Re: When is a Dreadnought a Dreadnought

On Aug 19, 1997 at 10:56:56 AM, "Steve Pugh" <mafb90@pop.dial.pipex.com>

wrote:

> Well, the consensus here in the past has been that if a ship has
enough 
> mass then it can carry fighters. Hence, a dreadnaught is what ever you

> want to call a dreadnaught and the line in FT about only carriers and 
> dreadnaughts having fighters is generally interpreted as only being
true 
> for the standard designs. 

I have some affection for FASA's _Renegade Legion_ system, where mass 
determines the class of the warship.  So, for example, you have Frigate,

Destroyer, Cruiser, Battleship, with carriers of a similar mass being
tagged 
as Frigate-class carrier, Cruiser-class carrier, etc.  Since all
warships can 
carry fighters, the main difference between a "carrier" and a
non-carrier is 
that carriers don't have spinal mounts.  I can't remember if there is a
limit 
on the number of embarked ships a non-carrier can carry.

Incidently, as I think I have said on this list, _Renegade Legion_, for
all 
its faults, is perhaps the only game I have run across that is
consistant in 
its explanation as to why both fighters and battleships are used in
large 
numbers. The explanation was published in an essay in _Renegade Legion: 
Prefect_.

-- Chris Weuve	 [My opinions, not my employer's.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
mailto:caw@wizard.net (h)	    _Exordium_: the fan web page
mailto:caw@intercon.com (w)	   
<http://www.wizard.net/~caw/exordium.htm>