Prev: Re: [ds] Ogres Next: Re: Warfare -- where is it?


From: Ground Zero Games <jon@g...>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 22:41:31 +0000

>On Sun, 8 Nov 1998, John Leary wrote:
>> Tron wrote:
>> > Seeing that the list appears to have dried up ....
>> J) 1) Just wondering how many will stay with FTII due to the eligant
>>	 simplicity of the rules.
>i'll drink to that!
>i've not actually seen ft1.3 (as i will continue to call it :-) ie the
>fleet book, but from what i've read i'm wary of it. it sounds like the
>design system has been overhauled to get rid of some of the daft bits,
>like the escort-cruiser-capital splits, but it also sounds like a lot
>the other stuff has made balanced games where pure tactics are
>much harder; you have to spend more time thinking about how your
>match up againts the opponent's defences and vice versa.
>i like ft1.1 where, basically, everyone had beams and that was it.
>occasionally you'd  get torpedoes or fighters. basically, you have
>symmetry with your opponent's fleet, so it just comes down to tactics.

Tom - I think you'll find your fears are groundless if you take a look
the FB. If you still want to use all-beam fleets, or any other style of
fleet you want, you can. Sure, the four fleets that we give specs for in
the FB all all deliberately different from each other - there wouldn't
been a lot of point otherwise, but this shouldn't restrict you or anyone
from playing the kind of game YOU want with the rules. This isn't a "you
can only use the designs we've published" type of system....  <grin>.

Jon (GZG)

Prev: Re: [ds] Ogres Next: Re: Warfare -- where is it?