Re: (fwd) Re: [FT] F***ters [was: Operational game]

Allan said:
>It fails in a second critical aspect, too. In WW1 a smaller ship was
harder to hit. Likewise, a fast ship was harder to hit, so a small, fast
ship was much harder to hit. In FT the size and speed of the vessel
doesn't
affect combat, just the range.

You could house-rule that each thrust point which is not otherwise used
may
be aplied to evasive maneuvers (eg "1 Thrust = +6mu" or "1 Thrust =
increase range by 25%" or something similar).

Size is a little trickier.  For those who want to get really detailed
(you
Noam who you are), you could define the L/W/H ratio for each ship and
give
them different range band modifiers for different angles--eg most ships
are
going to be harder to hit from the front, and easier from the sides,
because you have more surface to shoot at.  

Assuming each ship has the same proportions as all the others (an
invalid
assumption, but it's a start), then we see that as length, width and
height
each increase by x2, then target profile increases by x4 and mass
increases
by x8.	That means (I think) that Target Profile = (Target Mass/Standard
Mass)^(2/3).  If we set Standard Mass as 100, then a Mass 12 ship should
effectively be at 4xRange; Mass 19 at 3x Range; Mass 35 at 2xRange; and
Mass 282 at 1/2 Range.

Note that I'm not suggesting that this be applied to vanilla FT.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .