Re: The GZG Digest V1 #608

Tom Anderson wrote:

> On Thu, 9 Dec 1999, Sindre Cools Berg wrote:
>
> > Roger Books wrote:
> >
> > > GBailey@aol.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > A smarter SML would have to give up something.
> > > > How about making they are more fragile so any PDSs fired
> > > > at them get a +1?
> > >
> > > SML's are fairly balanced if you use the ships in the fleet
> > > book.  When you can attach 3 mass 2 towed drones to every
> > > major ship (at a whopping 6 points each) suddenly SML's are
> > > broken, this is just an attempt to correct the problem.
> > >
> > > You know, maybe only playing with official designs is the
> > > way to go...
> >
> > I'm just a little bit curious about this banzai jammers/SML thread
> > (Could someone please enlighten me to what a banzai jammer is ?) ?
>
> in my understanding (which is far from perfect), a banzai jammer is a
tiny
> ship designed purely to absorb SM fire, and die doing it. 'jammer'
because
> they interfere with SM fire, and 'banzai' because they expect to die
(that
> term may be culturolinguistically inaccurate, but it clearly
communicates
> the intent). the ultimate banzai jammer is mass 3: 1 hull, 1 engine
> (thrust 8) and 1 FTL motor. 9 points in total.
>

Thank you (and Alan) for the explanation.

>
> > I our games, we've never had that much problem with small ships
> > escorting...though we use Fleet Book only designs,
>
> which rules out the use of extreme banzai jammers.
>
> > and try (sometimes at
> > least) to make logical fleets.
>
> which probably rules out the use of massed scouts as off-the-shelf
banzai
> jammers.
>
> however, i think there is a good case for banzai jammers being
realistic,
> to some extent. basically, those tiny ships have jobs other than
banzai
> jamming; i refer to such tiny utility ships as 'granaatscherven',
Dutch
> for 'shrapnel'. in the Tuffleyverse (the universe described in the
> rulebooks), there is no FTL signalling, only ships. thus, for a fleet
to
> keep in touch with bases, other fleets, etc, it must have an armada of
> small ships suitable for courier work. the mass-3 ship mentioned above
> would actually be pretty good for this. furthermore, a fleet needs
scouts
> to run around looking for the enemy, and those mass-3s do this well
too
> (or you could use mass 6: hull 1, engine 2 (thrust 8), FTL motor,
superior
> active sensors, 44 points). there are a multitude of other jobs
suitable
> for granaatscherven, too: carrying area ECM (these have done their job
> once the fleets reach combat range, although one might want to keep
them
> alive: they're expensive!), intercepting enemy scouts and couriers,
fleet
> security (checking on other ships in the area), etc.
>

Though I agree with you on the need for small ships I see a problem with
the
willingness for a fleet to sacrifice large amounts of small usefull
ships just
to soak up damage...In a campaign it would mean a non-FSE fleet would
need as
much resupply of small scouts as the FSE would of missiles (i..e. you
trade
one banzai jammer for each salvo). Not to mention the morale effect
etc...

>
> > Of course most larger ships have smaller
> > escorts but that's the point right ? And isn't it better to spend
the
> > points you spend on surrounding the large ship with small corvettes
on
> > some proper escort cruisers or other ships with overlapping ADAFs ?
In
> > that case at least they can shoot back and take some serious
pounding.
>
> this is a point of debate. on the one hand, proper escorts obviously
give
> better sustained defence than banzai jammers - escorts defend by
giving
> ADFC-driven PDS support, whereas jammers defend by getting in the way
and
> dying, and as such are a very limited resource. on the other hand, it
> takes a very heavy PDS barrage to stop a large SM salvo in its tracks,
> whereas it only takes a handful of jammers (or is it just one? i
forget
> the details of the rules.) to do the same. what it comes down to is do
you
> want all-round area defence, in which case you take ADFC-PDS escorts
> (which can defend against fighters and MTMs, too), or do you want
cheap
> protection against SMs, in which case you take banzai jammers.
>

In theory only one jammer per salvo (at least if the firer spreads his
missiles in an intelligent fashion), but take a decent NSL fleet with
one
Super-Dreadnought as the main ship. With 2 overlapping Light escorts you
get
10 PDS + the ships own PDS on any ship in the convoy..I've seen in
played that
way and it is really a hard nut to crack without severe losses (I'll
gladly
accept any good hints on how :)  and that without banzai jammers...

>
> > Though in my little experience (I've only played FT for a few
months)
> > the real missile problem is the german missile destroyers played by
a
> > good german player. :)
>
> on the other hand, the german capitals are the best _targets_ for SMs
ever
> invented :).
>

I don't know really, the NSL fleets have the best Fleet Book equipped
ADAF
ships IMHO...

>
> > Anyway I've seen missiles do excellent damage due to clever
placements,
> > but of course we have a house rule that says you can't place escort
> > ships closer to the big one than the miniature allows...
>
> that sounds like a very sane rule, and one that i imagine is played by
> most people.
>
> > Hope this made some sense, as it's my first post to this list
>
> it was a model of clarity. welcome aboard!
>
> oh, and don't worry about the SG2 guys, you get used to 'em eventually
:).
>
> tom

Sindre Berg