Re: [FT] A few more fleets
From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 09:56:50 +1000
Subject: Re: [FT] A few more fleets
G'day David,
>Well, the reason is that that weapons with all
>around arcs are ruinously expensive. I'd prefer
>all around arcs, but you just don't get very
>good weapons mixes at the cost I can afford.
I agree that all-arounds can be expensive, but what I meant was even
with
the ones you've got you can get 5-arc coverage (AP/FP/F for one 3-arc
and
then F/FS/AS for the other etc).
>As designed they should probably stay back and
>pot shot at the enemy at ranges where they can't
>respond and flit away when they're charged.
You've got enough class-2s to suggest that you wanted to get a bit
closer ;)
>I've never played a fleet like this except for
>someone's version of the UN (not mine) and in that
>case it was kind of a Kobiashi Maru scenario. I
>started 18" away from 3 times my weight in Kravak
>and I had to leave orbit around a planet all in
>in a precise way that left me totally predictable
>to the Kra'vak. Ughhh!
Ughh alright! ;)
>This was sort of a concept fleet, but it's probably
>too extreme. My experience is if you rely on
>ordinance, you'd better have a lot of it
You sure do, but you also need some beams to clean up what's left over.
>the Orions are designed for slash and run.
>They probably SHOULD have needle beams really.
You could try out some of the heavier needle beam variants that cropped
up
in the WOW discussion a while back.
Cheers
Beth
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Elizabeth Fulton
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