Re: FT: Carriers & Fighter Capacity

Roger Books wrote:
>This is another "discussed to death" topic.

Sorry if I'm rehashing an old subject, but this was probably beofre I
was 
into FT.  Just asking.

Although most suggesters
>do 6 and 3.

I'd prefer 6 and  4 or bigger, up to maybe 6 and 6.

>The consensus, as far as I remember, was that it made
>fighters much cheaper and therefore much stronger.

Not a bad thing if that's how you want them in the game setting you run.
:-)

>Since you normally
>launch from beyond weapon range it doesn't disadvantage you to take
>2 turns launching.

Which is the reason I'd suggest a combination of masses that makes 1 bay
and 
1 ops deck more in mass than 1 self-contained fighter bay.

3B^2

_________________________________________________________________