Re: FT Fleet formations was Re: [GZG] FT vector movement systems

I would counter propose that this is two formations.  One is a screen
and 
one is your long range hitters.

John

>
> A possible situation in a fleet engagement is redeploying a destroyer
> screen.  You have a core of ships with devastating long range
capabilities
> (graser-3's or HDC-2's) that have sacrificed close in firepower, so
you have
> a destroyer screen loaded with class-2 beams and submunition clusters
to
> make it really expensive for your enemy to close (Note: unless your
opponent
> has your equal in long range firepower, you really do want him to
spend the
> time to blow away your screen, as it keeps the range open).  The
problem is
> having enough destroyers to completely encircle your core is equally
> expensive, so you need to be able to keep your incomplete screen
between
> your enemy's fleet and your fleet's core.  The formation may be too
large to
> just treat is as a single ship, and you may want to turn in one
direction,
> while rotating the screen in the other.  Maybe your enemy has
misjudged and
> moved past your formation and you need to quickly get the screen to
the
> other side.  Finally, as elements of the screen are destroyed, you
need to
> close up the gaps.
>
> If you chose to go the HDC route for devastating long range firepower,
you
> really DO have to exert finicky control of your formation to keep the
gaps
> in your screen facing a likely enemy location.
>
> BTW:	I do not think grasers are unbalanced.	At a distance they are
quite
> destructive, but at close ranges an equal mass of beam-2's cost less
and
> inflict more damage.	They very much trade close in hitting power for
long
> range crunch.
>
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l