Re: EFSB

Excerpts from FT: 21-Jan-98 Re: EFSB by Tre Chipman@intelli.com 
> Personally, I didn't care for it much.  The ships seemed to be a
little
> overly complex and clunky.  They had increased the level of game
resolution
> so that even fighters had a few systems and damage boxes, and at that
> scale, the ships ended up having tons more damage boxes that I thought
were
> really necessary.  I got the feeling that ships could have battles
that
> lasted nearly forever, and given the frequency which ships bite the
dust in
> B5, I didn't think it captured the flavor or spirit of the show very
well.

Actually, given the way that the way that damage can penetrate through
the outer layers of the hull to the interior structure, not to mention
the way that some weapons (or, a volley from a ship) can just slice
through a large number of boxes, I don't think they did too poorly. 
Admittedly, they could've had the same effect by making weapons do less
damage, and having fewer boxes, but anyway.

As for the time, though, it *can* take a while.  A friend and I played a
Primus BC vs. G'Quon cruiser battle (no fighters), and it basically
ended up a draw... one side of my G'Quon fell off partway through the
battle, and the majority of my weapons were destroyed, but I still had
both of my main cannon.  My friend's Primus was reduced to near
scrap-metal with only two of the secondaries left, and he turned tail
and ran....  A lot of fun, but it did take several hours, though the
pizza break and let's-get-to-know-the-rules didn't help.  Unfortunately,
my firend's down in florida nad I haven't played again since.

One comment, though: Chris Weuve's (sp?) vector movement system is, IMO,
a *lot* better than the half-*ssed movement system in the B5Wars
rules....

Later,

		    Aaron Teske
		    Mithramuse+@cmu.edu