Prev: Re: [GZG] FT:XD changes, part 1 Next: [GZG] FT:XD changes, part 1

Re: [GZG] FT:XD changes, part 1

From: John Tailby <john_tailby@x...>
Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 01:34:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [GZG] FT:XD changes, part 1

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lIn all the
campaigns we have played, many of the situations you describe don't
eventuate.
 
It's pretty simple to get something that means the fleet book designs
are viable and that you have some idea about what is going on.
 
We use a map so the empires share borders with multiple neighbours.
There are usually way more missions for the fleet to do than it has
ships for. You need a home defence division, an offensive squadron and
border squadrons. Dividing your fleet into the required number of units
usually means pretty small ships will make up most of the fleet.
 
It's not stated directly in the fleet book, buit it's implied in the ESU
doctrine and the description of their ships, that you have to return to
your base to replenish ordnance. I imagine that it's even harder to get
replacement fighters and fighter pilots so It's easy to imagine that
carriers need to go back to the sector capital to get replacement
squadrons. 
 
Experienced carrier aircrew could be hard to come by and the training
times could be quite long so carriers need to be carefully used and
threfore are likely rarely used.
 
We have strategic intelligence in our campaigns because eash ship/unit
is represented by a counter and the counter indicates the mass of the
ship divided by 50 rounded up (so a mass 150-200) is size 4. So you have
some idea what the enemy is bringing to a fight even if you have no idea
what their ships are.

Prev: Re: [GZG] FT:XD changes, part 1 Next: [GZG] FT:XD changes, part 1