Re: Re: [GZG] John's Shipbuilding

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOn 1/18/06, Ian
Downing <iandowning112@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> It must depend on whether FT models Age of Sail naval warfare or WW1
or 2.
>  In the Age of Sail it was difficult to destroy warships so often they
> surrendered. However there are very few instances of warships in WW2
> surrendering in combat. Even the German destroyers at Narvik, out of
all
> ammunition, and virtually out of fuel scuttled themselves rather than
> surrender. If I recall correctly in WW2 only 3 or 4 submarines
surrendered,
> often when they thought the boat was sinking. So I don't favour the
> surrendering of warships if FT models "modern" naval warfare, however
> merchant ships and scuttling are another matter.
>

Why can't FT be its 'own' Age? Space ain't like the ocean, and scuttling
a
spaceship is tantamount to suicide if done right (ie, total destruction
of
said ship, making it completely useless for the other side to salvage or
gain valuable intel - or even use the ship against its owners - and any
escaping crew would likely be unable to avoid the blast of the
self-destructing ship). If an FT ship surrenders in battle, it's likely
to
save the crew.	At least in WW2, scuttling a ship meant it was near
impossible for the enemy to retrieve it for any purpose, and the crew
would
likely be rescued by the attacking enemy ship(s). Or at least had a
fighting
chance for survival.

Mk