Re: Battlefleet ... but also some OT and a bit Showdown

At 11:40 PM 1/25/99 +0100,
(Uh-h)+(rolling-olling)+(j=yellow-ellow)+(a=cut-ct)+n wrote:
(Okay, I guess I'm getting a bit silly here. ^_^ )
>Aaron wrote:
>
>> ...we
>> setteld down for a litle BSing about painting, ship design, Oerjan's
>> comments about the Indy vs. Iceburg battle, just how you *pronounce* 
>> Oerjan in the first place, 
>
>Haven't I told both of you (OK, written) how it's pronounced?

Probably, yes, though I think that was back when I was at CMU and is
currenly lost in the mass download I did just before they removed my
account. ^_^;

>OK, since I've gotten this question from just about every list member
who
>has contacted me off-list, here it is again:

<grin>

[snip]
>There. All cleared up now? ;-)

Like alphabet soup. ^_^

>> Mark was also a bit more sensible in his fleet
>> design than in our last battle, where he took a few pulse torps; he
>> didn't take any last night.	My pulse torps didn't do too much; hit 
>> 2 of 3 shots, but only did 3 points of damage. <sigh>
>
>Aha! It seems that the Teske and Kochte fields have reversed polarity -
>witness the latest Showdown results!

Yeah, I know.  I'm beginning to dread GZG-ECC.	I *still* blame Jerry,
though, even if he claims he isn't doing it on purpose. ^_-

>>even the Eldar have more 
>> of an emphasis on broadsides than they did in Space Fleet, 
>
>That fits well with how they're depicted in the WD139-141 pictures,
>though it doesn't agree with their SFleet stats.

True 'nuff....

>> THE RULES:
>> The rules work a lot like Epic 40K, and are the same as the rules 
>> presented in White Dwarf #225 so I'm not going to go into too much 
>>detail here.
>
>Damn. I really, really don't like the "I fire everything in my turn,
then
>you fire everything in your turn" game sequence - Aaron has (probably)
>seen the battle report I sent to AC, 

Yup!  Thanks....

[snip]
>I'd very much prefer to see an alternating fire game sequence like the
>one used in E40K (even if it hurts the Eldar - it should be possible to
>compensate them in other ways :-) ), or an alternating activation
>sequence as in DSII.

Andy *does* mention that as a possibility for an alternate turn sequence
in
his "Designer's Notes" section on the last page of the rulebook.... ^_^;
(The E40K method, really.  Though where exactly the ordnance phase falls
--
twice in a 'complete' turn, remember -- may be up for debate.  And
radically change the order you fire your ships, since *all* ordnance
moves....)

>> These have a firepower
>> rating, which cross-references a table (like Epic 40K's) based on 
>> whether the target is a capital ship, an escort, or ordnance, and 
>> whether it is closing (easiest target), moving away, or moving 
>> abeam (across the ships' field of view -- the hardest target). 
>
>This gives one rather strange result: It is harder to hit a ship which
>moves parallell to your own, beside it, at the same speed (in reality,
>the ships don't move relative to each other!), than it is to hit a ship
>which comes towards your broadside (and therefore does move across your
>sights at some speed) :-/

Hmm... interesting.  Hadn't thought of that. ^_^;  Though a "comparison"
chart may work there -- instead of having the enemy ship moving towards
(easiest to hit), away, or abeam (hardest), have relative course
differences of 0-60 degrees (easiest), 60-120 degrees, or 120-180
degrees
(hardest).  Though, of course, then two ships going head-to-head will
fall
in the 180 degrees heading.  Hmm... needs work, but I'm not going to
sweat
it yet.

(Hmm, house rules... before the game is officially released!  Oh,
boy....)

>>  The torps that get through have to roll the target's
>> armor or over to hit, as beams; oddly enough, that means escorts 
>> (usually 4+ armor) are *easier* to hit with torpedoes than cap ships 
>> (usually 5+/6+ armor), unless there's some rules I don't know about.
>
>Not all that odd if the torps have even rudimentary targetting systems.
>It is usually a lot easier to destroy an APC than it is to kill an MBT
if
>you're using an LAW, even if the APC is smaller and faster (not that
all
>of them are, of course!). Similarly a WWII DD which got in the way of a
>torpedo usually fared a lot worse than a battleship... 

Oh, sure.  But the thing is (as you yourself pointed out) having 6+
armor
means fewer torps will even *hit*, vs. 5+ or 4+ armor, which means
they'll
continue on their merry way across the board.  It's not a question of
hitting and inflicting negligible damage, it's just a question of
whether
escorts should be hit by more torps than cruisers and battleships!

>the DD had a
>greater ability to avoid the torp, but the BG torps aren't that fast,
so
>unless they were launched from within 30cm a nimble ship would be able
to
>dodge them. I assume BG escorts are nimbler than the capitals :-/

Yes. ^_^  And even cruisers can dodge torps fairly effectively.

>> The miniatures... are very, very nice. ^_^  
>
>Good. If they're plastic, they might be affordable, too :-/

Hafta see.  If the box set is US$60, that's prolly $8-9 per plastic
mini,
retail.  Not bad, I guess, since the Emperor (roughly the same size as
the
plastic cruisers, in metal) is $10 or maybe up to $15 by now (ordering
from
GWUK), but... I'm hoping the box falls closer to $50. ^_^

>> Okay, so many of you prolly
>> know I like the Space Fleet minis to begin with, but even so.  The 
>> cruisers we used were about the size of the Space Fleet Emperor 
>> Capital Ship -- 4" or so -- while the battleships look to be giving
the
>> Superior superdreads a run for their moeny, in volume of metal if not

>> actual size 
>
>Hm. Well, yes - if they're anywhere close to the Righteous Endeavour in
>size, they're *huge*. Judging from the bitz used to build her, she must
>be about 6-8" long :-/

Yup!  The Righteous Endeavour wasn't along for the trip, but the BBs
were
impressive....

>> These things are a drybrusher's wet dream.  
>
>Isn't that self-contradictory? ;-)

I'm not talking about the condition of the paintbrush, here. ^_-

[snip]
>> The Eldar have ships that emphasize speed, agility... and fragility. 

>
>Good :-) Eldar ships should be like Phantom titans in E40K - hard
>hitting, but explode stylishly if you breathe on 'em <g>

<grin> Just so long as that isn't true of the mini itself... my friend
had
a *lot* of trouble with his (SM/TL) Revenant Titans since the "hip"
connection was so small.

					Aaron Teske
					ateske@HICom.net
LAUNCH DAY!
A totally unprovoked attack on peaceful neighbors. Must be the race 
file. Does strange things.
		--Rick Kujecko, on the War Monger PRT in Stars!