Fire, Fusion, and Steel 3

[pendragonman]

I'd certainly favor a Fire Fusion and Steel approach over the makers. The makers are neat but they often produce nonsensical results and aren't integrated all that well.

An FF&S approach to the makers could create a more readily use-able flow chart effect to the makers. Thus causing the makers to be more easily understood and more widely used/experimented with.

FF&S v3 should, IMHO, unify the design sequences for ships and the makers, giving us a clear view of how the maker approach to ship building works.

More than a decade since the last time I opened FF&S (TNE-not sure which version it is) and I can still recall that laser turrets are swappable cans with clear views as to power needs.

 

[whartung]

I just need some clarity.

This sounds like a fan based complete rewrite, rather than just an update of FF&S2. Is that what I'm hearing? Just seems strange to have to reinvent all of that work, when it could probably be more efficiently updated than redone.

 

[aramis]

I just need some clarity.

This sounds like a fan based complete rewrite, rather than just an update of FF&S2. Is that what I'm hearing? Just seems strange to have to reinvent all of that work, when it could probably be more efficiently updated than redone.

What you're hearing is essentially wishful thinking. At the outside, Marc might allow a revised FF&S as a fan done project for use with TNE/T4, in the same way he allowed MT Robots...