Re: [FT] Even more NAC ships

Hugh Fisher wrote:

 >Full Thrust is simple and playable, which puts it ahead of 90% of the
 >wargame rules on >the market. That it has loopholes does not
disadvantage it.

Oerjan Ohlson responded:

 >Full Thrust is steadily losing market shares to the space combat games
 >among the remaining 10% of the wargame rules on the market. I'd say
that
 >this makes FT's loopholes a fairly serious disadvantage, unless you
want FT
 >to drop out of the market and get replaced by other games...

My questions, to any and all:

Is that the reason for FT losing market share? Do players actually cite
the 
rules/construction loopholes as such a problem with FT that they switch
to 
other systems? What systems are they going to? I simply don't have
enough 
space combat players around here (Central Indiana) to be able to tell;
the 
only groups that I know of play FT, or Battlefleet Gothic. The rest that

are commonly available here are barely represented (Aerotech, Hard
Vacuum, 
etc.). Maybe I'm lucky; the small FT group that I know of would rather
play 
interesting scenarios/campaigns, than push the edges of the design
rules.

Noah Doyle

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.577 / Virus Database: 367 - Release Date: 2/6/2004