Re: FT3 Revision, not Re-write

Brian Bell wrote:
>1)Classification ranges. These need to be spread more evenly over the
100 ton
>range.
>Escorts: 2-30 tons				     Corvette:	       
2-10
tons
>								     
Frigate:
>11-20
>								     
Destroyer:
>21-30
>Cruisers: 31-60 tons				    Lt Cruiser	     
31-40
>								     
Esc
Cruiser
>41-50
>								     
Hvy
Cruiser
>51-60
>Capital: 61-100					Battlecruiser 
61-70
>								     
Battleship
>71-80
>
Dreadnought
>80-90
>
Battledrdngt
>91-100

I would not mind if the whole classification thing changed so it's
broken
down into mass ranges that each equate to a size rating(e.g. Escorts are
now
treated as size class A, Cruisers are size class B) vs. using size
ranges to
determine the ship type.

Using generic sizes would represent how each race might have a different
method of classifying a ship type, especially new types that do not
exist in
the current offerings.	I realize one of the main reasons for the
current
system is probably to quickly identify ships, based on types people are
familiar with, but I like something more generic to allow players to
choose
the type they feel best describes the ship.

>4) PDAF/ADAFs should be able to target any fighter/missile in range.

ADAFs already do this.

Mike Miserendino