Prev: Rise of the Robots Next: Re: A thought about points systems

Re: FT: Carriers & Fighter Capacity

From: Donald Hosford <Hosford.Donald@a...>
Date: Wed, 01 May 2002 04:45:03 -0400
Subject: Re: FT: Carriers & Fighter Capacity

Well, I have had the thought of simulating Launch Tubes, Catapults ect.
by
adding some extra accelleration to the fighter group's first turn
accelleration.	Problem here, is FT fighters don't move like that....So
how
about by adding some extra move for the first turn, or add an extra
combat
endurance?  This is assuming in the standard bays, the fighters are
using some
of their own fuel/supplies to launch.  The Tubes would be a separate
system on
the ship sheet, and could be damaged like any other system.

I like the idea of having a separate ops deck.

My other favorite type of carrier is to park the fighters on the outside
of the
ship.  This way, the carrier can launch or land it's entire complement
each
turn.  The bad side, is the fighters would be exposed to any attacks
that
damaged the carrier (after shields, before armor?)  Maybe have a die
roll
deturmine if any of the still landed fighters were hit, instead of the
ship.
(Some kind of ratio?  A single roll for each damage point?)

Donald Hosford

Brian Bilderback wrote:

> I've been considering the rules for fighters.  Under the current
rules, a
> ship can store, launch, and recover 6 fighters for 9 mass.  That means
that
> every flight has it's own hangar, launch facility, and recovery
facility.
> It's a good thing modern carriers don't work quite like that.  Has
anyone
> ever tried any alternate rules for separate storage/shared launch &
Recovery
> for dedicated carriers in FT?  I was thinking of something like making
each
> "Hangar bay" worth 5 mass per flight, and each "Operations deck" worth
4
> mass. The carrier could carry as many fighters as it had bays, but
only
> launch and recover as many flights per turn as it has ops decks - sort
of
> like the difference between SML's and SMR's (Only Different).  This
would
> make it remain more economical to buy full 9-mass fighter flights for
BB's,
> DN,'s, etc, but give a litttle incentive to designing good dedicated
> carriers.  Thoughts from the list?
>
> 3B^2
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com


Prev: Rise of the Robots Next: Re: A thought about points systems