RE: Full Thrust vs Starmada

The gist of the argument is this (as I read it):

Fighters are immune to all but selected weapons aboard ships.  In
effect, they exist in a 'dimension' or 'game space' where only PDS,
other fighters, and a few select weapons can effect them.

If your opponent puts 80% of his resources in attacking through fighters
and you haven't put all weapon mass into anti-fighter weapons, you lose
(and don't even enjoy it).

To shift the balance back to allow balanced fleets to battle
fighter-heavy fleets, you need to make fighters harder to use or
targetable by all weapons (albeit at reduced capability).

But Jon definitely feels some settings demand fighters that are immune
to anti-ship weapons, and leans towards making fighters harder to use. 
And making them harder to use without making the game hard to learn is a
challenge.

Oerjan's take would likely be more detailed and accurate.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU [mailto:owner-gzg-
> l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU] On Behalf Of le morpion
> Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 11:58 AM
> To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
> Subject: Re: Full Thrust vs Starmada
> 
>  And there are some problems
> > which we'd rather fix
> > *before* releasing--for example, the Great Fighter
> > Problem should be solved
> > when FT3 is released--and some of them have
> > solutions which are, hm, not
> > immediately obvious.
> 
> I might look a bit naïve but what is actually the
> Great Fighter Problem ?
> 
> (it looks impressively dangerous said like this with
> capital letter ... lol)
> 
> 
> /morp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________________________
> Découvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 250 Mo d'espace de stockage pour
vos
> mails !
> Créez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.mail.yahoo.com/