Prev: C batteries / PDAF Next: Re: guns in vacuum (was Re: Near Future Rules Draft is up!)

Re: [OFFICIAL] new ideas!

From: Ludo Toen <Ludo.Toen@p...>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 15:37:46 -0500
Subject: Re: [OFFICIAL] new ideas!

Joachim Heck - SunSoft wrote:
> @:) or, for that matter, a Japanese Carrier give the slip to torpedo
> @:) bombers in the South Pacific DURING BATTLE?
> 
>   This, however, happened quite a lot.  Otherwise it would have been a
> lot easier to sink ships.  Manouvering capabilities of ships may not
> have been great compared to that of fighters, but then the fighters
> are trying so hard to avoid the AA that they can't aim that well
> either.  Torpedos and bombs are avoidable by ships.  Until there get
> to be too many of them.

Like you say, the fighter's trying to dodge the AA, an undefended ship
would be hard to miss unless it was something like a torpedoboat or
something like that. So how about this: many people find that *DAF
systems should be more lethal. Keep the current *DAF rule but give
surviving fighters a negative die modifier.

Ludo

Prev: C batteries / PDAF Next: Re: guns in vacuum (was Re: Near Future Rules Draft is up!)