Re: [FT] AAR and Re: RE-[FT] Starfire...

["Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@xxxxxxxxx>]

devans@uneb.edu wrote:

> ***
>>Now B may use secondary movement to disengage from the >>dogfight. If
it does so, Group B gets a free shot at Group A.
> 
>No, the other way around: A gets a free shot at B. The side which
>does *not* disengage gets a free shot at the side which does
>disengage.
> 
>[snip]
> 
>>If Group B reenters a dogfight with group B, all fire in the dogfight
>>is simultaneous.
> 
> Group B dogfights itself? <g> Should be "If Group A reenters..."
> ***
> 
>It's becoming hilariously obvious just how often I'm filtering out
typoes.
>'I knew what they meant.'

I know. Such typoes can be rather confusing to newer players though 
:-(
 
>***
>Here's an odd thing, though: If there's only *one* squadron per side
in
>the dogfight, they fire simultaneously according to FT2 p.17.
> 
>However, if at least one side has *more* than one squadron involved
>in the same furball, the sides take turns firing one squadron at a
time
>and apply the damage immediately(...)
> ***
> 
>Funny, I thought it was on purpose.

Could be, but only Jon knows what that purpose actually was :-/

>I know I've not been in many large
>furballs, and assumed the far more common mano y mano, or >squadron y
squadron, would be run faster/simpler. I don't have the >book handy;
how is order worked? Numerically superior shoots first? 

The player who won the initiative shoots first. Not sure if he gets the
first shot in *each* multiple-group dogfights (in case you have several
going on at once) or if he just gets the first fighter-on-fighter shot
overall.

>Course, at this point, I'm expecting to hear how everyone else >ALWAYS
has multi-squadron dogfights...

Not *always*, but fairly often - especially when one side has numerical
fighter superiority but the other has loaded up on interceptors.

>***
>The Bugs didn't use SBMHAWKs in IDG.
>***
> 
>Funny, if this were another list to which I subscribe, Legends of
>Galactic Heroes, we'd be hearing spoiler-warning calls. ;->= Course,
>as you know, I won't read IDG until it's finished, and none of us
should >be holding our breaths. Last word from Baen on Sept 22? *sigh*

"In Death Ground" is finished, and was published in 1997. It's the
sequel, "The Shiva Option", which isn't, and I haven't said that the
Bugs won't use SBMHAWKs in that novel... they might, and then again
they might not <g> 

What you say sounds similar to saying "I won't read the Honor
Harrington series before it's finished" :-/

Regards,
 
Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

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