Re: [GZG] RE: [FT] Unified Fighter Rules? [sec=UNCLASSIFIED]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robertson, Brendan" <Brendan.Robertson@dva.gov.au>
To: <gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:36 AM
Subject: [GZG] RE: [FT] Unified Fighter Rules? [sec=UNCLASSIFIED]

As stinger nodes follow the beam die mechanic, they should be able to. 
This
is one of the cases where those optimised Sa'vasku designs will suffer
from
the lack of extra pds.

Stinger nodes are not PDS they are anti ship weapons. The limitation is
not 
sually the number of stinger nodes it is the number of firecontrols.

>After all ship movement, the AMT moves 3mu towards the closest

I wouldn't move it, you just declare attacks so the opponent knows who
gets 
to use PDS on it.

???? Isn't the AMT a missile so doesn't it get to make an attack run of
6mu 
towards the nearest ship and then it explodes? The way you have
described it 
the AMT sounds like a mutant cross between the PBL and a missile. As a 
missile only the ship being attacked gets to use its PDS other ships
need to 
use ADFC. You need to refine your wording it is not clear.

>>> Scattergun	      6mu      1d3		      1
>>> This nerfs KV anti ordinance.

Yes, it does. The 1d3 was intentional because scatterguns are
overpowered. I 
don't know about the ADFC part.
 So what protection does heavy fighter give against scatter gun?

Why are scatter guns overpowered? they need to be very good because they
are 
one use so are less useful if coming under sustained missile attack.
They 
are good against fighter squadrons, but PBL and heavy missiles will
exhaust 
them before too long. 

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