Prev: Re: FT-Banzai ships Next: Re: NAC - American style [LONG]

Re: FT in centimeter scale?

From: J L Hilal <jlhilal@y...>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 01:05:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: FT in centimeter scale?

--- Mark & Staci Drake <> wrote:

> Am looking to try playing FT in cm scale--what pitfalls do I need to
> watch out for when using centimeters??

We played for many years at 1MU=1", but 2 years ago tried 1MU=1/2",
which should be close to what you are asking about.  We now use both,
depending on what type of game we are looking for: 1" for starting
speeds under 15, 1/2" for starting speeds over 20.

1)  As others have mentioned, the 6MU radius of ADFC is very noticable,
also for a variety of other systems, such as fighter attacks, SMs, PBs,
etc. is a large affect.  The 3MU reduced range for placed systems in
vector will also jump out at you (that's a guess as we play cinematic)

2)  It is possible that a squadron of capital ships can NOT physically
be placed so that they are less than 6cm apart.  Some others on the
list have their ships based on differing height stands to allow for the
close maneuvering of the smaller scale.  If you do not want to re-base
all of your ships, then you should probably either stick to smaller
miniatures, such as AOGs Fleet Action scale B5 and Turning Point, or if
you are using GZGs minis (or any others with similar sized capitals),
use the smaller ships from the range and "rescale" them (ie use a
"cruiser" mini and call it a BB, use a "destroyer" mini and call it a
cruiser, etc.)

3)  With the high speeds possible, fighters can be left behind easily
on a scrolling table (max move 36MU, 48 for fast fighters if you use FB
rules).  We often get fleet speeds of 50+ with 1MU=1/2".  Similarly,
this changes the effectivenes of SMs and PBs.

4)  The "feel" of the game also changes.  With 1MU=1", it feels like a
historical pre-missile naval battle or the kind of thing that you are
used to from sci-fi on film and TV.  However, with the high speeds of
the smaller scale we often get squadrons scissorng back and forth
across the table like a high speed jet dogfight.  Remember that with
high speeds a ship may be able to pass completely across another ship's
fire envelope during a single turn's movement (eg out-of-range to port
to out-of-range to starboard), especially if they are closing by even
one course facing.  You can also do this on purpose, ie turn towards
your opponent with the intention of combined closing speed taking you
out of range before the firing phase.

5) because of the increased pace of maneuvering, fire arcs become much
more important.  In our games were severely limit the number and total
Mass of 6-arc weapons that a ship can mount.

6)  At higher speeds, the two step fixed turning causes much more
pronounced discrete end-position ship loci.  It may be impossible for
you to maneuver your ship into significant areas of your maneuver

7)  P-torps, K-guns, SMs, P-bolts, and pulsars all have a uniform fixed
maximum range.	Humans and Svasku have weapons that the player can
choose to give longer ranges.  If you switch over to cm or 1/2" MUs,
you will find that home-built ships will shift towards having fewer but
bigger beams (or just get bigger) and svasku-style bio-ships will
become more "powerful".  Several of the others on this list have put
forward that given sufficient space (cm MUs, scrolling table), a small
ship with T8 and a single 3-arc B5 can chop up anything, of any size
with smaller B's or less T.

Some house rules that we use to fix some of these:
A)  We use a different movement system for fighters than the FB

B)  Cause turns greater than 2 to be evenly distributed over the
movement, eg a P3 order would happen in 3 1-point turns at the
begining, 1/3 and 2/3 point of movement.

C)  Use a sliding scale for turns, eg turns at V20 or less cost 1
Thrust (normal), turns at V20-40 cost 1.5 or 2 thrust, etc.

D)  We use a home-grown set of rules for SMs which is a blend of Sms
and MTMs, the missiles' speed is influenced by the firing ship's V, and
with a different To-Hit mechanism.


Prev: Re: FT-Banzai ships Next: Re: NAC - American style [LONG]