Re: What is FT? (was:Big vs Small ships...)

On Wed, 2 Apr 1997, Ground Zero Games wrote:

> Sorry if you took my comment a bit personally 

No offense taken.

> something in FT is "wrong" becuase it doesn't fit some kind of
historical
> counterpart

I have no beef with that, as long as the game's internal logic works.
The models its own particular reality, which may or may not correspond
to 
any other reality.

There are flaws in the internal logic, though...

> that sort of sense of humour...) was that although we call one FT ship
a
> "destroyer" and another a "Battleship", these are nothing but
convenient
> labels;

True. Look at modern fighters -- they're bigger than a fair few WWII 
bombers. We're likely to attach familiar tags to anything new. It helps 
people relate to changes...

> navies! (He was a Harpoon player).

That figures :-)
 
> Sure, bits of FT are taken from almost every historical model you
could
> list, and from probably every space opera SF source I've ever read or
seen,
> as well, but they are then all liberally mixed around. 

Yup. There have been a fair few proposals for a "grand strategic"
campaign 
system. I think we should really think what kind of reality we'd like 
such a system to model. 

--
maxxon@swob.dna.fi (Mikko Kurki-Suonio) 	  | A pig who doesn't
fly
+358 50 5596411 GSM +358 9 80926 78/FAX 81/Voice  | is just an ordinary
pig.
Maininkitie 8A8 02320 ESPOO FINLAND | Hate me?	  |	     - Porco
Rosso
Http://www.swob.dna.fi/~maxxon/     | hateme.html |