Prev: RE: Re: FT: Carriers & Fighter Capacity Next: RE: Glenn Wilson

Re: Another tack on fighters

From: Flak Magnet <flakmagnet@t...>
Date: 03 May 2002 09:13:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Another tack on fighters

I snipped much of this... but I wanted to thank Mr. Barclay for posting
his message.  I got a lot of insight into some of the intricacies and
problems in the FT system.  Nothing that turns me off to the game, but
it certainly makes me want to develop some rules for running a campaign
in which players are forced to do evolutionary ship design... 

Let's see... everyone starts with small, basic ships that are exactly
the same... they learn the rules with those ships (not many people here
play, and I have yet to play anyone myself)...

I'll cut myself off there and if I figure out some way to enforce
evolutionary ship design by some abtract campaign system or something,
I'll put it up to the list.

I'm thinking sometime after I've played a few games, maybe tried it,
bought and read the FB's. etc...  (Don't hold your breath.)

--Flak

On Fri, 2002-05-03 at 02:44, Thomas Barclay wrote:
> I don't agree with Mr. Foley on all his points. 
> Perhaps the thing to keep in mind here is this: 
> The models we mostly buy are FB ships. The 
> ships used in most games (esp tournament or 
> convention) are FB ships. So if fighters 

-- 

--Flak Magnet
Hive Fleet Jaegernaught


Prev: RE: Re: FT: Carriers & Fighter Capacity Next: RE: Glenn Wilson