Re: Large mass adjustments, was Re: [FT] F***ters

I used to play Starfire a (long) while ago...

One of the minor reasons I stopped, is that the Starfire ship display 
made all the ship designs seem similar.
(note: I did say "seem")  Unless it was labled "destroyer", or 
somthing,  you didn't know what it was...(ie: little ships all looked 
alike, medium ships all looked alike, ect...)

Also players were not given any choice of fire arcs.

One thing I did try, was to layout the systems in a grid, on graph 
paper.	The few games we tried, this had potential.  I added system 
codes for the core systems.  (ie: sensors, power, control)  For the 
placement of the systems, I used a few simple rules.  Engines towards 
the back,  shields near the middle, weapons near the side they fired out

of.  This allowed damage to be "directional".  (ie: fore, aft, 
left,right)  To deturmine the actual row or column hit, we would roll an

properly sized die.  Armor was layed out with the same number of armor 
hits, on each side.  

Donald Hosford

Imre A. Szabo wrote:

>>Perhaps what we ought to do for Full Thrust is, when we're putting
>>    
>>
>together
>  
>
>>the hull boxes, we should intersperse the ships' systems evenly
between
>>them.
>>    
>>
>
>When I want to play StarFire, I play StarFire.  When I want to play
Full
>Thrust, I don't want to play StarFire.
>
>ias
>
>
>  
>