Re: [FT] OFFICAL RULING REQUEST (was Re: Couple of questions)

-MWS- wrote in reply to Mk's reply to -MWS-'s reply to me:

> > Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I *thought* this question
came
> > up shortly after the FleetBook came out, and Jon (T) responded that 
> > MT missiles reacted to (or rather, were acted upon by) PDS in the >
>
same manner
> > as Salvo Missiles (ie, an MT missile was taken out on a roll of 4-6
-
but
> > each MT missile was considered *one* salvo [emphasis mine ;) ]).

It is in the FT FAQ as well - yes, the FAQ answers are official. The
question concerned fighters intercepting MT missiles (my wrong - I
didn't
remember they could do it!), but if an MT missile is regarded as a
"one-missile salvo" when fighters attack it, it seems *very* likely that
point defences regard it as such as well <g>

> Well, I wasn't around on the list until recently, so my apologies in 
> advance if I'm rehashing old ground :).

Accepted :-)
 
> I do sincerely hope that you are wrong, however. If true, it
effectively
> neuters the MT missile as an effective weapons system 

It doesn't neuter it, but it does tone it down considerably. Since the
missiles were the second-ranking generator of complaints of powergaming
(the Kra'Vak being first, and the A-batteries third) in the FT/MT rules,
they needed toning down IMO... Besides, it is quite a bit easier to get
the things on target if you use Vector movement than under Cinematic,
even if you fire them from very far away :-/

> and kills one of the underpinnings of my fleet design philosophy.  If
the 
> original PDS rules stand, the costs/damage/effectiveness of the MT 
> missile is barely worth while as it is,

Depends on what movement rules (and what speeds and thrust ratings) you
usually play with. I didn't have problems with MT missiles since I
usually flew too fast for them to catch many of my ships, but... well,
there has been lots of complaint about them from players who fly slower.
Massed missiles against slow fleets could be really ugly.

>  based upon average expected damage vs point/mass costs.  

If the target doesn't have any point defence, the average expected
damage
of an MT missile is exactly the same as that of an SM salvo fired from
an
SML with a Mass 4 magazine - the difficulty to hit with them is IMO
about
the same (namely, predicting where the enemy ships will end up). With
your interpretation of the PDS/missile interaction, the MT missile is
better than the SM salvo... well, I don't consider the SMLs merely
"barely worthwhile", and anything better than them is pretty good
indeed.

With the official interp the MT missiles are worse than the SMs in raw
average damage, but they have several offsetting advantages compared
with
SMs - eg, the (very) long range, the smaller Mass per missile (ie, MT
missiles can be carried on smaller ships than SMs), their ability to
choose targets instead of going for the closest in range (that one's
arguable, though) and the fact that there are no EMP SMs. (With the
reduced number of Screens in FB fleets, EMP missiles are outright
scary...)

Regards,

Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Hen3ry