GZG List archives -- December 2006

Number 173 of 192 messages in this Archive
[Date Prev] Main Index [Date Next]
[Thread Prev] Thread Index [Thread Next]

Re: [GZG] Battlecruisers




    
That is what happened in 1 of our games recently, a FSE squadron getting resupplied with more missiles was jumped at it resupply place.  While yes the FSE did cause some damage with it's SML while armed, but when without them, they were less well armed then the beam strike squadron sent against them.  Of course a spy, gave up the location...
     But those all missile fleets suffer a bit in campaigning becuase they need a "larger support train" then unit using just beams, or even Pulse Torp.  Now a Fighter heavy fleet needs a even larger still...


DOCAGREN

Just a Lurker here on the Digest, But maybe I have a good idea or 2..
:-)

In a message dated 12/27/06 3:03:37 PM, gzg-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:


Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 18:50:37 +1100
From: Robert N Bryett

Given that it was a campaign, how did you model logistics for 
expendable weapons? Could the "beam" side attack the fleet train with 
light units?

Best regards, Robert Bryett
rbryett@xxxxxxxx

> In one of our campaigns one of the players built a fleet around 
> missile technology and was very effective. You jump in force the 
> enemy to engage, salvo your missiles and then run for it. If the 
> missiles do the job you can mop up with secondary weapons.

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


  • Prev by Date: Re: [GZG] Battlecruisers
  • Next by Date: Re: [GZG] [FT] Auxiliary craft for starships

  • Previous by thread: Re: [GZG] Battlecruisers
  • Next by thread: Re: [GZG] Battlecruisers

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

    roger@nospam.firedrake.org
    Generated: Mon Jan 22 02:07:30 GMT 2007