Re: [GZG] what's the latest news on Full Thrust

I've heard mention of people playing FT at "Oerjan speeds", but I've
never witnessed it.  We play on a 4'x8' table.	Moving a ship in
cinematic, even with a 6 thrust rating at speeds of more than 30
mu/turn poses a serious risk of flying off of the table.  And not only
does your ship have a chance of flying through range bands, you're
also flying through your own range bands, and thus you can't hit the
enemy either.

Not saying that I necessarily approve or disapprove of anything, just
saying that it has it's own risks.

Realistically (not that that should factor in), it makes some sense
that if something is moving fast enough, it's possible that it could
blur through multiple range bands and not be a reasonable target.

I don't like the idea of capping max speed unless there is some
pseudo-physics that would support that at some point, continual thrust
would max out top speed in space.  I have my doubts. :)

J

On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Eric Foley <stiltman@teleport.com>
wrote:
> Oh, okay.  Is that with Starmada X in particular or...?
>
> The main complaint I have about Full Thrust is actually a feeling that
cinematic movement is broken at high speeds.  Oerjan speeds are
effective because they allow you to basically skip two or even three
whole range bands to make a strike, and because even moderately
maneuverable ship travelling at those speeds becomes completely
unhittable with salvo missiles and plasma.  Vector has its own issues,
but ships being unhittable with direct fire isn't one of them.  I
wouldn't mind seeing a slight sop to inertia physics in cinematic where
if you're moving at, say, three times your thrust max you need twice as
many thrust points as normal to make a turn (with the same limits for
maximum turning), and at four times you just aren't allowed to turn at
all until you slow down.
>
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l