RE: FT tactics vs slow ships

>A good point.
>Unless there is an admiral or complete agreement on objectives, two
smaller
>fleets will usually not beat a unified fleet of equal points.
>One of the balancing points I plan to use in a game I will run at
GZG-ECC
>will pit 4 human fleets against a Sa'Vasku fleet. The Human fleet
out-masses
>the Sa'Vasku fleet. But superior SV technology combined with
inter-fleet
>rivalry should make it more balanced. <evil laugh>
>
>Of course if Jon T has the Fleetbook 2 done in time, or ready for
play-test,
>I could easily adapt the SV fleet. [Duck the jab in the gob]. ;-)

Like objects in the rear view mirror, some things may be closer than you
think.........

;-)

Jon (GZG)
>
>-----
>Brian Bell
>bkb@beol.net
>http://members.xoom.com/rlyehable/ft/
>-----
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:	Roger Books [SMTP:books@mail.state.fl.us]
>> Sent:	Monday, January 24, 2000 10:11 AM
>> To:	gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
>> Subject:	Re: FT tactics vs slow ships
>>
>>
>> The biggest problem I am hearing isn't ship design.	It's that one
>> guy is running a 1500 point fleet and the other side is running
>> two 750 point fleets.  If you are going to run with two individuals
>> you really need to designate one the admiral and have him give
>> a mission objective to the other.  Otherwise you are just going to
>> lose no matter what ships you take.
>>
>> Roger