Re: Full Thrust vs Starmada

John Lerchey wrote:

 >So, one thing that I would do, had I both time and energy ( ;) ) would
be
 >to compare that statement with popular sci fi.  No one attacked the
Star
 >Destroyers in Star Wars with *fighters*.

Hm? Check out Lando Calrissian's order in RotJ that the fighters break
off 
their attack on Death Star 2 (since the energy shield was still up) and 
instead attack the Star Destroyers "to draw their fire off the [rebel] 
cruisers"...

Simply put, if the fighters were not a threat to the SDs there would be
no 
way in which they *could* draw the SDs' fire off the rebel cruisers -
which 
in turn would mean that Lando's order was completely pointless, and all
he 
achieved by the order was to expose the fighters under his command to
more 
enemy fire than necessary.

 >I'll grant that having 6 PDS could easily make a ship invulerable to
 >fighters.  I'll only stipulate that if that is *appropriate to the FT
 >unvierse*, then it a) does solve the problem of fighters being worth
too
 >much, and b) works within the confines of the system.

It does solve the problem with large numbers of fighters being worth
*too 
much*, all right - it makes the fighters worth roughly zero points, thus

eliminating the reason for using them at all. It does *not*, however,
solve 
the problem with *small* numbers of fighters being worth *too little*; 
instead it makes that part of the problem even worse than it is now.

Later,

Oerjan
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
-Hen3ry