Prev: Re: [FMAS] Is this insane or what? Re: real-life FT playing (was: Re: Fighter Group Turn around time was: YAFS Next: Re: [FT] Yet Another, another fighters suggestion

RE: [FT] Yet Another, another fighters suggestion

From: kevinbalentine@v...
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 18:02:32 -0600
Subject: RE: [FT] Yet Another, another fighters suggestion

Well, it's not unprecedented. In FT2, ships got a certain number of 
fire controls based on their mass. That didn't get too slippery :-)

On 4 Feb 2004 at 15:22, B Lin wrote:

> Then to balance it out, for every X mass, a ship would get Y
fighters...
> 
> For every Z mass it gets A beams, B torpedoes, C shields, D Fire
controls, E ...
> 
> Watch for the slippery slope... It's slippery. :)
> 
> --Binhan
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Don M [mailto:dmaddox1@hot.rr.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 3:13 PM
> > To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
> > Subject: Re: [FT] Yet Another, another fighters suggestion
> > 
> > 
> > This is an off-the-cuff idea, but has anyone considered giving
> > warships a "built-in" fighter defense value? Something like, for
every
> > x mass of the ship, the ship gets y PDS systems?
> > 
> > I hadn't thought of that but, it's simple and elegant enough to just
> > work....)
> > 
> > Don
> > 
> > 
> 

Prev: Re: [FMAS] Is this insane or what? Re: real-life FT playing (was: Re: Fighter Group Turn around time was: YAFS Next: Re: [FT] Yet Another, another fighters suggestion