Re: official minis Re: Flat top carriers

***
So I looked through the fleet book and decided I like the FSE
and ESU miniature styles the best, with the ESU coming out
favored since I dislike the carrier versions of the FSE (why
wet navy style flight decks?).
***

There are many people that feel the fleet book fleet designs
are fairly well-balanced, and that would be a good reason to
have some games strictly by the 'rules', if your friend wants
to play that the FB designs are the rules.

I actually support that point of view, but only if stated as
the way you want to play for one game or one campaign or one
tourney.

The GZG figs and the books are Jon's livelihood, and yet he's
the first to tell you play what you want, the way you want,
just make certain you include 'play' with all it's meanings.

***
In Battlestar Galactica the fighters launched out of tubes,
but for landing they used a big open deck, albeit a covered
over one.
***

As far as flat tops, I also have problems with the designs.
In BG's case, the shots from fighters approaching always
looked like 'big tubes' to me. However, it's very useful as
a visual queue saying 'this is a carrier', and I can come up
with pretty convincing PSB either way. The kit-bashed carriers
I came up with had large funnels on the rear to 'net' the
incoming fighters. I always assumed they'd be EM nets, not
hard matter.

I noticed the external fighters on the Roger Young et. al., but
don't recall you actually seeing them launch. Course, that
brings up the previous arguments about external storage all
over again. I refer back to the archives.

The_Beast