Re: Re: FT: Carriers & Fighter Capacity

----- Original Message -----
From: <Beth.Fulton@csiro.au>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 12:33 AM
Subject: RE: Re: FT: Carriers & Fighter Capacity

> G'day,

> > The ship designs really are _that_
> > bad, as compared to what can be done with the same systems in
> > FB1 and a little custom design.

> Personally I would've thought the NSL BB was pretty good, or is that
because
> it uses beams/p-torp combo?

It's one of the better ones, yes.  Two main reasons.  The first is that
it's
one of the few designs in the book that doesn't devote an imprudently
large
percentage of its mass to things other than weapons (i.e. the total mass
of
its drives, hull, and armor is just a hair over 55% of the total, which
isn't bad).  The second is that its armament is devoted to all one
purpose
rather than trying to do a lot of different things without bringing
enough
to do any of them particularly well.

The things I don't like about it are that it brings a few too many 3-arc
weapons to the plate for a thrust-2 ship, and (like every other ship in
FB1)
its point defense armament is far too weak, IMO.

E