Re: Reactions...

On Mon, 24 Feb 1997, Ground Zero Games wrote:

> I guess that if you
> design "balanced" ships with reasonable weapons fits, as the
"standard"
> ship designs were supposed to be, then the problem really isn't that
> important - it only matters to the players who want to maximise their
> designs (and to their opponents...).

Well... If I design a scenario, I can put whatever tech limitations I 
want into it (eg, the "Age of Iridium" scenario which was modelled on
the 
naval battles between Russia and Japan during the 1904-5 war, with 180 
degree arcs and all that; or B5 rules, or whatever...) - and I can make 
them "make sense" in that background. In Mk's B5 rules C-bats and *DAFs 
are very valuable (especially the *DAFs which double as screens!), so it

"makes sense" to use them.

What I'm trying to say is that in the context of a given background, 
certain weapon mixes "make more sense" than others.

But in a background-less single game, the thing that determines what is
making sense is the rules. Nothing else. If I were responsible for
BuShips
and designed something using "inefficient" weapons - as the B battery
was
compared to the A - when I knew there was something better available,
I'd
certainly be fired (and possibly fired at!) when my fleet suffered from
better designs. Thus the "reasonable" weapon fits given in FT actually
become "unreasonable", unless you have a background which says things
about how ships should be designed. Or, of course, the rules are such 
that you have to make compromises - fewer but longer-ranged weapons or 
more but shorter-ranged, or weapons vs point defences, or something.

But if I _don't_ have to make compromises anywhere (ie, one weapon
system 
stands out clearly as the best), I certainly won't.

> The most difficult thing about asking for everyone's opinions like
this is
> that whatever we do for FTIII we're going to p*ss SOMEONE off by going
> against their suggestions! Well, we're just going to have to bite the
> bullet on this one, but please understand that I've read and noted ALL
the
> feedback and opinions, and they'll all help to shape FTIII and future
> products in some way; as always, if we end up using something you
don't
> personally like then feel free to change it!!

Which is, of course, exactly why you don't have to be afraid to go 
against the opinion of people!

> I'll probably be putting some more thoughts out for discussion in due
> course, but for now it may be a good idea if we get back to the
"normal"
> day-to-day correspondance on the list...

You mean, discussing what we think you ought to have written or how to 
modify FT? :) :) :)

Later,

Oerjan Ohlson

"Life is like a sewer.
 What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
 -Hen3ry