Re: Professionalism and Quality in FT terms (long)

At 09:11 20/01/00 -0500, you wrote:
>On 20-Jan-00 at 06:29, Tony Wilkinson (twilko@ozemail.com.au) wrote:
>> G'day all,
>> 
>>	I have been thinking about Beth's quality survey and how it
might be
>> used in FT games. These a rough ideas (do I have any other kind) and
there
>> is still much to be worked out particularly with regards to costings.
>> 
>
>This is all well and good, but unless you want to have everyone playing
>NAC you need to adjust point values on fleets to reflect the fact that
>everyone other than NAC has picked up a severe disadvantage.
>

	But thats just the point. Unless the costings can be reworked in
such a
way as to balance the advantages/disadvantages then there is really no
point to trying to represent the more abstract factors effecting ship
preformance. The costings are what needs work. As for Beth's survey I
really that assigning one value for the entire fleet is just not
reasonable. All fleets and militaries will have a quality/preformance
range. If they didn't you'd never see elite troops.

Wilko.