Re: [ft] Fighter Momentum Conservation (was: [OT]UnpredictableAI)

G'day,

 >Just for the record...I am not arguing just
 >for the sake of argument...Hopefully I
 >am trying to expain my view clearly...?

I will endeavour to pay attention and not let my devil's advocate side
take 
over then ;)

 >>>The data sheet for a squadron seems much simpler
 >>>than the simplest ship's data sheet anyway.
 >>
 >>Why?
 >
 >There are only so many types of fighters in the game.
 >As opposed to the near infinate number of ship
 >designs possible.

Sorry that was my misinterpretation, I thought you meant it would be
easier 
to keep track of their movement/orders, I do agree keeping track of how 
many are dead etc is easier.

 >Just means that if you want to dogfight,
 >new tactics are necessary.  These ships
 >are in space...not air, or water.  Means everything
 >moves the same way. Momentum
 >should be observed for all objects.
 >Not just because it is a ship.

True, which is why (in the context of introducing that momentum to
fighters 
too) I suddenly wondered why "If both wish to, they both stop right
there 
and continue the dogfight." ;)

 >Well, how big a weapon do you think a
 >fighter can carry?  Thats one of the reasons
 >they are called fighters.  If they could carry
 >destroyer weapons, they would be
 >called destroyers...

I'm not disagreeing with that, but if fighters are made to move like
ships 
without giving them thrust abilities that are ludicrously high then they

won't get into range consistently enough to do any damage, so you're
back 
to the problem of fighters (effectively) "being left behind" by the
ships. 
(Though in context of comments further down I'm saying this from a 
perspective we're we write orders for ships and so if fighters were to
be 
dealt with like ships....)

 >I have a few very good books on navel ships
 >from the first "rafts" to the mid-20th
 >century.  Technological History is one of my hobbies.

Whereas I'm more an Ancients kinda girl ;)

 >Sure they do.  They just do it faster.
 >At the speeds they travel, air does the
 >same things to them as to ships.
 >They just have to worry about bumping into
 >things, not sinking.

But doesn't the immense speed they can attain give them flexibility
beyond 
what ships can match? They can turn on a pinhead and go back the other
way 
(essentially) when in the same time period ships would seem like they're

taking an age to turn... bit like fighters really being cinematic
whereas 
ships are in vector (relatively speaking). At least that's what it
seemed 
like to a dunderhead like me ;)

 >I myself have never bothered writing orders
 >for any game that required it. Just seems (to me)
 >to be a waste of good time, better spent playing the game.

Have you had much of an opportunity (like at cons) to see how games with

orders compare to your games without and do see if it changes the game?
I'm 
just interested as we've always written orders in FT.

 >That is true.  I remember some of the long
 >threads on this list on this subject in
 >the past few years.  Sometimes I wonder if
 >we are rehashing the same old things
 >without realizing it.  Maybe I am just too
 >lazy to check out the archives...:-)

Well they say there's only 8 separate story lines, maybe the same holds
for 
threads ;)

 >Besides, one never knows where a good
 >idea will come from.	Talk is good!

Very true!

Cheers

Beth

------------------------------------------------------------------------
---- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Elizabeth Fulton
c/o CSIRO Division of Marine Research
GPO Box 1538
HOBART
TASMANIA 7001
AUSTRALIA
Phone (03) 6232 5018 International +61 3 6232 5018
Fax 03 6232 5053 International +61 3 6232 5053