Re: [FT] Huge games? Yikes!!

On Mon, 18 Jan 1999, Los wrote:
> You can check out the Monster Game we played for the making of Adler
Tag here:
> It was played to completion in  less than a day...

summarising from Los's comprehensive illustrated account:

NSL 44 ships, 16 fighter groups, 14800 pts
KV 22 ships, 5 fighter groups, 10500 pts

1-0 Away win to the NSL

Commenting on his preparations for the match, Los writes "Any space mini
that was mounted was pressed into service on one side or the other.  (I
ran out of fighters so we used quarters with a tiny die representing
strength)". What about duration? "We started at about 1 pm (w/ Prep) and
it lasted till 10pm". Nine hours is really not bad going for an
engagement
this size.

> -MWS- wrote:
> > I've been reading posts on the list about games with 20, 30, and
even 60 (!!)
> > ships *per side*, and I'm starting to wonder if anyone actually
plays the
> > games out to completion. :)  Also, how many of you playing these
huge games
> > are taking an entire weekend to run these monstrosities?

FT is remarkably quick once you get the hang of it - me and a friend
used
to warm up with a ~6 ship a side FT battle before spending the rest of
the
day playing a single 8000 point a side Sp*** M***ne battle, which we
often
didn't finish. half the time was looking up rules, which we never, ever,

had to to do for FT. we could have gone to 20 ships each and played it
out
in a day (roughly 1000-1800). mind you, we used ft2.0, without fighters
and using squadron maneuvering.

A question: does time to play scale linearly with force size? if you use
squadron orders more or less throughout, order time should be the same
for
small and large forces (ish), movement-plotting should take the same
time,
physically moving the minis will take proportionally longer, and firing
should take longer as there are simply more dice.

Tom