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

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

From: Douglas Evans <devans@n...>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 18:54:47 +0000
Subject: RE: FT3 DEVELOPMENT QUESTION: Movement system(s)? was: Re: [FT] Quiet in here, isn't it.

Whoops, missed that one. 

I've no problem with floating table; it's about two ships further apart
than the size of the battle area.

Doug

-----Original Message-----
From: Gzg [mailto:gzg-bounces@firedrake.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Han
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 1:42 PM
To: gzg@firedrake.org
Subject: Re: FT3 DEVELOPMENT QUESTION: Movement system(s)? was: Re: [FT]
Quiet in here, isn't it.

In the end, everything is about choosing whatever balance you want
between fidelity, playability and convenience.	There are no wrong
answers, especially when you're playing sci-fi or fantasy and there
isn't a real world analogue that you need to match performance or result
to.  In the end, if you're having fun, that's the important bit.

JGH

On 22/10/2015 3:54 AM, Roger Bell_West wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 08:46:11PM -0400, Damond wrote:
>> I'd think the size of the table would limit practical speeds.
>
> Because space is finite? :-)
>
> (Seriously, a non-floating table is a game-ish solution, which is 
> perhaps hard to justify.)
>

--
ghoti221@gmail.com
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."

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