RE: FT Thrust question...

Date sent:  17-OCT-1996 09:20:24 
>Peter Caron

>makes a good point

>--Has anyone out there noticed that the small ships in fleet 
>--engagements tend to get blown up too easily. 

>I too was thinking especially in a PBEM game where a small ship is all
you have 
>that they seem to die too easily. In reality a destroyer in something
like 'Sink 
>the Bismark' survived unless it go too close to the Bismark.

Lets not forget that the Bismark was basicly a rehashed WW1 design
rather
than a WW2 Warship. It lacked the modern advances such as dual purpose
small guns (It had a complete array of AA-only guns, unlike all other
navies who were using Dual Angle). And the main Armament could never
hope
to hit a Destroyer.

The only way to reflect this would be to reduce the effectiveness of A
and B against escorts.

It all depends on wether you want to recreate WW2 battles in space or
not.
And if you do, I'd use fighters to fill the Destroyer role.

>Has anyone played deflection rules in FT - there were some good rules
in an ICE 
>starship game that had a deflection table - this could be modified
(simplified) 
>to the FT paradigm.  Basically crossing shots are more likely to miss
than 
>up-the-kilt or down-the-throat shots. If you've every played X-wing
againt a 
>Tie-Advanced you know what I mean.

Tried it. Too complex. I just assume all Firecons include a
comprehensive
target tracking suite, able to deal with complex firing solutions.

+-------------------------------------+--------------------+
| Adam Delafield, I.T. Officer	      | Bolton Institute,  |
| #include "witty_saying"	      | Eagle Tower,	   |
| E-mail : ad4@Bolton.ac.uk	      | College Way,	   |
| Phone  : +44 1204 528851 (ext 3163) | Bolton, UK.	   |
| Fax	 : +44 1204 399074	      | BL3 5AE.	   |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------+