Re: fighters (shorter than the last rant)

>From: Ryan M Gill <rmgill@mindspring.com>

>The problem is that we've already got a naming scheme confusion.

Agreed.  "Interceptors" as described in the game seem to be a nebulous
cross 
between a true Interceptor and an Aerospace Superiority Fighter -- 
essentially a craft designed to engage other similar-sized craft.

>Fighters that should be called Attack Space Craft/Planes. If we call
>them bombers, then we're running over my still to be played anymore
>bomber idea with a mass 2-3 craft designed to run the role of the
>B-24/25/17 in the maritime role.

No comment on that idea, but I will say that the problem with using the
term 
"Bomber" is just the same as the problem with "Interceptor"  -- people
will 
confuse their conception of the definition of "Bomber" with what it's 
intended to mean in the game.  What's needed is a set definition of
terms, 
and a set of terms that matches the intended game effect.

3B^2

_________________________________________________________________