Prev: Re: Beam Weapons Next: Re: Beam Weapons

Re: Beam Weapons

From: Adam Delafield <A.Delafield@b...>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 1996 07:35:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Beam Weapons

Date sent:  29-NOV-1996 12:29:48 

>Adam wrote:-

>--Am I the only one who disagrees with this? All it needs is a little
>--common sence to create designs that 'feel' right.

>No I agree with you, the obsession with points etc has never appealed
>to me Im with the feels right camp. I'm very happy with the rules as
>stand, if they changed them, I'd complain. 

Start complaining then 8-)

So long as they don't change it to a FMA system, I'll be happy. I quite
like the idea of Mass being the only balance. Perhaps drives will take
up mass points. One thing is sure, the ships will need more capacity,
what with the growth in weapon size, additional equipment and drives
all to be fitted into the hull.

>I play with set ship types that are balanced (like the one in FT & MT)
or fit 
>the background or scenario (Kobyashi Maru was never balanced on

>Do you have your full finalized Star Trek background available yet...

Not even close. I keep changing my mind on details 8-)

I have put my Klingon ships on my root web page (The first set to be
They are ziped and in Word 6 format.

Note klingons don't get damage control, but get extra capacity.

>Tim Jones

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

Prev: Re: Beam Weapons Next: Re: Beam Weapons