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

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOh my god,
someone aknowledg's MT/hevy missiles are deadlier and smarter than 
salvo missiles. Personally the MT/hevy missiles are harder to kill too.

________________________________
From: John Lerchey <lerchey@gmail.com>
To: gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
Sent: Tue, December 21, 2010 9:51:16 AM
Subject: Re: [GZG] what's the latest news on Full Thrust

Eric,

I can understand how/why you came up with this, but I think that it
would significantly slow down play.  One of the things that I
[think/hope] is always in the FT3 design team's minds is "speed of
play".	That often will mean simplifying some things by sacrificing
levels of detail, but if it keeps things moving instead of making the
missile phase or whatever take as long as 2-3 non missile *turns*, I'm
OK with losing the complexity and potentially more "accurate feeling"
results.

John

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Eric Foley <stiltman@teleport.com>
wrote:
> I've sort of been thinking about this, and my best thought is
something about 
>like this:
>
> For every missile salvo or plasma bolt, you throw it after ships have
moved, 
>and you place it at a target point to start within the range of the
appropriate 
>missile or plasma.  Then for each salvo/bolt, you roll a d6.  The
results go 
>like this...
>
> 6 - exact hit on the placed point
> 5 - scatters d3 MU from the placed point (another d6 to determine
direction, 1 
>is directly ahead of target, clockwise from there)
> 4 - scatters d6 MU
> 3 - scatters 2d6 MU
> 2 - scatters 3d6 MU
> 1 - fails to lock/detonate altogether
>
> Each ship then rolls point defense on any salvos or plasma that land
within 6 
>MU (3 MU for vector), with the rest of the rules as they are now.
>
> As I see it, unescorted ships will still be vulnerable to missiles,
while 
>escorted ones will still be relatively safe but not completely so;
banzai 
>jammers won't be a complete panacea to missiles any more because a
natural 6 
>will still hit the target.  Slow ships would no longer be completely
dead meat 
>against missiles because they can still just plain miss, but fast ships
also 
>wouldn't be immune to them any more by simply taking high-speed turns
-- which 
>IMO are excellent balance improvements in both cases.
>
> Heavy missiles might be a case where they still move for three turns
and then 
>roll this attack roll whenever they wish to make a striking run.  I
would tend 
>to recommend that they be changed to hit the nearest ship as salvo
missiles 
>currently do if they used this system.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> E
>
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: John Lerchey <lerchey@gmail.com>
>>Sent: Dec 15, 2010 4:31 PM
>>To: gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
>>Subject: Re: [GZG] what's the latest news on Full Thrust
>>
>>This is actually a valid consideration.  Missiles as they stand, are
>>VERY slow compared to what a ship can do if it's got a good start
>>speed.  Most sci-fi genres don't have ships out running missiles
>>unless they're fired from REALLY far away and chasing.
>>
>>In FT, since the missiles have a relatively short launch range and a
>>very short closing range, if you're playing at high speeds, Eric is
>>right - it becomes a huge game of guesswork to place them.  Of course,
>>that's said with the understanding that a big part of the game is
>>about guessing where the opposing ships (and sometimes your own!) will
>>end up.  I've certainly benefited and suffered from guessing badly,
>>and ending up ass-end to my opponent within 3mu, or visa versa.
>>
>>But since FT3 is being worked on, maybe put a note on the chalk board
>>to consider alternate missile rules.
>>
>>Of the top of my head something like this could work (maybe, really,
>>I've given this about 2 seconds of random thinking)
>>
>>Missiles - range bands of 24 mu (double that of beams).
>>Hit numbers like p-torps.
>>Prior to resolving hits, apply PDS/ADS/etc. against the incoming
>>salvoes (on a per firing ship basis).  If Heavy Missiles are still
>>single objects that are harder to kill, that's what's used.  If Salvo
>>Missiles are in clusters of 6, and you need to whittle them away,
>>fine.  After PDS (and such) reduce the missiles, any remaining roll to
>>hit.	Apply damage as appropriate.
>>
>>This makes them remain different from beams and p-torps in that a)
>>ranges are much longer and b) defense systems can counter them.  But
>>it then uses an already existing mechanic for resolution - roll to
>>hit, do damage.
>>
>>There is a factor of entertainment loss in that you can't fly into
>>your own salvo, but really, space ships running into their own fired
>>missiles targeting envelope and the missiles are too stupid to NOT
>>attack the friendly ship??  That's always stretched it a good ways for
>>me anyway.
>>
>>Just a thought.
>>
>>J
>>
>>On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Eric Foley <stiltman@teleport.com>
wrote:
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>> If major elements of the game weren't based on guesswork, I'd be
more fine with 
>>>this.  The main reason it's a problem is because of the indirect fire
rules.	If 
>>>missiles and plasma were on a to-hit roll or some other kind of fixed
opposed 
>>>roll (i.e. you roll to hit and then the other guy still gets to roll
point 
>>>defense anyway) and there were no guesswork involved in hitting a
ship at this 
>>>speed I'd have no problem with it.  If getting to pick the firing
range was the 
>>>_only_ advantage you got from going at such speeds, it'd still be a
little bit 
>>>weird but it'd be easier to swallow.
>>_______________________________________________
>>Gzg-l mailing list
>>Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
>>http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gzg-l mailing list
> Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
> http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l