Prev: Re: GZG ECC Scenario Q:s. Next: Re: [semi-OT, definitely TIC] US Collapse was: Fuel Cells was: Space Programs (warning future history comments may arise.... ;))

Re: (fwd) Re: [FT] F***ters [was: Operational game]

From: "Imre A. Szabo" <ias@s...>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 22:42:24 -0500
Subject: Re: (fwd) Re: [FT] F***ters [was: Operational game]

> In other words, you launched your missiles too early and paid the cost
for
> it <shrug>.

No I didn't.  What killed me was his four Gorshikov's that launched the
same
time I did.  Those strike cuirsers can be very nasty.  If I had waited I
would have still have had 3 gutted Jerez's...  The ESU fleet can do
Salvo
missiles right.  Gorshikov's with Kamorov's for picking off decoys and
FB1
described Beijing B's ADFC varient for Anti-fighter defense make a nasty
force to reckon with.  Try 3,000 points with 2 Kamorov's, 4 Gorshikov's,
2
Beijing B ADFC's, and 4 Lenovs...

> Mind you, just like Jon T. the playtesters pick up a lot of
interesting
> ideas on the various open GZG-related mailing lists (including this
one -
> remember the "all stuff posted here is the intellectual property of
GZG"
bit
> in the "welcome to this mailing list" post you got when you
subscribed?),
so
> don't be surprised if the 'official' fighter-balance fix resembles
some of
> the stuff you've seen here :-)

Hopefully not the chart and/or the PDS percentage of mass schemes.  I'd
rather just have a lower mass ADFC (mass 1) and more escort varients
that
give a few weapons for ADFC and more PDS.  Or the second PDS phase.

ias

Prev: Re: GZG ECC Scenario Q:s. Next: Re: [semi-OT, definitely TIC] US Collapse was: Fuel Cells was: Space Programs (warning future history comments may arise.... ;))