Re: Fire Control lock-on

>Ground Zero Games wrote:
>>Re the suggestions that we introduce some sort of target-size-based 
>>modifier, I think someone already answered that one - the problem 
>>is that it reintroduces artificial break points (which were in 
>>original FT2 but FB1 then disposed of) , eg: if you say that ships 
>>up to 50 MASS (for the sake or example) are considered "small", 
>>then given the D6-based granularity of FT you are going to end up 
>>with a situation where a 51 MASS ship is at least 17% easier to 
>>lock-on to than a 50 MASS ship. Now, this doesn't feel right in 
>>many ways - but in real gameplay terms, is it actually a problem or 
>>not? Yes, such a system would mean that munchkin ship designers 
>>would always go for ships just under the break-point, but in trying 
>>to do so they may well be compromising other aspects of their 
>>designs..... I originally dismissed this one out of hand due to the 
>>break-point argument, but the more I think about it the more I'm 
>>wondering whether it could be made to work after all...... 
>>opinions, anyone?
>
>But considering that most aiming/targeting/firing probably wouldn't 
>be executed by humans but by computers.. do size really matter?? 
>Wouldn't it be a question of onboard computers having a fairly good 
>idea of where	enemy ships are when firing. Where as the leftover 
>thrust of the ship being fired upon could help allow it to negate 
>the fire?

Ah, we're back to the old "does size really matter" debate again..... 
<BIG GRIN>

Jon (GZG)

>
>--
>With kind regards
>Claus Paludan
>
>W-site : http://www.krigsspil.dk - Danish Miniature Wargaming Society
>MSN : claus_paludan [at] hotmail.com