Re: FT-Fighters and launch bays

From: "Ryan Gill" <rmgill@mindspring.com>
> At any rate going with the all bay based system isn't a bad idea.
> Adding a bit of cargo space for an extra group or two would work. The
> delay in launch/recover/rearm evolutions would probably approximate
> the balance of crewman that are double timing on aircraft.

The best idea would be to say that each Fighter Bay can do one of the
following: Launch, Recover or Arm a Fighter group.
You could then have Hangers at a cost of 6 per capacity rather than 9
mass, which are only capable of storing, not launching fighters. Each
hanger
would be connected to one or more fighter bays.
If you did this, I'd recommend boosting the cost of fighter bays
connected
to hangers to 12 rather than 9 mass. Why?  a) Playbalance,  b) it makes
existing FB designs reasonable, and  c) it is analogous to the increased
cost of a SM launcher (+2 mass) as opposed to SM rack (+1 mass).

Note that a fighter bay would have to be connected to more than 1 hanger
space in order for this to be worthwhile, effectively meaning you get a
discount but at a heavy price in launch/recover/re-arm capability.