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

stiltman@teleport.com wrote:

> A typical carrier-based task force for me will consist of most or all
of the
> following elements:
> 
> 1.  A front line of three or four SDN sized ships, average hulls, mass
250,
> MD2, two B3's (4 arcs), 6 B2's (all arcs), six fighter bays. 
Optionally, I
> might yank some of the beams off and put in PBL's instead, but I
haven't
> actually ever used that variant yet.	(I typically call these "Star
Destroyers"
> though they're not intended as literal copies of their namesakes from
SW.)
> 
> 2.  A backup line of five or six "Clams", weak hulls, mass 60, MD1,
four
> fighter bays.
> 
> 3.  A skirmisher detachment of either "Needle Shrikes" (cloaking light
> escort cruisers with 8 needles, MD6) or "Armor Shrikes" (non cloaking
armored
> strong-hulled battlecruisers, MD 6, 10 needles).
> 
> The total task force will probably have around 30-40 apiece of needles
and
> fighters.
> 
> Pretty much everything you describe above would get shredded pretty
trivially
> by this force.  Your escort cruisers would have Shrikes all over them,
if you
> went all-PDS the Star Destroyers will munch them, if you went fast-B4
they're
> not going to stay out of both fighter and STD reach very long on a
fixed board,
> and if you went balanced I'd simply take my pick of going ship-to-ship
if you
> specialized against my fighters or letting my fighters chew you up if
you
> specialized to go ship-to-ship.  Since the prerequisite assumption in
this
> campaign is that I've got the early resource advantage behind this
carrier
> force, you've got a nightmarish task ahead of you playing catch-up
against me.
> 
> All I need to do is press this advantage against your production
centers, and
> a carrier force against a battleship force will nearly always win a
war of
> resource attrition once they've got the early lead -- the fighters are
far
> cheaper to replace than the ships they destroy.  With the luxury of a
resource
> advantage, the initial cheap fighters that the carrier-based navy lost
in order
> to secure this early advantage can be replaced with much higher
quality stock.
> And in simple terms of resource attrition on a fixed-board tactical
field,
> there simply is no playing catchup against a well balanced carrier
force that
> can achieve fighter superiority at will and has heavy torpedo bombers
to burn.

How does this force deal with an equal valued force of mass 12 
soap bubble carriers?