Prev: RE: [VV} FTL discussion was RE: [VV] Vectorverse Next: Re: [VV] Vectorverse FTL

Re: [VV} FTL discussion was RE: [VV] Vectorverse

From: Roger Burton West <roger@f...>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 21:09:32 +0000
Subject: Re: [VV} FTL discussion was RE: [VV] Vectorverse

On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 02:08:13PM -0700, B Lin wrote:
>Adopting three forms of FTL travel allows a more diverse gaming
environment:
>
>Wormholes will be the main transit trunks - fast, cheap, heaviliy
defended
>Jump gates will be the intermediate traffic and short routes -
moderately defended, more likely to evacuate the area than defend it as
it only assists ships going outbound.

One reason to support two different "fixed route" networks is that they
can be _different_ - a really useful planet for the Wormhole People
(lots of minerals, close in wormhole travel time to a population
centre) might be valueless for the Jumpgate People because the jumpgate
network leaves it sixteen transits away from anywhere helpful...

(I'm suggesting that jumpgate construction be somewhat constrained by
"natural features", obviously.)

R

Prev: RE: [VV} FTL discussion was RE: [VV] Vectorverse Next: Re: [VV] Vectorverse FTL