Re: [GZG] [FT] Plotless Full Thrust game

>Pardon my bluntness as I don't mean to tick off anyone.  Jon, you 
>have a wonderful game as written.
>I love FT.  I'd gladly play it "according to Hoyle" using either 
>cinematic or vector movement with
>anyone. I have no problems with plotted movement.

Don't worry Greg, no offence taken!  ;-)
We've happy that you play or modify FT to any way you like, as long 
as you have fun with it!

>
>But I also know my nephews pretty well, and plotted movement is a 
>non-starter. They have so many
>other toys and games to play with, that they simply won't play a 
>second game if they have to
>use plotted movement.	I know this makes FT a different game.	I 
>accept that.  My nephews won't
>be playing FT with anyone else except me, so they won't know the 
>difference.  I thought about
>the idea of one side plotting movement while the other side moves 
>unplotted, but it won't work
>for the reasons you give.  My nephews will want to play on opposite 
>sides and I would like to
>include SMs eventually.

In that case, I'd probably suggest using movement alternating by ship 
(though other options may work as well or better!), and accepting the 
fact that certain things (such as the placed-marker weaponry) are 
just not going to work as intended because they are so dependant on 
plotting as a fundamental part of the game.

>
>So, I would like to politely and humbly ask that we just forget 
>about plotted movement for
>the sake of this thread.
>
>I like Laserlight's idea of dummy SMs.  I'll mull that over to see 
>if that'll work.

Yes, to me that sounds a good compromise if you want to use PMWs at 
all; maybe two dummy markers for every real one, and if you place the 
three in a good spread then even if your opponent maneuvers violently 
to avoid them all (assuming he can do so), then they've at least had 
some value as "area denial" weapons!
Maybe some limitation like all three (the real salvo and the two 
dummies) must be no more than 6mu apart (from at least one other - so 
a line of them 12mu long would be OK), and (as I think someone else 
suggested earlier) PSB it that the firing ship launches a couple of 
"crybaby" decoy missiles at the same time as the actual salvo.... 
come to think of it, that's not a bad idea for a weapon system option 
even for "normal" plotted games....  ;-)

Best,

Jon (GZG)

>
>Please keep those ideas coming.  Thanks.
>
>--Greg
>
>
>On Jan 8, 2006, at 1:36 PM, Ground Zero Games wrote:
>
>>I've always considered the plotted movement (and hence the need to 
>>anticipate your opponent's intentions) to be a very fundamental 
>>part of FT,  and while it's certainly possible to play it in 
>>various ways without plotted movement, that makes it a very 
>>different game.
>>
>>My preferred method for playing the game with young and/or 
>>inexperienced players who find the concept or execution of plotted 
>>movement a problem is this:
>>
>>Assuming you have one experienced/adult player against a youngster 
>>or newbie, make the experienced player plot movement as normal for 
>>his/her ships, then allow the young player to move his/her ships 
>>(without plotting, but still adhering to the normal movement rules 
>>and restrictions). Finally the experienced player moves in 
>>accordance with the plotted orders. The end result of this is 
>>essentially the same as if both sides plotted and then moved as 
>>normal, thus preserving the feel of the game.
>>Yes, this method does mean that there are problems with placed 
>>marker weapons like SMs (though only if the experienced player is 
>>using them - the youngster can use them in the normal way without 
>>problems), but probably you would be better sticking to simple 
>>direct fire systems when teaching young players anyway. As they get 
>>more used to the rest of the game, then maybe you can introduce 
>>them to the full plotted movement at a later stage.
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>Jon (GZG)
>>_______________________________________________
>>Gzg-l mailing list
>>Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
>>http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Gzg-l mailing list
>Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
>http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l