Prev: RE: FT3, details of needed changes Next: RE: FT3?

RE: FT3?

From: rpruden@a... (Rob Pruden)
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 13:00:47 -0400
Subject: RE: FT3?

>Of course, the biggest thing in any Full Thrust game is your ships'
>relative to fighters and missiles.  If your capital ships can safely go
>than the fighters and missiles, and you use the optional rule where
>move after orders and before ships move, then a one-point turn can fool
>fighters and make them nearly useless.
>I'd say that this is one of the things distinguishing many 'standard'
>games.  If your velocities are all under 15, fighters will do
>amounts of damage.  If your velocities are over 15, fighters often
won't be
>in range.
>I don't see a way to codify that points-wise, however.

You bring up a good point.  The 'standard' FT rules, however, don't
allow for cap ships zipping about at high velocities (doesn't fit with
cinematically-inspired sense of the way they should move).  

The way we have fixed that problem with fighters is as was suggested
earlier.  Treat each fighter squadron as a seperate "ship" and plot a
for it.  FT movement plots are so easy that this won't take up too much
time.  Give standard fighters a thrust rating of 6 and fast fighters a
rating of 9.  Allow them to use up to all of their thrust to change
(like the Kra'Vak).  This allows the fighters to move more like
else and not be left behind.  We have even experimented with giving
the option to split their course changes into 3 parts: 1/3 before
1/3 at midpoint, and 1/3 at the end.  

Has anybody else tried some of this?  Does it screw up the basic
"spirit" of
the game?  Would you also want to use the endurance and morale rules?


Prev: RE: FT3, details of needed changes Next: RE: FT3?