Prev: Re: FT-Banzai ships Next: Parts question

Re: FT-Banzai ships

From: Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@t...>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 13:16:48 +0100
Subject: Re: FT-Banzai ships

Charles Lee wrote:

>Kravak defence weapons would carry over like B1/ PDF since they came
>and the game designers forgot people use them.

If we had forgotten that people use scatterguns and B1s as point
we wouldn't have included updated versions of these rules in the Fleet 
Books (FB1 p.7 for B1s as point defence, FB2 p.10 for scatterguns).

Since however there *are* updated versions of these rules in the Fleet 
Books, the older MT versions do not carry over - they are superceded by
Fleet Book versions.

>The salvo missles were supposed to simply missle use, but the long
>and smart targetting use keeps it alive in 54 MU's choice.

Say again? The Salvo Missile rule explicitly says (in the first
that SMs are a completely new system, ie. *not* a replacement for
Furthermore the FB1 ship design rules explicitly give the mass and
cost values for both MT missiles and SMs, which would have been pretty 
pointless if SMs had been intended to replace MT missiles.

>Had in the new system used MT missles the kravak weapons would have
>better discribed against them.

The FB1 and FB2 rules for defensive systems *are* written assuming that
old MT missiles would still be in use. That's precisely why these rules 
talk about shooting at "missiles" (as in "all types of missiles")
of "salvo missiles" (which would've referred to SMs only).

>House rules generally lead the designers because of prefferences.

Certainly, but you nevertheless have to specify when you're talking
house rules since otherwise others will think that you're talking about
published rules.



"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."

Prev: Re: FT-Banzai ships Next: Parts question