Re: Destroyers

My mind plays tricks on me sometimes. In this case, a logical deduction
(my
assignment of weapon sizes to ship classes) was presented as an actual
memory.
Which it obviously isn't.

And I wasn't looking at either FB1 or FT when I mentioned it. It just
seemed so
plausible at the time ;-(

--- Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com> wrote:
> Michael Llaneza wrote:
> 
> >>>I'd give them a lot of Class-1 beams and PDS, with 1 or 2 ADFC. (5
> >>>class-1, 2 PDS, 1 ADFC for example). The beams will work against
> >>>fighters and missiles and the PDS will back them up. This follows
> both
> >>>the classic FT >paradigm (class-1s on DDs, class-2s on CA, etc.) 
> >> 
> >>If this was a "classic FT paradigm", it must've been in 1st edition.
> >>The 2nd ed. sample DD used B-batts (equivalent to Class-2s) as its
> >>main armament...
> >
> > It's been a looong time since I played 2nd ed. :-)
> 
> Then I'm even more confused by the "classic paradigm" thing. All of
the
> "official" FB1 DDs use either missiles or B2s as their main
> armament...?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Oerjan Ohlson
> oerjan.ohlson@telia.com
> 
> "Life is like a sewer.
> What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
> - Hen3ry
> 
> 
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.