Hi folks

> The test of time has shown Netrek to come up short. :-)

Indeed, but why aggravate that?  :-P

> In many games, design intent is later exposed as not providing optimal 
> play. That's why games such as C&C will adjust the specs for units with 
> each patch release. Design intent does not guarantee optimal play.

True, but which is more _likely_ to result in good play: accident or design?

> Did you notice the difference?

No meaningful SB track record myself.

> Where are the old players? They probably have families and careers and 
> no longer have time to play with the exception of those who make time. :-)

But those who make time constitute ~50% of the current player base!  :-P

> I used to find the delayed explosion really odd. My memory might be 
> wrong - but I think in high speed scenarios, a starbase could tractor 
> and repress the ship right through the SB, and achieve reduced damage. 
> To me, that's a bug.

Sounds like a tractor-pressor philosophical issue to me, although if you consider Z-depth it can be explained away; delayed explosion surely is another issue?  I assume the idea is to simulate a chain reaction: fatal damage triggering warp core explosion.

>	The only server to see any meaningful amount of usage isn't
> 	affected; this is truly a non-issue.

Surely the server will be upgraded at some point?

I would bet that the 400 ms delay was a feature deliberately added in the mists of time, and retained for its depth of play; I assume that ogging was formerly considered to be too easy.  Either way, 80 ms is too small to be meaningful.  I see two options as superior to the status quo:
    1. Remove the delay entirely.
    2. Restore the original play-tested feature (my vote).