Campaigns and stuff

I'm trying to cut this down to bare essentials. If you fell I've omitted
something of great importance, feel free to pose the question again.

> YMMV. It seems that your battles are about the same as mine; I don't
> find the floating edges a hassle. Could be because of my slightly
> bigger table, though (effectively bigger; physically it is of course
> much smaller); I have some extra mu in each direction before I need to
> float the table.
 
Don't think so. I never really needed to do minor floats (I'd just fudge
them). It's when someone decides doing a triple-digit speed pass is in
his
better interests, when someone doesn't want to fight but the other guy
doesn't want to let him go... I mean I can live with floating the table
once or twice during a battle, but when someone makes a tactic of
getting
off the table (and the rules encourage it) that's too much hassle for
me.

> According to FT2 p.21, 54mu is the range at which you can do *active*
> sensor scans. Beyond that range you only detect the enemy ships as
> bogies, but you are perfectly able to determine their location, speed,
> course and general size (though the last can be modified if the enemy
> uses decoy drones and/or weasel boats).

No max range AT ALL for bogey detection? Well, it's been two years or
so.

Cutting to the chase here, we seem to agree that entry parameters
greatly
affect the way the game plays.

But, pray tell, why are there no rules for such then? 

Quick poll time: What do *you* (yes, you in the audience) use for entry
parameters? I.e. initial speeds, facings and distance? 

Strategic bombing: Strangely, the history of futility you outline has
not
stopped people from trying it again. Victims of Hiroshima probably agree
that their deaths had nothing to do with the end of the war, yes?

Besides, when the other side's air defence is virtually nil, the
distinction between strategic and tactical air blurs as far as we are
concerned -- they both become "zero-risk" tactics. Allied air
superiority
towards the end HAD a profound effect on the war.

> IMO the important word here is *hit*. If you - like the unsupported
MTM
> boats against a mobile target, the artillery during much of WW1, or
> the
> Allied bombers during much of WW2 or the recent Kosovo war - *don't*
> hit your targets, you're simply wasting (usually huge amounts of)
> money... not that your generals and politicians are very likely to
> admit that, of course, but they tend to have serious problems
> afterwards when the public finds out just how much the inefficient
> fireworks actually cost.

The cost of a body bag is a lot, lot more. Especially today. Sure,
they'll
gripe about money (it's natural, we always gripe about money), but it's
just money. We waste money on a lot of stupid things anyway, and it's
soon forgotten. But Johnny in a plastic bag is something else...

Maybe daylight raids over Germany were a bad idea... but all the gripes
about the expense I've seen have been about the expense in human lives,
not cost of bombs dropped or planes lost.

Supply: Interesting. Can you quote a case where a carrier returning to
home base (e.g. mainland US) was not able to "fill up" due to lack of
actual aircraft available (NOT lack of trained airmen).

Sorry, references to Japanese shortages don't count. They *were* up the
shit creek...

So, you don't think the supply ship is a valid target? Hmmm... MD8 fast
cargo... that's an interesting concept. (And a bloody real problem with
the game, at least in cinematic -- there's just no way to catch a MD8
ship
that doesn't want to fight, unless you catch it "pants down", for which
there are no rules... kinda kills the glamour of manning a scout boat)

Campaign costs:

I'm not familiar with StarFire, but missiles no longer hold the range
edge
on everything else in FT. You could buy some, err, class-5+ beams, or
take
all that hassle with getting reloads if you want to base your tactics
around superior range. But superlative reload costs also hurt subpacks
and
SRMs which are not "zero-risk bombardment" weapons.

Okay, I can buy not free, but definitely not "as expensive as buying it
all new". E.g. a SRM magazine cost probably includes the cost/mass for
all
the magazine infrastructure -- storage areas, ammo conveyors etc.

AND I definitely advocate upkeep costs even for the "beams only" ships.

-- 
maxxon@swob.dna.fi (Mikko Kurki-Suonio) 	  | A pig who doesn't
fly
GSM +358 50 5596411 Tel +358 9 8092681		  | is just an ordinary
pig
Länsimetsä 3B1 02300 ESPOO FINLAND   Hate me? Try |	      - Porco
Rosso
http://www.swob.dna.fi/~maxxon/      hateme.html  |