Prev: RE: KV Railguns - Another idea Next: Re: [FT] Kra'Vak Changes

Re: [OFFICIAL] Colony lists? (was:Re: Locations of Stars etc.)

From: Rick Rutherford <rickr@n...>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 17:36:54 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: [OFFICIAL] Colony lists? (was:Re: Locations of Stars etc.)

On Fri, 27 Nov 1998, Laserlight wrote:
> 1) What do we want? ("We" being the list membership, as a particularly
> enthusiastic cross-section of FT/DS/SG players). A star map/colony
> that is as close to known astronomical data as possible....

Yes, please use the real galaxy -- it's more fun whn you look up at the
night sky.

> 2) Of those people who use the "official" background, or a minor
> modification of it, do you actually WANT to see it defined in this
> of detail, or left loose (as we have done so far) to allow more
> to come up with your own colonies, campaigns etc.?

I'd say leave it loose -- we need room for different views of the same

> For gameplay purposes it is probably better to keep endurance
> relatively short, even for military ships, to prevent bypassing of
> chunks of territory - if layovers have to be fairly frequent then it
> becomes more tactically necessary to hold star systems rather than
> detour round them.

We used the campaign rules in the back of the Full Thrust rulebook for
first campaign (way back in 1994!), and we found that it was too easy to
get from one system to the other. We were moving in secret on a hex map
boardgame-style, and we each ended up with 95% of our ships in one
flotilla hopping from one star system to the next, hoping to land on and
smash a smaller force. 

FTL movement needs to be restricted, either through low endurance, or
through "jump lines," "Alderson points", or some other future-tech
justification. Your future campaign system will rely on it. :)

Rick Rutherford

Prev: RE: KV Railguns - Another idea Next: Re: [FT] Kra'Vak Changes