Prev: Re: [FAM&SG2] Incident at North Haven Part 3 (AAR) Next: Re: Thursday GenCon Photos are up.

Re: Vector Movement and SML's

From: Roger Books <books@m...>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 14:07:22 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Vector Movement and SML's

On 11-Aug-99 at 13:59, Bell, Brian K ( wrote:
> True. 
> That's why every fleet needs escorts. To screen the capitals and to
get rid
> of the screening escorts. A balanced fleet is better in most
> No ship design is perfect. The one that I posted has a NUMBER of
flaws. It
> is something that I would, probably, not take into battle. I prefer
> ships (but, then I often loose).

I didn't mean to make it sound like I was complaining, I look at a ship
and the first thing I think is "How would I fight this thing?"	In
particular I look at my designs and do this.  If I know what my
are then I can prepare for them. :)

> And you are right. The fact that Salvo Missiles attack the nearest
> is the biggest drawback (and balancing point) of the Salvo Missle
> Let me, then, rephrase my statement. Since the average ship in the
> have a MD of 4, a Salvo Missile salvo launched at the point I
described, is
> guarnteed to hit (excepting for PDS fire, screening ships, etc.) the
> average target ship. 

Of course, that depends on your opponents.  My opponents are all buying
ships capable of dodging my Salvo Missiles.  That's fine, if giving up
10% of my weapons load causes them to give up 20% of theirs I'm happy,
and I can still get a lucky shot.

> The point is still valid, however, that the average Fleetbook ship
> dodge a 6" range SM salvo using vector movement.

Nope, that's why I wonder about the people that keep saying they use
6" range, you can't miss.  I would consider that a bit unbalanced.


Prev: Re: [FAM&SG2] Incident at North Haven Part 3 (AAR) Next: Re: Thursday GenCon Photos are up.