Prev: Re: Fire Control lock-on (was: Re: [FT] squadron suggestions) Next: Re: Fire Control lock-on (was: Re: [FT] squadron suggestions)

Re: Fire Control lock-on (was: Re: [FT] squadron suggestions)

From: Doug Evans <devans@n...>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 07:59:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Fire Control lock-on (was: Re: [FT] squadron suggestions)

>> Perhaps a small change in perspective: let the defending ship try to
>> "break" the lock-on of a ship that is attacking it.

...

> I think I kind of like this.... what does everyone else think?

..."roll to hit, roll to wound, roll to save, each WITH (possible)
modifiers and special automatics (auto hit or auto wound or no save)..."

It keeps the defender playing during the other person's turn, so you are
not 'only waiting' til your turn, which is prolly why it's part of the
Evil
Empire(tm) mechanic. But it's still an extra roll, so I'm against it.
Please note, the range band adjustment will add time of varying amounts
depending how quick the players are, too, but it's not a separate step
in
the process.

Is the concept of alternate, or even complimentary, systems right out?
Could you see offering each as an option, and pointing out that mixing
and
matching the extra die rolls with range adjustments would make a
fiendishly
complex system, which may be what some folks seek?

The_Beast

Prev: Re: Fire Control lock-on (was: Re: [FT] squadron suggestions) Next: Re: Fire Control lock-on (was: Re: [FT] squadron suggestions)