Re: Fighters

At 5:17 PM -0500 5/8/02, Randy W. Wolfmeyer wrote:
>
>
>My original thought was that beams would attack just like beam 1's in
PDS
>mode, but with the appropriate number of dice for range.  This would
make
>it imperative for fighters to be evading at close range.  One thing the
>fighter player has to account for as well is keeping endurance to
survive
>leaving the fight and getting back to the carrier alive.  It might make
>sense then to have your carrier closer to the fight, which might make
some
>of the FB carrier designs more useful with all of their "unnecessary"
>armaments.

So Class 2's, 3's and 4's will get to engage fighters as well?? Tell 
you lads what, why don't we just ditch fighters and carriers all 
together? Would that be better?

All of the methods you folks are proposing would emasculate carriers. 
Why have carriers?

-- 
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
- Ryan Montieth Gill			     '01 Honda Insight -
- rmgill@SPAmindspring.com			    '85 CB700S -
- ryan.gill@SPAMturner.com		 '76 Chevy Monte Carlo -
- www.mindspring.com/~rmgill		       '72 Honda CB750 -
-				      '60 Daimler FV701H Mk2/3 -
-				   '42 Daimler Scout Car Mk II -
-	      I speak not for CNN, nor they for me	       -
----------------------------------------------------------------
-    Smart ID cards in the US, Smart ID cards in Hong Kong,    -
-		      what is the difference?		       - 
----------------------------------------------------------------
-  C&R-FFL  /  Protect your electronic rights!	  \ EFF-ACLU   -
- SAF & NRA/  Join the EFF!  http://www.eff.org/   \ DoD #0780 -