Re: [DSII] Heresey

John Crimmins wrote:

>I've been doing a good bit of DSII designing lately, and something's
been 
>bothering me about the system.  Let me see if I can put this into
words; 
>I've only
>just managed to put my finger on what it is.
>
>When you look at Full Thrust, it's very possible to have two ships of 
>identical mass (and virtually identical point cost) that are *very* 
>different from each
>other, but still very competitive.  Ship X may have Pulse Torps and 
>screens, while Ship Y has beam weapons and armor, but neither of the
two 
>is clearly
>superior to the other.
>
>It seems that DSII is missing this factor; it's very easy to see (and 
>design) the ideal tank.

That's because the FTFB ship design system is the third iteration of the

Full Thrust design rules, and was based on 5-6 years of experience with
the 
design rules in FT2 - which were about as one-sided as the current DS2
ones 
- there was only one beam weapon worth using (A batteries), essentially 
only three ship sizes worth using (namely the ones immediately below the

class thresholds), and level-3 screens was pretty much compulsory
(except 
on escorts). DS2 today has similar problems - points-optimized designs 
should always use Superior FCS, the maximum allowed level of reactive 
armour (IAVRs and GMSs are far more dangerous than HELs), no Stealth
etc. 
(Points usually *are* a problem, and Stealth is freakin' expensive...)

Later,

Oerjan
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."