Re: Fw: Carriers and other updates

>I haven't tried it, but I would think it's logical for a Line of Battle
ship
>not to devote space to fighters which could be devoted to weapons or
>defenses.  Fighters are weapons, yes, but they have the advantage of
being
>long range weapons.  If you build a Frail or Weak carrier and keep it
100 MU
>away from enemy cruisers while your fighter wings, then you don't need
the
>extra hull and armor--instead you need another hanger.
>My philosophy is that you ought to have an optimum range and a way to
keep
>the fight happening at that range.  If you build a ship that's a mix
of,
>say, Beam 3's and Torps, you're either going to be wasting your beam's
range
>advantage or you're going to be parked at 30" hoping your torps
occasionally
>hit.  Suboptimal solution.  Obviously a carrier with Thrust 6 or so, a
paper
>hull, and a horde of fighters, is not going to waste time wondering
about
>what range to maintain.

Agreed completely on "wasting" space for weapons whose long range punch
comes completely from fighters.

However, does this work on the tabletop - where generally your carrier
must
be on the table and evade rather than being safely tucked away "off the
board."

Schoon