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

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOn 3/5/07, John
Lerchey <lerchey@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
>
> I've played SITS a number of times, but only played AV once.	I did
not
> find it to be any easier to hold formation in SITS than it is in FT.
>
> What I find is that holding and turing lines is fairly difficult, but
if
> you make a diamond or circle, it's fairly easy to stay on station in
> either system.
>
> <shrug>

In SITS, there is little benefit to any formation that does not have all
of
the ships in a single hex, with the same attitude  and same vectors. 
Energy
ranges being what they are, two ships more than one hex apart are nearly
incapable of providing any mutual support.  Without an FTL-comm, they
cannot
even coordinate a combined missile launch on a distant target.	As I
said,
it is not easier in SITS, merely that the difficulties of handling a
formation is mooted by there being no benefit extending any formation to
include ships not in the same hex/facing/vector.  Holding a line-ahead
formation is trivial as each ship in the line does not initiate its own
vector change; until it reaches the hex that the lead ship started its
vector change, and then it performs the same vector change.  If the
magnitude of the vector does not change much, the line even keeps its
spacing.

I suppose what I should do is come up with some canned maneuvers and
post
them.  That way, people might be encouraged to post some of their own,
or
suggest why certain maneuvers are not likely to be useful.  As an after
action report underscored the difficulties faced by a Kra'Vak player
after
turning his line-abreast formation three points turned it into a
line-ahead
formation with drastic effects, turning a line-abreast formation is a
good
starting point.  When I figure it out, I will let you know.