Re: Fighters

--- Tomb <tomb@dreammechanics.com> wrote:

> True, except that is more a simple CAP role than a
> true interceptor
> role. And with no operational level game with a

Yeah. . . 

<snip discussion of operational level game>

If fighters had the legs to go gallivanting around the
star system on their own, you:

1)Wouldn't EVER see carriers actually on the field.

2)Would fight most battles as pure airstrikes against
groups of starships.

3)Would be playing frickin' HARPOON, not verdammt Full
Thrust.

This discussion has massively tended in the direction
of Harpoon-style rules covering massive complexity in
fighters.  At which point you need a CAG with a
complete staff to do your battleplanning (anyone here
ever played Harpoon besides myself and Don??).	It's
like having Starfleet Battles power allocation rules,
which requires an engineering technician and staff.

The point of Full Thrust is to be a quickplaying and
simple game that you can teach to small children at 2
in the morning on the second day of the convention. 
Not an hours-long exercise in tedious staff work
(which is not nearly as much fun as some people here
seem to think).

John

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience