Re: strike the colors rule

"Robert W. Hofrichter" wrote:

> Continuing this a little further--an extreme example:
>
> A German cruiser during Jutland (can't remember the name) was
basically
> knocked out of action (severely reduced speed, most weapons not
functioning)
> but even though it was passed (and shot at) by just about every Brit
ship,
> it continued to fire when it could--and even ended up sinking a Brit
vessel
> via torpedo--until it finally sank the next day.  Or something like
> that--read about the incident in a 1980 book called "Cruisers."
>
> Either a perfect example of a vessel making all its morale rolls or a
good
> example of why not to use morale rules for "modern naval" combat.  I
prefer
> the latter (and to write victory conditions that force players to
behave
> wisely with regards to losses).

That could be the Seydlitz.  It did not actually sink, it merely ran
aground
some distance from port.  There was an impressive amount of water in
her, as
more had been let in to keep an even keel.  Her forecastle was awash. 
She is a
tribute to design and damage control.  I think she suffered 40 hits from
15" AP
shells.

Although, it may not have "passed all of its morale rolls", it may
simply have
been leaving the batle as fast as it could, while being in the worst
possible
location.  As for the torpedo launch, it may have been an opportune
thing at the
time.  However, it is an overpowering testament to the training of the
men that
they were able to continue fighting the flooding while the shells kept
crashing
through the ship.

Morale in a naval battle depends on the situation.  Under the Harpoon
system,
there is little point in surrender rules, as anti-ship missiles don't
take
prisoners and aircraft do not hang around long enough to check if the
colours
are still flying.  Finally, turning tail and running only works against
other
ships, not missiles and planes.

For morale rules to be useful in FT it should take into account the
damage to
the ship's side, and the apparent damage to the enemy, along with the
ships
damage.
Lastly, they should consider the ability to flee.  In vector, fleeing is
difficult and is simply a matter of not accelerating back to the battle.
 The
only reason for an FT ship to surrender is if the vessel is dead in
space, and
the opponent is the same species.  The vessel will propably be scuttled;
unless,
starships are VERY expensive and every repairable FTL drive counts.
(much like
wooden ships when trees for masts were hard to find, and many ships of
the line
fought on both sides in the same war).

So, a crew will surrender when the only way to get planetside is an
enemy ship
and they can reasonably expect the enemy to deliver them to a habitable
world
(if not actually repatriate them), but the vessel itself will only be
surrendered if ships are very expensive to build and every space worthy
vessel
is a treasure.

I suppose an interesting campaign idea would be to start with an
assortment of
FTL drives parcelled amongst the players, and have them all lose if too
many are
destroyed, on the grounds that an interstellar civilization is no longer
viable.  Battles away from important planets would be very tentative,
and ships
would be surrendered to avoid destruction (and players would have to
make
compromises between weapons and cargo space).