Re: [FT] Playtest of Fulton's MT Missile rules proposal

-MWS- wrote:

> > If those three barges had had *standard* warheads though, the ship
> > would've taken on average 4.6*7 = 32.2 pts of damage... no, sorry, 
> > -MWS-  only wanted the specialty missiles to be doubled in size, not

> > the standard ones. OK, it gets hit by 18 - 4.4 missiles, for on
average 
> > 95.2 pts of damage - a rather massive overkill, I think. *This* is 
> > unbalancing IMO.
> 
> Not by that much, though.

[snip a bit]

> NAC standard SDN defenses: 4x PDS
>			   + 2x Std Fighter groups screen
>			   + 2x Class 1 Beams
> 
> SMR Salvo:	 9 * 3.5 missiles = 31.5 missiles
> Total Defense: 4 * -0.8 + 2 * -3.6 + 2 * -0.4 = -11.2 missiles
> Missile Hits:  31.5 - 10.4 = 20.3 missiles
> Damage Points: 20.3 * 3.5 = 71.05 points
> 
> MT "Salvo":	 18 missiles
> Total Defense: 4 * -0.5 + 2 * -1 + 2 * -0.33 = -4.67 missiles
> Missile Hits:  18 - 4.67 = 13.33 missiles
> Damage Points: 13.33 * 7 = 93.33 points

Yep, I forgot that there are no multiple kills or re-rolls against MT
missiles: OTOH, the original example assumed that the fighters were busy
elsewhere; to compare this with Schoon's example you have to drop the
fighters from the equation and inflict another 14 pts of damage on the
SD
(for a total of 107).

> Hmmmm.  Overpowering, but not horribly so, except for the fact that
the
> MT missiles will almost *certainly* have a 100% on-target rate (unlike

> SMs) at medium to slow speeds.

Exactly. You have to move pretty fast at the start of the turn to have a
50% ability to dodge (ie, your enemy needs 2 missiles to cover all your
potential turn end positions). IIRC (did this at work but forgot to
write
the numbers down; they may be 1 pt too low):

Thrust 8 MT KV drives: Speed 16
Thrust 8 Human drives: Speed 19 (slow for a thrust-8 ship IMO)
Thrust 6 Human drives: Speed 21 (it's the 90-degree turn, full thrust
move				that's hardest to catch)
Thrust 4 Human drives: Speed 26 (pretty fast for such a low-thrust
ship!)
Thrust 2 Human drives. Speed 72 (*extremely* fast, even for me <g>)

> > There's *very* little chance at all to dodge the missiles - if you
move
> > at speed 15 or less in Cinematic, not even a Thrust-8 MT Kra'Vak
ship
> > would be able to dodge at all since the 12" secondary move and the
6"
> > engagement radius, together with the ability to engage any target
rather
> > than the nearest, covers all possible end locations for the ship...
OK, I
> > usually fly faster than that, but Human drives allow much less
dodging
> > than KV ones. 
> 
> Minor correction - since the movement rate is 18", the secondary 
> movement would be 9", not 12".  At least, that's how we playtested
them
> the other night.

Derek specified a secondary movement of 12 mu, so that's what I used in
the analysis <shrug>

Not that it matters very much, of course - the "dodge speeds" listed
above drop by 3-5 pts except for the Thrust-2 which drops by 12 (to a
mere 60 <g>).

> As far as your "fly fast" speeds go, I've yet to play a game in which
*any*
> ship has gone faster than about 20.  

I'm known for flying fast, though. As a rule of thumb, I fly my ships at
between 4 and 6 times their Thrust rating in Cinematic - and I don't
build Thrust-2 ships, and dislike Thrust-4 :-/

> Mostly, we're moving in the 9 to 16
> range, so my view of the effectiveness of Salvo Missiles is probably
quite
> different than yours. :)

That means that you will get 100% accuracy with these missiles except
against Thrust-8 ships, even with the reduced secondary move. SMs, on
the
other hand, shouldn't hit anything more than about 50% of the time
unless
you know your opponent far too well :-/ Or he flies Thrust-2 ships, of
course...

[snip]

> Considering the games
> I've played, where SM's have over an 80% attack success ratio, this 
> balances out quite nicely.

80% success ratio? You *do* know your opponent far too well (or he is
too
predictable or too low-thrust)!
 
> If you use 3 turns endurance with 18" missile movement rules and *no*
> secondary movement, then keep the costs at 2 MASS and 6 points.  

Much better IMO.

> The attack success ratio will then be quite a bit lower than SMs, IMO,

> because even with the increased number of turns allowed, their lower 
> movement range makes them easier to dodge - 

Unlikely at the low speeds you fly at. If you regularly flew at 20+,
I'd've agreed with you.

> and more subject to multiple turn interception by fighter groups.  

Since the fighters burn 1 endurance point to kill a single missile, I
think that's a pretty good deal for the MT missile :-/

> Also, point defense against small numbers of MT missiles is more
> effective than point defense against SMs, because *any* hit kills an
entire
> unit of MT missiles, while hits against SMs usually leaves you with at

> least *some* missiles on target.

We've already discussed that :-/ 

I only calculated the real average damages of SMs and MTs up to 3 PDS
per
SMR salvo or 2 MT missiles, and the difference there is less than 15%. 
It'd rises when you add more PDS, of course. The MT missile ability to
ignore closer targets for a juicier one more than compensates for this
difference IMO.

> Personally, I would feel comfortable using the 18" movement, three
turn, > no secondary movement rules at 2 MASS & 6 POINTS per standard >
missile.
> Furthermore, I'd feel comfortable playing *against* them with those
rules.

Same here. With secondary movement, I wouldn't feel comfortable at all
(pretty much regardless of their Mass, and definitely regardless of
which
side I'm on :-/ )

> I'm not sure that I like either the Needle or EMP missiles of any sort
in 
> any situation, unless you're trying to implement a specific genre. :)

I don't like the Needle missiles, for a number of reasons - both PSB and
game balance. 

EMP missiles aren't bad (thanks to their inability to kill DCPs), and
your proposal with a single combined roll makes them even better
balanced
IMO. If the highest they can go in a single turn is 50% knock-out and no
secondary movement is allowed, I'd be quite comfortable with them at
Mass
2 each.
 
> As far as the FiCon goes, use the same rules as SMs - a ship needs a 
> [single] working FiCon to launch missiles.

Definitely.

Later,

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