Re: FTIII

David Brewer wrote:
>I don't see a need for a mass, so long as something is used as a 
>multiplier. Charge a flat point cost for everything, including hull
>boxes, and multiply by a factor derived from the thrust. Or use the
>number of hull-boxes as a multiplier. Or both. A more expensive 
>weapon will demand a more survivable platform, anyway, so there's 
>your mass-factor.

IMHO using mass adds to the flavor of designing ships.	I really like
the
use of both mass and points when building ships.  The system is simple
enough as it is, why simplify this more?  Taking out some of the details
of
ship design could make this process a boring task.

>I think tech-levels are a red herring. If a superior technology can
>shrink it all down... and make a smaller platform more survivable,
>then the exact same ship in FT stat terms, same weapons, same hull-
>boxes, same thrust, could be quite different "masses".

Nah, tech levels can make the design process more interesting.	I see
this
as strictly optional.

Mike Miserendino