Prev: [OT] Even for ME Re: [FH] Breaking News - Alien voices Next: Re: couple moreFT questions

Re: couple moreFT questions

From: "Laserlight" <laserlight@q...>
Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 22:55:58 -0500
Subject: Re: couple moreFT questions

From: "Andy Skinner"
>  How necessary is it to have scenarios for games where fleets aren't
similar in make-up, though they cost the same in points?

In the situation you describe, the big ship is at an advantage.  If
you're using NPV, it's a good idea to keep fleets similar in
composition.  If you're using CPV, then it shouldn't matter, as the
points value accounts for the increased value of bigger ships (up to a
point--if you meant 400 mass rather than 400 points, then it would
probably cost more than it's actually worth).  Combat Points Value can
be found on Noam's website, IIRC in the
Weapons and Defenses Archive.

>The rule is you can spin freely as long as your engine works, right?

Yes, at the moment.  That will almost certainly change in the next
edition, though; it is recommended that a ship at speed 0 have its
normal turning ability (thus a 30 degree turn if he's Thrust 2) rather
than spinning freely.

> I'd love to have a single FT rulebook with the best version of each
system in it.

So would we all.  It's coming.

> I'm still interested in what's in the fleet packs from GZG.  I was
thinking of getting a battle squadron and a carrier group.
> Does that make sense?  I don't know how that compares with picking
out ships individually.

I'd get two battle packs and I wouldn't get a carrier--but I don't
like fighters, so YMMV.  And if you use a lot of fighters, you'll find
there's a problem with the present rules--the playtest group is
laboring to resolve this issue.

As I recall, a battle pack is a bit cheaper than picking out the ships

Prev: [OT] Even for ME Re: [FH] Breaking News - Alien voices Next: Re: couple moreFT questions