Re: FB2 Fleets (or "How I Learned to Hate the Savasku")

Mark Reindl wrote:

>>IOW the carriers and their fighters made up over half of your entire
>>fleet, both in mass and in points. Out of curiousity, what were your
>>other ships - I'm guessing at BB+2xCS+CL?
> 
>Let's see, it was one heavy carrier, one light carrier, one BDN, one
CA, >2 CL, 1 DD.

...but didn't you say it was a 3200-point battle? The above fleet, with
11 standard KV fighter squadrons, adds up to 3396 points.

>>He didn't carry anything in the fighter bay aboard the von
Tegetthoff,
>>then? OK, both of you wasted one fighter bay so I guess it evened
>>out.
> 
>I used all fighter bays, he didn' t use his.

Argh. Yes, of course you did - I had the Draath and Ko'San fighter
groups mixed up; sorry about that.

>>You don't seem to have used the fighter morale rules, though? If you
>>did use them, you must've been extremely lucky not to have most of
>>your fighters go berserk and spend all their endurance early on...
> 
>Didn't use them.  We haven't used them yet, nor have we used >Damage
Control rules.

OK.

>>Um... Why go after his *missile* destroyers, unless you had already
>>killed all of his other small ships (which it seems you hadn't, since
>>one FF survived)? Given the number of scatterguns on your ships, his
>>salvo missiles were by far the least of your worries.
> 
>Chalk that up to my previous experiences with salvo missiles. 
>Remember, I'm still trying to figure out how this fleet works in
>comparison to my ESU fleet, 

"Completely differently" is the simplest way to express it :-) The ESU
are like thugs armed with baseball bats; the Kra'Vak are more like
fencers with rapiers.

>>NSL ships are favourite targets for the Kra'Vak: slow (which means
>>easy both to target with K-guns and to outmaneuver) and lots of
>>armour (which doesn't give much protection against the bigger
K->>guns). They do however have quite heavy beam batteries, and tend to
>>outgun the KV in the (F) arc in the 0-12mu range band (and also in
the >>30-36mu range band where their B3s can hit you and you can't hit
>>back). Because of this, trying to attack NSL ships head-on at
point->>blank range is usually a bad idea for the Kra'Vak. In fact,
trying to >>attack *anyone* head-on at point-blank range is usually a
bad idea for >>the Kra'Vak.
> 
>As I am finding out.  As I said before, I wrote this to ask for ideas,
>which you are very generous in giving.  Since FB1 came out, I've been
>playing ESU.  They are, in many respects, I think, one of the easiest
>fleets to play given their relatively good defenses and attack
abilities.
>Plus, they're pretty straightforward as well.	

They are indeed <g>

>The Kra'vak are certainly a different breed (and not all of us had the
>opportunity to playtest them before they came out :).

You may have used the MT rules for them, though. The engines and
maneuverability are unchanged from MT, though their virtual
invulnerability to all and sundry has gone :-)

>I was surprised at the changes from MT, most notably the lack of
>armor or other defenses on their ships. As I am discovering, they
>seem to require quite a bit more finesse than their background would
>certainly indicate.  

That's why the Sia'Na are so important <g>

>I'm not altogether sure that having stronger hulls than equivalent
human >classes is *that* great an advantage.
>
>The reason I say that is due to threshholds.  For example, a Maria Von
>Burgund has only 36 hull points, but also mounts 10 points of armor.
>So, all things being equal, if the Von Burgund takes 12 points of
>damage (let's assume for the moment it was all in 1-point increments,
>with no penetrating hits) then the ship would be nowhere near a
>threshhold roll.  OTOH, a Kra-vak Ko'vol BB has 48 hull points,
forcing >the KV player to make a threshold check once it takes 12
points of >damage.

But how do you justify assuming "1-point increments, with no
penetrating hits" when you're flying a *Kra'Vak* fleet? The only time
that comes even close to be true is when you use only fighters, K1s and
scatterguns - even the lowly K2 inflicts more damage on hull than on
armour against human and SV ships.

If you shoot at that MvB with K3s instead, the average damage needed to
reach the first threshold *is* just the 12 points you thought wouldn't
be enough. If you shoot it with a K5, you need just over 10 points to
reach the first threshold (10.33, that last third coming from the
one-in-six chance that the K5 doesn't inflict double damage).

In short, while the Kra'Vak hulls aren't the best possible option
against human weapons, they're at least as good as the human armoured
(not to mention screened!) hulls are against most *Kra'Vak* weapons :-/

>>However, if the KV are able to attack the NSL ships from the 12-30
>>range band, or are able to attack from other angles than the NSL (F)
>>arc (preferrably the rear 180 degree arc), the tables are turned.
Which
>>of the two attack options is easiest depends on the movement >>system
you use - IME it is easier for the KV to control the range in >>Vector,
while in Cinematic it is easier for them to control the arc >>(unless
the enemy slows to a standstill and spins in place, in which >>case
you're close to the Vector situation again). Unless the table is so
>>small that the NSL can sit still in the middle and cover *all* of it
with >>their beams, the KV should be able to carry out their first
attack, or >>even the first few attacks, from positions of their own
choosing.
> 
>Very true, I just have to learn to maneuver and be patient.

Often you only have to be patient for one turn, though <g>

>>If the enemy ships have heavy human-style (single-layer) armour, and
>>NSL ships do, remember to use your K1s+fighters against different
>>targets as your heavier K-guns to avoid destroying armour
>>unnecessarily - NSL ships in particular can be destroyed without
>>losing all their hull boxes when hit by heavy K-guns.

Should of course read "...without losing all their ARMOUR boxes when
hit..." <sigh>

>One of the things that I've been thinking
>about is splitting up my forces more to be able to hit them with some
of >my ships at any given time, rather than all of my ships at once.

Attack from opposite directions; if he turns to face one the other
group goes into his (A) arc while the first group turns away (Kra'Vak
are *good* at turning away quickly <g>). The risk of being defeated in
detail is quite high, though.

>>...so against the one enemy where you really, *really* want fighters
to
>>give him something else than your ships to spend his power on, you
>>didn't have any :-(
> 
>Well, to be fair, we had originally agreed to play a game with CA
types >and below, but then he decided he wanted to use his bruisers. 
>Thought I'd try slightly different mix of ships, for all the good it
did me.

Too bad you didn't use the fleet mixes in the other order, though :-(

>>>I do like the Kra'vak, but in my (admittedly limited) experience
with
>>>them, they seem to be overpriced for what they do.
>>
>>That was a pretty common reaction for new KV players during the
>>playtests. Those who faced experienced KV players for the first time
>>seemed to consider the KV quite *under*priced instead, though :-/
> 
>Well, hopefully the others in the group will feel that way as I gain
more
>experience with them.

<g>

>>>And second, if I am being whiny, what sort of tactics can you
>>>suggest for playing the Kra'vak effectively without having to rely
too >>>much on fighters,
>>
>>Against the NSL I think you *are* whiny <g>
>
>Thanks!

...but I think you'll get out of it as you learn how to use the KV
fully :-)

>>2) weapons which bypass much of the NSL ships' passive protection
> 
>I experienced this one yesterday against the ESU.  Vaped a Voroshilev
>in one turn with three hits.  He wasn't happy about that armor and
>screen generators which were really so much junk at that point.

Exactly :-) I bet he would've liked replacing the screens and some of
the armour with more plain hull boxes <G>

>>IME the KV's most dangerous FB1 enemy are the NAC, and >>particularly
the lighter NAC ships (CH and down) - they're fast enough >>to stay out
of the KV (F) arcs much of the time, and have decent >>wide-arc beam
batteries (but trying to use those (F)-arc P-torps of >>theirs against
KV is rather futile!). [snip]
> 
>In reading FB1 last night, that's the conclusion that I came to,
>particularly the fact that the NAC has high thrust ships with P-Torps.
>Those can do a lot of damage.	I'll have to keep the training wheels
on >for awhile before I go after them.

Never mind the P-torps - as I wrote above, trying to use them against
Kra'Vak is rather futile - you're much more able to dodge than he is!
The big danger with the NAC is that they can stay out of your (F) arc
long enough to wear you down with their broadside-arc beam batteries.

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