Re: Re: Revised Missiles (long) was Re: [GZG] Heavy missile questions.

--- laserlight@verizon.net wrote:

> >From: J L Hilal
> >However, we set up most games as parallel-converging
> 
> IME those tend to turn into mutually-closing pretty rapidly--which is
what
> you'd expect when fire arcs are centered around F arc. Do you tend to
use
> broadside arcs?
> 

Firstly, the group of people that I play with all prefer cinematic
movement
(just making sure there's no confusion).  Secondly, all our games are
played as
a scenario, never as "show up with X points and we'll shoot each other
for a
while".  So both players have a goal, which may or may not involve
actually
blowing up the other force, even when told to "show up with X points".

e.g. #1
Blue force is transiting between A and B (jumpgates, planet &
jumpgate/hyperlimit, etc) with convoy (freighters, troop transports,
parts for
the sunbuster superweapon, the Heir Tertiary, etc.).
Red force is trying to raid convoy.
Long table edges are 12 and 6.	Set up in corners of table edge 6, blue
facing
12, Red facing 1 (or 11, as appropriate), starting V=30, 1MU = 1/2 inch.
Blue must get X convoy ships off of table edge 12 on scrolling play
area.
Red must disable or destroy Y convoy ships

e.g. #2
Blue force is transiting from jumpgate/hyperlimit to inner system target
(planet, outpost, station, shipyard, etc.) with intention to bombard.
Red force is trying to defend target.
Long table edges are 12 and 6.	Set up in corners of table edge 6, blue
facing
12, Red facing 1 (or 11, as appropriate), starting V=40, 1MU = 1/2 inch.
Blue must get ships with X operational PTLs or SM salvoes off of table
edge 12
on scrolling play area to successfully bombard target.
Red must prevent bombardment of target.

Since the playing area scrolls, in order to count towards victory Blue
ships
will need to be at least 1 table width (short edge) away from farthest
red ship
still engaged.	Disengaged Red ships will be left behind.

Finally, To acually answer your question, most of the ships have wider
than
1-arc weapon mounts.  Common patterns are 3-arc weapons overlapping F,
4-arc
weapons overlapping F and A, or 5-arc weapons overlapping 120-degrees
each
broadside.

> >I was just being conservative in my proposal by keeping the existing
range
> envelope.
> 
> No problem, I had two concepts in mind for those two proposals:
> a) 6mu/Endurance gives you a pretty easy way to change the max range
for a
> missile. There's no reason ESU and NAC and FSE and so foth all have to
have
> the same performance/range. And if you're out at the edge of your
powered
> envelope, your chance of hitting should go down.
> b) the 18+18 suggestion was originally put forth by someone else, but
it
> offered and interesting idea--on the first turn, your missiles launch
after
> ship movement, so they can seek their intended targets if you're close
enough
> (and your ship won't overrun its own missiles); on the second turn
things are
> handled as they are now for SMs

Any limits to where the marker is moved, such as arcs or turning
limits/rates? 
On the second turn, is the player required to maneuver the salvo against
the
original target or can he maneuver it against a different target?  If
the 2nd
turn move is before ships move (you said "handled as they are now for
SMs"),
how can you tell if the player is maneuvering against what target?  Can
the SM
marker turn around and chase down targets that overflew it?  Can a
player
intentionally shoot at a target out of range so as to get the salvo on a
target
next turn at the same time as a new salvo from the same launcher,
effectively
doubling his throw weight?

We encountered alot of these questions in our trials of various SM
variants,
which is why I am suspicious of multi-turn missiles as either complex
rules-wise or open to abuse if using simple rules.

J
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l