RE: SV: Pulse Torpedoes vs. Submunition Packs

Personally, I find pulse torpedo's more enjoyable to use than scatter
packs.	Pulse torps involve some skill to get within range and to get
into a good firing position while scatter packs only require a thrust 8
ship to come screaming down the battlefield and fire off its packs.  How
exciting.  I though Full Thrust was about tactics and using a bit of
thought rather than I've got more scatter packs than you have so I win,
then again I've got the latest White Dwarf and they say......

		-----Original Message-----
		From:	scylla@mediaone.net [SMTP:scylla@mediaone.net]
		Sent:	Saturday, November 01, 1997 11:33 AM
		To:	FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk
		Subject:	Re: SV: Pulse Torpedoes vs. Submunition
Packs

		2 things...

		1) Isn't this getting a little bit like Star Fleet
Battles...?

		2) Oerjan...What exactly are you trying to get out of
the sewers any
		way!!!??

		All in good fun....hehe
		Scylla

		Oerjan Ohlson wrote:

		> ----------
		> > Från: Jonathan Davis <davis@albany.net>
		> > Till: FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk
		> > Ämne: FT:	Pulse Torpedoes vs. Submunition Packs
		> > Datum:  den 31 oktober 1997 02:29
		> >
		> > The list has been too quiet.
		> >
		> > I've given some thought to the 'useless' Pulse
torpedo.  Mark
		> > Kochte isn't the only one who seems to have trouble
making
		> > the to-hit rolls for the things.  I too have never
been
		> > enamoured with them.
		> >
		> >
		> > A pulse torpedo will generate the following average
points
		> > of damage:
		> >
		> >			0-6"	6-12"	12-18"	18-24"
		> > Pulse Torpedo	2.31	1.75	 1.16	 0.58
		> >
		> > By comparison a single submunition pack will do the
following:
		> >
		> > Submunition Pack	2.00	1.33	 0.66	 0.00
		> >
		> > If you compare the two weapons by a comparable mass
basis,
		> > where a Mass 5 PT has the same mass as 5 sub packs,
the
		> > single turn damage potential for five sub packs is:
		> >
		> > 5 x SubPacks       10.00	6.66	 3.33	 0.00
		> >
		> > Given that both weapons have the same one-arc
restriction,
		> > the torpedo destroyer is not as good of a purchase
than a
		> > close assault destroyer mounting 5 subpacks, and
either
		> > a C Battery and a PDAF, or two PDAFs.
		>
		> This analysis forgets that the SubPack is one-shot
while the PT isn't;
		> this
		> always indicates the SubPack as a much more powerful
weapon than it
		> is.
		> Compare 2 SubPacks with a single-arc B battery (vs no
shields), for
		> instance:
		>
		>			      0-6"    6-12"   12-18"
18-24"
		> 2*SubPack	      4.00    2.67     1.33    0.00
		> B battery:		 1.33	 1.33	  0.66	  0.66
		>
		> The B battery costs 5 points, the SubPacks cost 2.
"Clearly", the
		> SubPack
		> is much stronger than the B, no? Why then bother with
beams at all?
		> Especially since they aren't affected by shields :-)
OK, in the FT2
		> design
		> rules the B battery can have up to 3 arcs, but it
seems likely that
		> multi-arc batteries will pay a mass penalty in FT3
(and I've played
		> with
		> such penalties for a long time now).
		>
		> Of course, a DD isn't always that likely to survive to
shoot more than
		>
		> once. On bigger ships (strike cruisers :-), the PT is
more likely to
		> shoot
		> multiple times, which increases the value.
		>
		> Still, it _is_ weak even when compared to beams. The
damage per mass
		> point
		> caused by it (and B batteries, which have the same
range) are:
		>
		>				     0-6"    6-12"
12-18"	18-24"
		> B batt. vs no shield	    0.66    0.66      0.33
0.33
		> B batt. vs 1 shield	     0.50    0.50      0.25
0.25
		> B batt. vs 2 shields	    0.33    0.33      0.17
0.17
		> B batt. vs 3 shields	    0.17    0.17      0.08
0.08
		> Pulse Torp (mass 5)	  0.46	  0.35	    0.23    0.12
		> Pulse Torp (mass 4)	  0.58	  0.43	    0.29    0.14
		>
		> The original (mass 5) pulse torp is less effective
than two single-arc
		> B
		> batteries against any target with a single or no
shields, and a little
		> bit
		> more effective against heavily shielded targets - much
more, in the
		> case of
		> shield level 3. By reducing the mass to 4, the PT gets
better against
		> most
		> shielded targets (except shield level 1 at ranges
6-12" and 18-24"),
		> but it
		> is still worse than the B batteries against unshielded
targets - and,
		> of
		> course, it can only be mounted to fire forward. As
with the A
		> batteries, I
		> think a mass 4 weapon is better balanced.
		>
		> Later,
		>
		> Oerjan Ohlson
		>
		> "Life is like a sewer.
		> What you get out of it, depends on what you put into
it."
		> - Hen3ry