Re: FT Fighters (was: Re: Troop Capacity)

On 14 Jun 98 at 10:28, Ground Zero Games wrote:

> 
> Fighters are in FT because they are popular in many (most?) of the
> TV or movie-based SF backgrounds (Star wars, Galactica, B5, etc,
> etc, Trek being one of the very few exceptions), and in all of these
> the fighters are human piloted, more to make good storytelling than
> for good military sense... :) The "official" FT background assumes
> human-piloted fighters because it is (IMHO) more fun and dramatic
> that way, and for no other reason. If you want yours to be automated
> (RPVs or AIs), or prefer to dispense with fighters altogether, then
> feel free. I would agree that a lot of the fighter kills could be
> mission kills with the fighters either being disabled (or simply
> forced to abort) or the crews ejecting from destroyed fighters (a la
> B5 etc). For a campaign game you could roll for each "killed"
> fighter to see if it limps back to its carrier during or after the
> battle, or if the drifting ejection pod is picked up.
> 
> Jon (GZG)
> 
> 
Thanks for the response Jon. Oh.. I agree that fighters are romantic 
and have a good feelgood factor, and I'd like to keep them, but I was 
just trying to find a not too PSB reason for keeping them ;)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Richard Slattery	     richard@mgkc.demon.co.uk
An economist is a surgeon with an excellent scalpel and a rough-edged
lancet, who operates beautifully on the dead and
tortures the living. 
     Nicholas Chamfort
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~