a turn, it's just that this is for defensive
> >firing instead of offensive.
> >
> >			      Aaron
>
> And I assume that applies one fighter group or one Sm group too?
>
> Glenn/Triphibious
> This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.

That would make the ADFC too limited, IMHO.  I would think that the ADFC
allows the vessel to fire at any FTR's, SML's, and PB's that threaten
the
protected vessel.


Prev: Re: ADFC clarification Next: Re: ADFC clarification