Re: FT III alternative rules

joachim wrote:
>@:) ROF seems appropriate for individual weapon systems, but batteries
>@:) may make up several weapons of the same clustered together.  With
>@:) this in mind, a battery might be designed such that when some
>@:) components are recharging, others may fire, leaving no gaps in
>@:) fire support.
>
>  That makes a lot of sense - and immediately leads me to suggest that
>the player should be able to decide (either at construction time or
>during combat) whether to fire a weapon at full strength infrequently
>or at partial strength constantly.  For example, one might choose to
>either fire an A battery as a C battery on any given turn, or one
>might choose not to fire for two turns and on the third fire the
>weapon as an A battery.

My explanation of the beam batteries ROF was supporting existing
gameplay,
simply that the weapon system delivers a constant output.  Your option
to
allocate portions of the battery for varying degrees of fire would
definitely be interesting for some scenarios.

>  This would again require some bookkeeping but it wouldn't be too
>bad, especially if you were using some kind of erasable SSDs, either
>grease pencils or transparency markers.

Ugh!  More bookkeeping!  How about allowing a beam battery to fire at
any
level below its designation(An A-batt can fire at A, B, or C levels)
without
requiring the recording of charge level.  An example of its usefulness
would
be to try to disable a target vs. obliterating it for possible boarding
actions, etc.  

Mike Miserendino