Prev: Re: Missles? Next: Re: FT III Ideas

Re: Odd Tons (was Damn the Torp...)

From: jon@g... (Ground Zero Games)
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 15:48:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Odd Tons (was Damn the Torp...)

>On Wed, 2 Apr 1997, Ground Zero Games wrote:
>> I guess one of the most logical ways to do it is simply to ban
>> odd-numbererd mass ships!! :)
>As this is quite clearly the stand Geo-Hex takes in their FAQ at
>, I was wondering who authorized that?
>I *thought* they were gospel straight from the horse's mouth.
>Do we already have a schism?

No. KR at Geohex has been on the net much longer than I have, and I
have any input into this FAQ, but that doesn't make them any less (or
"right" or "official". But in fact, KR has probably PLAYED a lot more
of FT than I have (certainly in recent years) so is, IMHO, pretty well
qualified to offer interpretations.
>> this as gospel - it might be interesting to allow either way, as long
>> one factor (system mass or damage) is rounded down and the other up -
>> players yet another choice to make....
>Unnecessary complexity, IMHO.

I don't really think this is complex - just a simple choice one way or
other when you're designing your ship, you write it into the ship design
and there we are.
>And, IMHO, odd thrust should round maneuverability DOWN.
>A single point of turning is more important (usually) than a single
>of thrust, which leads to optimised designs with odd thrust numbers.

Yes, I'd definitely agree with you on this one.
> (Mikko Kurki-Suonio)	   

Jon (GZG)

Prev: Re: Missles? Next: Re: FT III Ideas