GZG List archives -- June 2006

Number 51 of 214 messages in this Archive
[Date Prev] Main Index [Date Next]
[Thread Prev] Thread Index [Thread Next]

Re: [GZG] Heavy missile questions.



There's so many rules you could use for this topic, but first, I would define the term heavy missile is it.
A heavy missile in it's load capabilities,eg TNT factor, or is it a ship killer?etc etc
would you give it a mass and thrust factor, does it have a fighterCEF, how many points is it worth?


You need the rules for this to be simple, fun, realistic in it's approach to the Fullthrust universe and more importantly the Fullthrust rules, otherwise it turns into harpoon, or worse starfleet battles, oh look a drone.lol

james my crew can breath in space , can your's? mitchell
----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert N Bryett" <rbryett@xxxxxxxx>
To: "List GZG" <gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 9:26 PM
Subject: [GZG] Heavy missile questions.



One of my nephews/admirals has started reading the Honor Harrington novels, and developed a commendable ambition to launch salvos of heavy missiles at the OPFOR. Since I'll have to umpire, I've been browsing MT and trying to integrate the missile rules with FB2. Heavy missiles seem a bit of an orphan system (no FB design seems to use them for example), and I have a few questions:

1. Interaction with FB2 armour. Should the effect of armour on heavy missiles be the same as that for salvo missiles? My feeling is that it should, if only to keep things simple.

2. Firing/moving heavy missiles. In the fighter movement phase? The way MT missiles move seems more like fighter movement than the way salvo missiles shoot. If the missiles move in the fighter phase, should they alternate with the fighter groups to give the fighters a chance to intercept? In vector, I think the acquisition range should be cut to 3mu as for salvo missiles.

3. Fire control. MT is pretty explicit about this:

"One ship may launch any number of missiles in one turn, subject only to the number it is carrying; each missile may have a different target, as they are guided by their onboard AIs and their own fire controls."

That seems reasonable enough. I can't imagine missiles engaging over ranges up to 60mu (60,000km?) using command guidance, beam-riding, semi-active homing or any other form of launch-platform-dependent guidance. If each missile has an on-board AI, sensors, IFF etc., they should be pretty autonomous. On the other hand, I can't really accept that the launch vessel would require *no* fire control at all. So... Maybe one FCS per launch?

4. Point Defence. Hmmm. This is a thorny one, since PDS vs. fighters or salvo missiles involves engaging a group of targets, whereas MT has one PDS engaging each heavy missile and only knocking it out on a roll of 6. Now each heavy missile *is* more costly in mass and points than a standard fighter despite it's shorter endurance, so I imagine it as being pretty smart, tough and equipped with its own ECM etc. but... I don't know. I guess we'll go with the MT rule and see how it turns out.

Any thoughts, or URLs where someone's already done this? I'm not looking for a full-on Honorverse adaptation BTW, just ways of bringing heavy missiles into our FT 2.5 games.

Best regards, Robert Bryett
rbryett@xxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

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




  • Prev by Date: Re: Revised Missiles (long) was Re: [GZG] Heavy missile questions.
  • Next by Date: [GZG] Re: gpthic imperail convertion

  • Previous by thread: Re: Revised Missiles (long) was Re: [GZG] Heavy missile questions.
  • Next by thread: Re: [GZG] Heavy missile questions.

  • Main Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Archive Index

    roger@nospam.firedrake.org
    Generated: Sat Jul 01 01:07:32 GMT 2006