Re: [FT\DS2] Fleet and Army sizes for games

Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> 
> Richard Bell wrote in reply to Stiltman:
> 
> >>I've had an ambition to set up some sort of larger campaign game
> >>where resource management winds up meaning something.  OTOH, >>I
> could easily see that getting out of hand -- e.g. a carrier force
> >>attacking a battleship force, the carrier side trades their fighter
> >>complement (but no ships) for the opposing task force, nullifying
> both >>of their striking power for the time being, but the carrier
side
> goes and >>buys much fancier fighters the second time around whereas
> the >>battleship side has to replace their whole task force, thus the
> >>campaign quickly becomes worse for whoever falls behind.
> >
> >It costs at least 45 pts to field a fighter squadron (mass 12, MD 2,
> >FTL, Hull integrity of 1, fighter squadron bay), plus the cost of the
> >fighters (18 minimum).
> >Yet I would fearlessly face an equal value of these carrierlettes in
a
> >single Konstantin (The Konstantin has interceptors, the carrierlettes
> >have whatever), because I know that with six squadrons on defence
>and
> level-2 screens, I should just be able to weather out the storm
> 

In retrospect, the Konstantin is a very bad choice, as it dies horribly,
the 
Kra'Vak Ko'San with all interceptors is a much better choice.
> 
> >If you actually decide to defend these ships against enemy fighters,
> >they need escorts that can survive.
> 
> Fighter superiority is a pretty good defence against enemy fighters,
> and the soap-bubble carriers will have fighter superiority against
just
> about any other type of fleet.
>
Not if it attacks anti-fighter heavy forces.  Kra'Vak and Sa'Vasku
design rules
allow these kinds of forces to be built without totally sacrificing
their anti-ship capabilities.  I shudder to think of the Kra'Vak
response (mass 10, MD 6, FTL, Hull Integrity 2, 4xScatterguns, cost
45).  Ten of these plus a soap bubble carrier against 11 soap bubble
carriers will gain fighter superiority, unless the all the fighters are
heavy (which only makes gaining fighter superiority likely, instead of
certain).  Point for point, the sbCV's warp out after inflicting no
damage, or are blown out of space.  

> >To defend against direct fire weapons, it has to have more thrust,
but
> >more thrust than three requires a larger FTL, and another hull box
> >(mass 17, MD 5, 2 hull boxes, FTL, ftr bay, cost 60).
> 
> ...or its fighters can take the attacker out before the soap-bubble
> comes under fire :-/

This is not guaranteed.
> 
> >A dedicated cruiser escort, a-la Atlanta class from WWII (mass 60, MD
> >4, FTL, 18 hull boxes,2xscreen, 2xADFC, 14xPDS), costs 202 and, >with
> the fighter break off rule, can fend off 2, maybe 3, fighter
>squadrons
> simultaneously.  The tyranny of numbers means that it does >have a
> limited anti-ship capability with its PDS suite, allowing it to finish
> >off the defenceless 45 pt carrierlettes that tried to attack it.
> 
> *IF* it gets close enough before the soap-bubbles hyper out, yes.
> Otherwise it'll only kill the fighters (and - since Stiltman doesn't
> use the fighter morale rules - will take some damage doing so, as
> well).

If the soap bubbles warp out, it has won.
> 
> >A high
> >acceleration ship with a single class-4 beam can snipe away several
of
> >the carrierlettes while dodging the fighters (mass 50, MD 10, FTL, 10
> >hull boxes, FC, PDS, class-4(F), cost 161).
> 
> With an (F)-arc weapon, your attack location is quite easy for the
> carrier player to predict (at least within the 18mu he needs to attack
> you) - which means that the enemy fighters will be there. Use an
> off-set arc, or a multi-arc weapon, or have MUCH more point defences,
> if you want the sniper to survive to shoot more than once.

I play vector, for cinematic I sacrifice two hull boxes to have the
weapon fire FP and AP (it will roll as necessary).  In cinematic, at
high speed it may be just possible to plan three firing positions, each
seperated by 24, and I pick the one that the fighters can't get to.
> 

I suppose a simpler solution is to impose command ratings on the flag
ship, say 5 plus one per crew factor, plus another one for every mass
point of extra "C^3I" equipment (which has a x4 cost multiplier).  This
will still allow for flotillas of small vessels, or larger fleets
commanded by SDN's, but will make the soap bubble blast harder to do.