Prev: Re: Fire Control lock-on Next: RE: Fire Control lock-on (was: Re: [FT] squadron suggestions)

Re: Fire Control lock-on (was: Re: [FT] squadron suggestions)

From: "Randy W. Wolfmeyer" <rwwolfme@a...>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:12:19 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Fire Control lock-on (was: Re: [FT] squadron suggestions)

As one of the requested quiet lurkers I guess I'll weigh in.

At first I was like, oh boy, yet another crazy newcomer with bright
ideas that involve adding more rules.  But as I read on, I was thought,
"This is pretty reasonable, and doesn't complicate things too much".
Then I then I got to the end and realized the crazy newcomer was Jon.
Oops.

That said, I like it.  It's an extra roll, but that one new roll adds a
whole lot of new territory to add into the game play.  And it doesn't
necessarily invalidate any of the old designs.	I like that it takes one
of the more passive components of the ship design and gives it a more
active roll in game play.

One thought, could this new roll also help decomplicate some of the Beta
fighter rules?	Instead of having the fighters evasion reduce the chance
of taking hits, it just applies to the lockon roll, and thus cuts down
on
some of the rules for each weapon type against fighters?  Make the
fighters generally harder to target to begin with and it might balance
out
okay.

Alrighty, back into my hidey hole.

Randy Wolfmeyer
Dept. of Physics
Washington University
http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~rwwolfme

Prev: Re: Fire Control lock-on Next: RE: Fire Control lock-on (was: Re: [FT] squadron suggestions)