Re: Re: [GZG] Revised Salvo Missiles Update

[J L Hilal <jlhilal@xxxxxxxxx>]

Wow!  I go out of town for a week and all the good stuff gets hashed out while
I'm gone :)

I think LaserLight's responses have been close to what I would have said.  So
I'll just add a little.

First, keep in mind that this suggestion originally was for the benefit of
Robert Bryett, whose nephews want to use missiles after having read some of
David Weber's HH books.  Quite frankly, the existing SM rules do not reflect
ANY popular SciFi or SF setting that I know.  Missiles have been shown in
Babylon 5, Andromeda, and the new Battlestar Galactica, and all of them appear
to be either very accurate homing-all-the-way missiles, or have a speed and
range 10x-100x that of the V of the ships in the battle scene.  The FB1 SMs
also do not reflect the way missiles are represented in a lot of written works.
 While someone may be able to come up with PSB to justify the current rules, it
costs me suspension of disbelief, as well as flexibility to use in other
settings.  FWIW, the genericness of FT is, to me, one of its primary features;
the more it shifts to reflect the GZGverse, the more inclined I am to look for
another fystem to play.


--- laserlight@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> I think we shold also unpack this into two separate issues. Should homing
> missiles be guaranteed to the right general area (assuming they have fuel, of
> course)? Once they arrive in the neighborhood, should they be guaranteed to
> get to the right target? 
> 
> I think they answer for #1 should be "yes"--if the target does P2+2 instead 
> of the S1-3 that I was expecting, the missile should still home in to the
> right area(either on its own or under the launching ship's guidance). 

I agree.


> 
> For #2, I don't mind if a banzai jammer spoofs or seduces the
> missile--although I'd rather have it be based on a ECM/ECCM rolloff instead
> of a simple "which one is closest", so a tramp freighter isn't as good at it
> as a first-line escort/EW frigate, and so that frigate still has a chance
> even if it's on the wrong side of the target.
> 

I would add the caveat that the "Banzai Jammer" sould have to be specificly
declared to be doing this, and should also suffer in some other way, such as
being more vulnerable to other types of fire.  Under the current rules, all
ships are assumed to be in Banzai Jammer mode at all times.

I'll also point out that the suggestion for optional ECM/Stealth/FCS advanced
rules for my suggested SM rules that ships "on the wrong side of the target" DO
contribute to reducing the SMs to-hit number.

J

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