Prev: Re: [GZG] FT:XD changes, part 1 Next: Re: [GZG] FT:XD changes, part 1

Re: [GZG] FT:XD changes, part 1

From: Hugh Fisher <laranzu@o...>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 19:48:30 +1100
Subject: Re: [GZG] FT:XD changes, part 1


Doc wrote:
>     We started doing that before you did the rule, because we found 
>it odd that PDS couldn't target any enemy squadron that flew within 
>it range.

Well, space is big and there's the third dimension we normally
ignore. I'm reasonably happy with saying that loitering fighters
are staying well out of PDS range.

And you can shoot loitering ships with ship to ship weapons, not
as individually effective as PDS, but much better range.

>* Multi-stage missiles
>Doubling the mass for one extra stage seems right, but keeping on
>doubling makes it really difficult to carry lots of long range
>missiles Honor Harrington style. So I'm planning to make the first
>extra stage double the mass, each extra stage beyond that just
>doubles the points cost.
>
>     Need to go look this up, as I missed it.	Could U send these 
>rules to the list so more can look at it.   But I think U need to 
>keep the mass as well.

A multi stage missile goes 16 - 24 MU on the first turn, full 180
degree arc. Subsequent turn(s) it only has 60 deg arc. Each extra
stage doubled the mass, so 3 stage loads are 8 each. I wanted to
err on the excessive side, but it seems a bit much. Nothing under
a superdreadnaught ends up being able to carry more than one or
two loads.

>     I like Fighters and Missiles hitting before Ship Fire, but I 
>have not worked on FT3

I don't think either order matters too much. I changed it to after
in FT:XD for compatibility with the beta fighter rules, but it does
seem that more people are happy with the 2.5 turn sequence.

Thanks for replying.

	cheers,
	Hugh
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l


Prev: Re: [GZG] FT:XD changes, part 1 Next: Re: [GZG] FT:XD changes, part 1