Re: Rant Warning below

[Noam Izenberg <noam.izenberg@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Glen wrote:

> IMDNSHO, The One Thing that I find in FT (otherwise a  fine and 
> excellent
> generic spaceship battle game for small to medium fleets/task forces) 
> in
> the 'fact' that it plays out as a WW1/early PTO WW2 naval game without
> fighters and as a WW2/Modern  naval game with fighters.  Hence the
> "..capital ships have a couple of fighter groups.." thing.  It fits 
> that
> model well.  But the model seems...  'wrong' to me.

I won't disagree with you.

<Geek>
In original Trek the various fleets had the feel of a few individual, 
might ships, rather than large fleets of hundreds or thousands. There 
were on the order of 20 Constitution class vessels like Enterprise 
during TOS setting, and they were the most powerful things in space - 
the flagships of the Federation. I had the feeling that an Enterprise 
vs. Klingon D7 was a "big deal" in the international incident scale. 
The ep where the M-5 augmented enterprise takes on four other 
Constitutions in "war games" had the feel of an unprecedented 
concentration of force. This feel did _not_ continue past the first 
couple movies or into TNG and beyond.
</Geek>

So this is how I was raised to think of space navies. That's not to say 
I didn't (really) enjoy later ST, Star Wars or B5, or even BSG type 
space combat. But IMO, FT _can_ emulate even TOS's feel of space 
combat, without bogging down into SFB hairsplitting.

In Ephemeral Garbanzo    (the medium of Noam Raphael Izenberg's latest 
temporary sculpture installation)