Re: [FT] Salvo Missile Range

Does Derek use any PD?

If your major weapon often (seems) to be SMLs, why doesn't he have a few
PD
ships in his formations...like the escort Chris mentioned.

They should at least take the edge off of your SML swarms...

Donald Hosford

Beth Fulton wrote:

> G'day,
>
>  >I had always thought that if everything
>  >used vector during vector games,
>  >everything would always be balanced.
>
> Sorry Donald it just doesn't work that way. We only play vector and
> everytime we've fiddled with using vector missiles (regardless of the
table
> we used) my dear little FSE smash the livin' daylights out of Derek's
NSL
> before he even gets into range. I start with vector 36 odd (if you
have
> speed restrictions then just sail around out of harms way until you've
got
> your speed up to something like 24-36 or more) then fire away and then
BANG
> - even though I end up under his nose, his poor old nose gets
demolished
> before he gets the opportunity to fire. Having said that we haven't
yet had
> a chance to try out the idea that you use vector missiles but the get
a
> deviation roll based on range to target from the firing ship.
>
> Cheers
>
> Beth
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> Elizabeth Fulton
> c/o CSIRO Division of Marine Research
> GPO Box 1538
> HOBART
> TASMANIA 7001
> AUSTRALIA
> Phone (03) 6232 5018 International +61 3 6232 5018
> Fax 03 6232 5053 International +61 3 6232 5053
>
> email: beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au
From - Wed Dec 06 17:41:52 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA05299;
	Tue, 5 Dec 2000 13:35:30 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB5JYra13230;
	Tue, 5 Dec 2000 11:34:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 5 Dec
2000 11:34:52 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB5JYpa13209
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 11:34:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:EdaHhu4LBUhaKjxeVDlFMDR8jwYweM8x@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB5JYnP13203
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 11:34:49
-0800 (PST)
Received: from spacemsg2.jhuapl.edu (spacemsg2.jhuapl.edu
[128.244.47.194])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB5JYnf55751
	for <GZG-L@csua.berkeley.edu >; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 11:34:49 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu)
Received: by spacemsg2.jhuapl.edu with Internet Mail Service
(5.5.2650.21)
	id <WZFDNZAP>; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 14:34:43 -0500
Message-ID:
<6B3C0EEAB4FED3119F5F009027DC5E9EA9AD04@spacemsg3.jhuapl.edu>
From: "Izenberg, Noam" <Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu>
To: "'FT List'" <GZG-L@csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [FT] Salvo Missile (and Fighter) Range
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 14:34:37 -0500 
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000745

I haven't been reading this thread until the last digest or two, so
please,
please forgive, and/or ignore me if I'm covering trampled ground. But I
do
think I have at least a start for a workaround of SML range and possible
fighter range issues. SMLs first.

This sounds a bit complex at first, but I think should execute pretty
simply
in 4 steps. I hate added complexity, but think this may really be
workable.

1) Launch salvo missiles in vector form. That is, apply the launching
ship's
velocity to the salvo before moving the salvo's 24 MU (or 36 for ER) in
the
allowed arc directions. Then measure the total distance the salvo has
travelled (in MU) from the true launch point. 

2) When the target moves, determine determine its relative velocity this
way: 
	If the salvo is between 10 and 2 o'clock, this is "head-on" and
the
target's velocity is added to the salvo's
	If the salvo is 2-4 or 8-10 o'clock, this is "orthogonal", and
the
target velocity is not considered.
	If the salvo is 4-8 o'clock, this is "chase", and the target
velicity is subtracted from the salvo's 

3) Add the "closing distance" (1-6 MU, round up) the salvo needs to hit
the
ship, regardless of the direction.

4) The total number is the Attack Velocity of the salvo. Normal SM's can
have a total Attack Velocity of 30 MU without penalty. For each 6" above
30"
the salvo loses one missile.

So:
Miissle Lock Roll      AV (Norm)     AV (ER)
    1d6 (1-6 missiles) 0-30 MU	     0-42 MU   
    1d6-1 (1-5)       30-36 MU	    42-48 MU   
    1d6-2 (1-4)       36-42 MU	    48-54 MU   
    1d6-3 (1-3)       42-48 MU	    54-60 MU   
    1d6-4 (1-2)       48-54 MU	    60-66 MU   
    1d6-5 (1 max)     54-60 MU	    66-72 MU   
    1d6-6 (0)	       60+ MU	     72+ MU   

 
Probably some numbers would need to be run, but I think SML overall
effectm
and therefore cost, should not be too affected by these alterations.
High
vs. low veolcity games (and high differential velocity) will balance
somewhat differently, natch.

Quick and dirty examples:
Head-on attack: FSE is moving 16", NSL is 12" head on. Salvo is
launched,
placed 16" ahead of the FSE ship, and moved an additional 10" forward to
come within 3" of the NSL ship.
AV is 16+10+12+3 = 41" or a -3 on the missile lock roll.

Orthogonal: FSE and NSL are at the same speeds but NSL pulls a 2 point
turn
and is hit at 3 o'clock.
AV is 16+10+3 =29": No missile lock modification.

Chase: Raider tries to take out a convoy escort:
Raider at speed 30" direction 1 Convoy is 6" direction 1.
Raider launches savo, which is placed 30" ahead. Slavo moves additional
24"
to reach 6" radius convoy escort.
AV is 30+24-6+6 or 54: Missile lock roll is at -4 or -5 depending on the
fractions.

Fighters next:

For fighters, I lean towards "fixing" them by giving them vector
movement at
all times. 

AV is determined similar to Missiles: 
1) Move fighter with vector, then move target ship with whatever
movement,
then apply fighter reaction move as desired. Determine total
start-endpoint
distance traveled
***Target of a reaction move must be announced. Reaction move toward a
specific target must be towards the target's center post, so the clock
facing of the attack does not change. A fighter group may not attack a
non-targeted ship with a reaction move even if it is base to base,
though it
may egage other fighters.

2) Add, igore, or subtract target speed as with SMLs
3) Add "closing distance" (1-6)
4) Total up Attack Velocity with 1+2+3

To engage any target - including other fighter groups, the attacking
fighter
AV has to be less than 42 (+12 for fast fighters) (OPTIONAL: +12 for
interceptors vs other fighters, +12 for torpedo fighters vs. ships)

At the start of each turn (before movement orders are written) a fighter
group that attacked a ship last turn can declare that they are "pressing
the
attack". That means that the fighter groups move with their target (as
in
screening). This gives the advantage that once attacking a ship, they
can
stick with it, but the disadvantage that the target ship can peel out of
formation and drag the fighters with them away from the action. The
fighters
can choose to break their attack _after_ movement by spending a CEF to
move
12" in any direction (adding it to the target's ships _ending_ velocity
for
the purpose of next turn). Fighters breaking off a pressed attack can't
attack another ship this turn, but can engage in dogfights.

(Extra Detail) Fighter furballs drift. Add the incoming velocity vectors
of
all fighter groups in the furball to determine the direction of drift.
Speed
of drift is the speed component of the slowest fighter group that that
joined the furball.

I'm sure there are some holes in these ideas, though I hope they are
reasonable first cuts. Please poke away.

Noam