RE: FT3 DEVELOPMENT QUESTION: Movement system(s)? was: Re: [FT] Quiet in here, isn't it.

For leaving the table, I keep in my mind a concept of 'battle space', a
limited area where command and control makes sense, and
entrance/reentrance requires involved reintegration of IFF and tactical
linkage. Best if 'you can come back, but for (x turns) you are
EVERYBODY'S target.' 

Especially if part of a larger battle, and you are assumed, having left
this 'battle space', to have entered another furball.

But, from my POV, if there is ONE maneuver, and ONE cycle of fire,
however abstract, I'd not be claiming a period of minutes per turn.

If you are putting 'limits' on speeds, I'd suggest it's more about
putting limits on turns at higher speeds. And, I'm afraid, that's where
hex-based rules have advantages. Painful, ones, I'll admit. (Sorry, I'm
having flashbacks to ancient arguments about 'if I'm going 10K MUs...'
proving FT2 was broken...)

By the way, I'm comfortable with something in the 4xthrust range. Yes,
the cracks show, but most of us don't get crazy about it.

Cinema fighters, along with the WWII Pacific baggage, create most of the
issues with Cinematic fighters, don't you know. I'd think the
problematic goal is one set of rules that can allow both reasonable or
heroic as you wish, as long as everyone is forced to know they're
choosing either the blue or the red capsule. Is Continuum close to that?

Doug

-----Original Message-----
From: Gzg [mailto:gzg-bounces@firedrake.org] On Behalf Of Damond
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 7:46 PM
To: gzg@firedrake.org
Subject: Re: FT3 DEVELOPMENT QUESTION: Movement system(s)? was: Re: [FT]
Quiet in here, isn't it.

I'd think the size of the table would limit practical speeds. 

D.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 21, 2015, at 7:39 PM, Roger Bell_West <roger@firedrake.org>
wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 08:31:16AM +1100, Robert N Bryett wrote:
>> Aircraft move in a different medium from marine ships, while
space-fighters would move in the same medium as other spacecraft.
Fighters *might* have an advantage in acceleration, but there is no
reason why they should have a higher maximum speed.
> 
> There's no _physical_ reason why anything in space should have a 
> maximum speed, but the way cinematic movement makes the game non-fun 
> at high speeds suggests that there's a _game_ reason.
> 
> I think I might say something like "no ship may move faster than 2x 
> its initial Thrust rating". Even that might be too fast.
>