Prev: Re: FT losing market share? Next: Re: [FT] Even more NAC ships

Re: [FT] Even more NAC ships

From: Hugh Fisher <laranzu@o...>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:24:56 +1100
Subject: Re: [FT] Even more NAC ships

Roger Burton West wrote:
>Mosquito NPV is correct, CPV is 109. However, you're in the
>"inefficient" range for screens - up to ship mass 60 they take 3 mass
>however small the ship.

and Ryan Gill wrote:
>Imho, shields are a Cruiser and above fit. Even in the case of a
>heavy-DD (destroyer leader) that exceeds the older cruiser masses,
>they still don't have shields. Its a question of protection level
>(usually some armor too) balancing out the equation and defining the
>role.

 plus some others with similar comments.

 I find the screen makes it very effective against ESU, OU,
 and FSE light opponents. The screen may not be the most
 efficient use of mass, but it's nice to still have protection
 when you've burnt the armour off your foes. Also very useful
 for those Mosquito crews lurking around the edges of large
 scale actions, or (ahem) running away.

 On the other hand, yes it's no help when the enemy are
 shooting large chunks of metal out of railguns at you.

 As I wrote on the web page, these designs are meant to be
 interesting, not necessarily efficient. I like the Mossie.

	Hugh

Prev: Re: FT losing market share? Next: Re: [FT] Even more NAC ships