Re: FT-IJN Designs?

In message <012a01c1a995$eb97cd20$e0ba0aca@avis>
	  "Alan and Carmel Brain" <aebrain@austarmetro.com.au> wrote:

> From: <bob_eldridge@mindspring.com>
> 
> > Great minds do think alike<g>. I've been thinking along those exact
same
> lines waiting for my Japanese fleet megadeal to arrive.
> 
> My thoughts on the IJN, based on WW2 IJN.
> 
> Small ships - "Long Lance" MT missiles, the ones with 5 range, or a
Mix.
> Medium ships - vast quantities of Beam-2s, a la Mogami, Chikuma etc,
which
> when originally constructed had something like 15 6" guns.
> At least one should have 12+ MT missiles instead of beam-2's.
> Large ships - Hermaphrodite carriers a la Ise and Hiei
> CVLs - fragile, slow, lots of fighters for their size, which is small.
> CVAs - fast, large, not well armed or protected, rely on speed.
> SuperShips - Make Komarovs look weedy. 4 Beam-4s in the forward arc
(only),
> which makes a pretty powerful "spinal mount" a la Space Cruiser
Yamato,
> only without the need for Yet Another Vunder Veapon.

But ve already hav not vun but tvo vunder veapons :-) vun ist in der
original Full Thrust rullbuk :-)
> 
> Japanese Fighters should be capable of transforming into combat
walkers :-)
> 
>
Hmm.. This has been discussed before, many times IIRC - I think the
simplest way to represent this is:
1) find a set of boarding rules you like
2) allow 'mecha' fighters to board (as 1 borading party per fighter)
instead of attacking normall (PDS still applies)

Cost of these - dunno :-(

Charles