Re: [GZG] Full Thrust Playtest?

[Oerjan Ariander <oerjan.ariander@xxxxxxxxxx>]

John Tailby wrote:

> > >>>>AMTs must declare an attack against all ships within 3 mu.
> > >>>
> > >>>How does this work? The missile can't physically move
> > >>>into contact with all ships within 3mu.
> > >>
> > >>NO missile, fighter group, plasma bolt or whatever moves
> > >>during the attack declaration or attack resolution phases.
> > >>They are all left right where they ended their primary move,
> > >>launch or secondary move (whichever came last), just like in
> > >>the Fleet Book 2 rules.
> > >
> > >I know the missile does not move in the attack declaration phase.
> >
> > Your objection (quoted above) was that the AMT couldn't declare attacks 
> > against all targets within 3mu because it "can't physically move into 
> > contact with all ships within 3mu". What I am saying is that this 
> > objection is invalid, because AMTs *never* physically move into contact 
> > with *any* targets. They're area-effect weapons, just like Plasma Bolts are.
> >
> > >But the missile has to attack the nearest ship within range. So
> > >that should be the ship it attacks.
> >
> > No, the AMT doesn't "have to attack the nearest ship within range".
> >
> > It uses its secondary move to *move* towards the nearest "target" (which 
> > is supposed to mean "enemy ship or orbital base"). Once it has made that 
> > move, it *attacks* EVERYTHING within 3 mu.
>
> I agree with your expanded explanation but it isn't what the rules talk 
> about.

Yes, it is *exactly* what the rules talk about.

You seem to have mixed up the AMT rule with the salvo/heavy missile rules, 
BTW: the "must attack the nearest target within range" rule you refer to 
above does apply to salvo and heavy missiles (and is explicitly stated in 
their respective rules), but it does *not* apply to AMTs (which is why the 
AMT rule *doesn't* say anything about *attacking* the nearest target).

> Also the missile doesn't attack as such. It just catches ships in it's 
> blast radius.

And for the purposes of PDS fire in the beta-test fighter rules, it has to 
"declare an attack" against every ship within its (undamaged) blast radius 
during the fighter/missile/plasma attack declaration phase.

> > The game effect of an AMT declaring attacks against all ships (friendly 
> > as well as enemy) within 3mu, is that all those ships become able to use 
> > their PD weapons against the AMT without having to use an ADFC or FCS to 
> > guide the point defences.
>
> Why is that?

Because otherwise an AMT would be impossible to target with PD weapons 
unless you use an FCS to direct them, and that would be very bad indeed for 
the game balance. The AMT's -1 DRM vs PD weapons and their area of effect 
makes them quite nasty already.

> > Interceptor Pods) regardless of whether or not that fighter group (etc.) 
> > is attacking anything. Note that the normal restrictions on (A) arc fire 
> > apply whenever you use an FCS to target anything.
>
> What are the "normal restrictions" on fire arc when firing a PDS weapon 
> with a fire control at enemy ordnance?

The restriction on (A) arc fire is a restriction on the FCS, not on the 
firing weapon. If you use the limited (A) arc fire rule (not all groups 
do), it applies whenever you use an FCS to direct a weapon - even if that 
weapon happens to be a PDS.

> > >>>>Scattergun   6mu   1d3 1
> What happens if a scatter gun fires at a squadron of heavy fighters with 
> this reduction in hitting power?

The defensive DRM is applied to the d3 roll, so the fighter group loses 
1D3-1 fighters.

Regards,

Oerjan
oerjan.ariander@xxxxxxxxxx

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

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