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
>http://www.geohex.com/faq1.htm, 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
didn't
have any input into this FAQ, but that doesn't make them any less (or
more)
"right" or "official". But in fact, KR has probably PLAYED a lot more
games
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
as
>> one factor (system mass or damage) is rounded down and the other up -
gives
>> players yet another choice to make....
>
>Unnecessary complexity, IMHO.

I don't really think this is complex - just a simple choice one way or
the
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
point 
>of thrust, which leads to optimised designs with odd thrust numbers.

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

Jon (GZG)