Re: MT missiles

Brian Bell wrote:

>Unlike Oerjan, I use vector (not for missiles or fighters), inch
scale, and
>usually fixed table edges (because of lack of room to do floating
>edges).

Uh... "lack of room" is the *reason* for using floating table edges -
ie, the practise of relocating all models by the same vector whenever
some of them threaten to leave the table.

If you have enough room, you don't *need* to use floating edges...
 
>Oerjan, Jon, and other play testers, it would be interesting to see
write
>ups of the test games (fleets, results, and
>analysis/observations/conclusions). If anyone has notes of this kind,
I
>would gladly provide web space (on xoom) to house it.

The problem with playtest notes is that they're usually only organized
into a legible form towards the end of the test period. This legible
form is usually referred to as "the final product" or something like
that :-/

I have most of the FB2 playtest battle reports posted to the GZG
playtest list, but on reviewing them now I can't remember exactly which
version of the rules were used in each battle - not for the ones posted
by others, at least - and I no longer have all the old versions of the
rules :-(. 

Laserlight wrote:

[Vector movement is realistic but problematic]

>Area effect weapons (eg Phalon PBL, wave gun). or Lay down a
>"minefield" at a distance from the target.  It can attack missiles
>(destroying them) and rocks (pushing them off course)--anything
>moving faster than Xmu per turn, select X to suit your fancy.	

Area effect weapons would work in reality, assuming that you know the
missiles are coming. Mines, well... as long as they cover a large
enough volume, yes, they'd work too.

The problem in Weber's backgrounds is that the missiles come *really*
fast. "High-velocity" means that the missiles are coming in at 0.99c or
thereabouts. Do you have enough time to detect them and launch/trigger
your area effect weapons before it's too late?

To use an extreme FT example: my ships approach at speed 4000 (with
1000 km/mu and 7.5 minutes/turn, that's equivalent to 0.03c). Since you
are a fixed or orbital installation I know exactly where to find you so
I can launch my missiles at their maximum range - assuming three turns
of endurance, that's 12000mu. You can detect me launching those
missiles (ballistically - they don't need to use their own engines) at
range 54 or thereabouts. When do you fire your area effect weapons?

BTW, the only area effect weapon which could possibly work in the FT
mechanics is the Nova Cannon - none of the others have any effect
during the missile movement phase, so if the missiles move faster than
the max range of those weapons you'd need to place the area effect
templates on top of your base to kill the missiles. OK, it is true that
some people wanted the Phalons to use their Plasma Bolts in exactly
that way as their only missile defence weapon, but it's definitely not
to be recommended as a standard tactic :-/

>It isn't much good for a maneuvering fleet

It is no good at all for a maneuvering fleet, but you can't use missile
strikes against a maneuvering fleet anyway. You don't need to either -
their supply bases and main repair yards are stationary, and no fleet
lasts very long without supply and repair facilities.

Roger Books wrote:

>Anyway, my 3000 point fleet can  handle  your MT missile 3000
>point fleet.  3000 points, 15% mass in PDS's and 2 ADFCs on
>each ship nicely removes the problem in a low speed game, as
>long as my ships stay within ADFC range.  3000 points is roughly
>what, 800 mass?  That gives me 120 PDSs and still leaves me
>armed.

3000 points of serious pure-MTM thrust-8 boats is somewhere around
150-160 MTMs; with average (ie, Average + some armour <g>) hull
integrities only about a quarter of them need to hit and penetrate your
point defences to wipe your fleet out. I'm not entirely sure I'd want
to rely on heavy PDS suites alone against this threat.

Mikko Kurki-Suonio wrote:

>Whew, what a can of worms.
> 
>I want to stress this one point: The most FT games I played were under
>the old FT/MT rules. I never claimed I've tested this under the new
>rules, or in fact, that there is anything wrong with the *current*
rules. I >merely outlined the game-breaking scenario that used to be. 

And I outlined the counter-tactic I developed under the old FT/MT rules
<g>

>I moved house about the time FB1 came out and after a few abortive
>attempts to fit FT on an 80cm dining table gave up.

Sounds similar to my current gaming table - 80x120 cm <g>

>(Now I've moved again and have a game room with a ping-pong table >as
playing surface) - ha! 

That is 108x60 mu. Approaches my gaming table in effective size <g>

>And actually, Örjan, I never play a space game with hard edges. I find
>the concept patently absurd, and because I cannot reasonably justify
it, >I can't enforce it on the players. IMHO, hard edges in a space
game is >just a lame cover-up for not figuring it all out.
> 
>What I do not like, though, is a game that actively rewards tactics
that
>cause hassle. And floating the table is a hassle.

So because you find it a hassle, you frown on anyone drawing the
logical conclusion of your 1) finding fixed edges "patently absurd" and
2) playing on too small a table or at least setting the fleets up too
close together.

If any weapon (except SV stingers <g>) can shoot almost from the edge
of one deployment zone to the edge of the other, the fleets are
definitely set up too close together...

If you set the fleets in the missile horror scenario up on the short
edges of your ping-pong table (>100mu between the fleets) instead of on
the long edges (ca 60mu between the fleets), at the speeds you indicate
(max 10+thrust rating), you can use the anti-MTM tactics I described
without floating the table edges. You have enough space to advance,
turn around, and start falling back to force the MTM boats to come into
your weapons range. If they launched too early believing that you'd
keep advancing, all they achieved was to waste their missiles for
nothing and you won the battle on walk-over.

The only reason for me to fall back immediately (which would force me
to float the edge immediately) is if the MTM boats approach at very
high speeds - ie, able to close to "effective" MTM range on the first
turn of the game. Since you didn't state what initial speeds you were
thinking of, I wrote my reply to cover at least most of the
possibilities.

>You would also notice that entry parameters make quite a lot of
>difference when you try to do a hit&run. 

I'm perfectly aware of that, and have been for the past six or seven
years. Unfortunately you didn't give any entry parameters in your
scenario set-up apart from "Start the battle in the normal way.", which
is about as unspecific as you can get.

>Interestingly enough, most of these games were in a campaign. The
>funny thing about campaign games is that typically one side wants to
>run away immediately, and nobody wants to take any losses. That's
>what gave birth to the missile swarms.

As Roger pointed out, your resupply rules seem to have been extremely
generous.

If you set your campaign up in a way that the players are able to eg
raid one another's bases, supply freighters and similar, the target
player is usually unable to run away immediately if the attacker turns
out to be too strong. If the campaign rules makes your
politicians/financers become nervous if you give up populations without
a fight, you'll also see rather more battles against desperate odds.

>And btw: There are no hard rules for ammo resupply costs either. 

Which is of course *exactly* why I specified what guidelines I used for
determining the MTM replacement cost in my example.

>(The
>problem with those is that they often make all ammo-using weapons >too
expensive to use in a campaign environment -- which, frankly, is
>pretty realistic if boring)

First you say that massed missiles are boring. Then you say that making
the missiles expensive, which is intended to limit the massed missile
tactics to more realistic levels, is boring. Please make up your mind,
OK?

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