Re: [FT] Operational game

Moi:
>Okay, thus far we have these assumptions:
>1.  This is limited war, so we don't have to deal with major planetary
>bombardment/asteroid strikes / nukes / biowar etc.

TimB:
>To be believable there should be a sound reason for this: planetary 
bombardment is not a light-and-heavy issue but includes all stages in 
between.  Even asteroid strikes can range from the Ortillery-like to 
targetted infrastructure damage and upwards.

Is why I said "major".	I assume that if you use strategic-level
weapons,
the UN and everyone else is likely to be irritated with you.  I also
assume
that "limited war" means no one is trying to destroy national capitals,
etc

TimB
>Very reasonable [blockade] states.  Would not a larger fleet be able to
have higher chances for interceptions and (even in the vastness of
system
space) find it more difficult to "hide" (the infamous "drive
signatures",
etc)?

Larger fleets could opt to stay together or split into squadrons.  If
the
latter, they will have a higher chance to intercept (ie more rolls). 
OTOH
if you have squadrons all over, it's more likely that someone will able
to
generate his own intercept course for you...

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .