Re: [FT] The Battle of Zibriske Point, a 40000cpv battle report

[Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@xxxxxxxxx>]

Matt Tope wrote

>Combined fleet totalled 62 vessels, a heavy core group of 8 Hoidrac Capital
>ships (including a mass 440 monstrosity) and 4 Escort cuiser (all thrust 6,
>20% hull with 10% mass double layer shell armour, primary weapons k-5's,
>k-6's, and k-10's, with scattergun back up). The Human Accord vessels,
>provided by the Sardens, consisted of 12 SM armed capitals and cruisers and
>the remaining 30 vessels were pulse topr armed destroyers (destroyers and
>cruisers were using advanced drives, 30% hull, screens, the capitals being
>primarily SM barrage craft used thrust 4 standard drives instead).
>
>The Tarsonis Pact (Human forces of the Sol Republic and The Peoples
>Democratic Republic of Vartiga. The Sol Republic is the largest of the Human
>powers and is a communist-millitary dictatorship. The PDRV is also of the
>socilaist persuasion). Combined fleet consisted of 77 vessels, including 34
>Sol Republic vessels (all thrust 4 advanced, hull 32-37% in THREE ROWS,
>armed with GRASERS and conventional beams), 14 destroyers and heavy
>destroyers, 14 war curisers (mass 64), 2 escort curisers and 6 shock
>cruisers (mass 94), 2BC, 2BCH (heavy Battleships), 1 BDN and 1 SDN, and 33
>Vartigan vessels (Thrust 6advanced drives, with 20%hull, 15% triple layer
>hull armour, pulse toprs, PBL's, Pulsers and scattergun), consisting of 18
>V-Boats (heavy frigates), 9 CH, 2 BC, 3 BB, 3 SDN.

If you have (or can get) the designs used by the various fleets in some 
suitable electronic format, I'd be very interested in seeing them.

>Playing area: 217mu x 184 mu, with clumps of "cometery matter here and
>there". Battle was played with forces set up within 30 mu of the edge of the
>play area, on opposite sides of the 217mu axis.
>MU: cm's.

:-)

[...]

>GRASERS AND TRIPLE HULL.
>All four players (including myself) discussed the Sol Ships and the new tech
>they were using. (The Sol ships were mine in case anyone was wondering). It
>was felt that triple hulls were extremely effective at enabling a vessel to
>survive one volley virtually unscathed, and return effective fire.

That they are, yes... in the early 3-row playtests I often failed to 
realise how close to destruction my ships actually were because of this - 
even ships with a mere couple of hull boxes left often had nearly all 
systems in working order! (Very annoying, since the victory conditions in 
some of those battles awarded points for ships that successfully disengaged 
from a losing battle... <g>)

The drawback is (of course) that these hulls are expensive, so in the early 
stages of a battle 3-row ships often find themselves both outnumbered and 
outgunned by cheaper but less durable 4- or 5-row ships... not so much in 
this battle though, since most of the other ships involved seem to have 
used a lot of expensive tech too.

>We will conitinue to test triple hulls and grasers and will report back on
>any new findings. However, at present the UN tech seems to be in balance
>with the other systems, cost and mass wise, and great fun to game with!

Good! :-)

One other question: How did you find the CPV system?

Later,

Oerjan
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
-Hen3ry