Well I the boxed set finally came out so I succumbed and bought it and
Brilliant Lances. I haven't had a good look yet through the main rules book
so I can't comment on it much. Unfortunately the boxed set still had the first
printing, so I got my little upgrade booklet to go with it. Has there been any
more errata published as I believe I found a minor error with the PAW design
in FF&S but no mention in the errata ?
Being a design weenie from way back (Striker and High Guard were two of my
favorite books from CT) I set out to build something from FF&S. As I hadn't seen
any PAW bays in Brilliant Lances I figured I'd design one (I'll post the designs
in a later message). I really like how we can design all sorts of weaponry now.
The minor error I mentioned is to do with damage calculation. Meson guns and
lasers explicitly say that 1/R^2 can't be greater than one, but the PAW design
sequence doesn't. It makes sense that PAWs should be the same and the PAW
spinal mounts in BL seem to follow that rule.
I also played a game of BL with a couple of friends. As none of us had played
it before it was fairly slow going to start with, but even after we had got
the hang of the rules, the damage calculation part seemed quite time consuming.
We all came to the conclusion that it would benefit greatly from computer
assistance. The critical hits are also quite brutal. We played with a
Chrysanthemum class Destroyer Escort versus three Gazelles. The Chrysanthemum
didn't have any missiles (to simplify things) and didn't use the sandcasters
(because I forgot 8-), but was able to waste the Gazelles because the 1000Mj
PAWs were doing two critical hits if they hit hull without surface features.
Before I finish, how could I comment on TNE without mentioning The Virus. I've
never been quite as violently opposed to The Virus as some members of this
list ;-), but I have to admit it is _really_ depressing looking at those
before and after subsector listings and seeing all those XXX000-0 planets that
used to be thriving societies.
Rupert
- --
Rupert G. Goldie, Research Scientist [email removed]
Australian Artificial Intelligence Institute
[address removed]