Bigger--not always better- but shouldn't be limited

Paul Calvi <tanker@rahul.net> wrote:

> In my continuing quest to degrade the potency of cap ships I wonder if
>anyone has tried any of the following modifications to the rules and,
>if so,how did they go?

<5 points snipped>

Well if your intent is to restrict the weapons of the larger ships I
think that they work BUT I am not to clear on why you would want to
limit the Capital ships.  It isn't realistic that their batteries are
any harder to fire then the smaller ships that have the same weapons. 
I think that playing with the rules like this isn't benifical to the
game... (sorry if this arguement has been around for a while I am
somewhat new)

If you find that you need to limit the power of them limit the use of
them in your campaign.	If you find that the people that you are playing
with seem to use the points in the game to only create the larger ships
then you need to make the use of the capital ships more realistic.  

In Navel battles you don't see two or three Battleships or Carriers
always showing up everywhere in every conflict.  You see a lot of
Destroyers and other smaller ships dealing with situations...

I have thought about this for a while and if you use a system like the
GW Warhammer 40k and fantasy game and use percentages as a scale of what
ships you can buy.

In that game they take the total points that you are given and say you
can only use 50% toward Characters, or a minimum of 35% toward main
troops, etc...

You could say something like: (mind that this is off the top of my head)
50% of points must be used on 40 mass or lower ships
 no more than 40% of points can go toward one ship.
 
 So in a 1000 point encouter you couldn't have a ship larger than 400
points
and need to keep the remainder under mass 50 or so. 
 
 Of course this is just a quick example, but I just wanted to put out
 the thoughts...
 
 Blake


Blake Tullo
blake@cybercomm.net