Prev: Re: Attitude on the UN Next: Re: [OT] Voting schemes

[FT and DS 2]

From: Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@j...>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 18:38:20 EST
Subject: [FT and DS 2]

Indonesian Commonwealth ships vehicles.

The GZG catalog (hard copy) I have has 25mm (but not 15mm IIRC) SG2 type
figures but the elements (infantry and vehicle for DS2) and ships (FT)
are not readily noticeable in same.

Has anyone worked up homegrown designs for same?  Maybe the OUDF
players/designers have something in the wings they use for IC-OU
clashes?

The 'Pedia blurb (went out there at lunch today) leaves a lot of room
for
mercenary infantry (and maybe mechanized units) but not too much use of
the fleet.

Fleet thoughts:
Would the IC recycle older designs of the EC?  FSE (They sell to anyone
I
expect)? NAC (for political purposes the NAC might want to influence the
IC)?  Certainly not the OU!  Marginally (maybe) the NSL would get
involved.  With a 'Pedia declaration of Military Power 5 would they
*have* more then a token Capital ship force?  

How would you reflect their lowest status force of the military aspect
in
a game?

What would they favor on their ships equipment/weapons/defenses-wise?

Seems the 'Gunskimmers' type vehicles of IC-OU war (2110?) must have
been
army or marine crewed or the navy had a better status for at least that
period.

Seems that the forces operating off earth (Vac Navy) would be fairly
efficient to control piracy and protect trade in general between the
colonies and the Earth government.  But with only short term conscripts
in space?  They would be lucky not to suffer catastrophic accidents on a
regular basis!	Space is a very unforgiving environment.

Gracias,
Glenn/Triphibious@juno.com
This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.
Historical - Warbeads@juno.com
Fantasy and 6mm - dwarf_warrior@juno.com

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:


Prev: Re: Attitude on the UN Next: Re: [OT] Voting schemes