Prev: Graf Spee tonnage was Re: Historical DD's Next: Re: Capital vs. others Debate

Minefields: WAS RE: [OFFICIAL] Missile Ideas

From: "George,Eugene M" <Eugene.M.George@k...>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 13:11:01 -0500
Subject: Minefields: WAS RE: [OFFICIAL] Missile Ideas


Mikko Kurki-Suonio Sez:
>
>Having yammered this much about missiles, how about a slight change of
>subject?
>
>Does anyone else think mines are underpowered, especially wrt missiles?
From
>the point/mass side of things, two mines equal one missile. Yet they
have
>average damage of only 2.66 points compared to the missile's 7. Against
>shielded targets the difference is even greater.

Yep, they're crap.

>Heck, dumping stationary missiles would probably much more of a
deterrant.

That's pretty much the conclusion I've come to. BTW no one has ever used
a minelayer in any of the games I've played in.

>How to make mines more usable? Some ideas:
>
>1) More ammo for the price. Allow laying more mines per layer/turn.

Yeah, 3 mines is stingy, but I'm wondering how much utility a 'game
time' minefield should have. Mining seems to be a scenario level, or
campaign level activity.

>2) More damage for mines. 1d6/no shields would bring them in line with
>missiles, but I'm not 100% sure I want to see this.

See Robin Paul's analysis of the damage potential of mines for this one.
I agree with Robin, mines are worse than useless. Unless you want mines
to represent the last-ditch weapons of the poor, third-world (planet ?
space ? system ?) nations in your game or campaign. I think 1d6,
ignoring shields is apropos, or maybe 1d6, with a 1 in 6 chance of
premature detonation and no effect, mines being rather haphazard.

>3) Permanent minefields. Minefields stay and damage all comers until
cleared
>by a minesweeper or maybe fighters.

Great idea, the perfect use of mining. Anti-mine drone fighters and
missiles, I like it already.

>Strategically speaking, it's currently impossible to lay anything like
usable
>minefields without a huge fleet of dedicated mine-layers.

And to do so during most FT games is tantamount to suicide.

Assume you want to protect one quadrant (90deg) of a space station, make
>anyone coming within bombardment range (36") risk 5 pts of damage. That
takes
>about 39 mines, costs 130 pts and requires a total of 78 mass in
strictly
>mine-laying ships.
>
>Lower cost for pre-laid minefields? What *does* it cost to refill the
mine
>rack?

I use Mass 1, 3 points per three mine reload for the mines as given in
the rules. So call it 1 point per mine and 1/3 of a mass point. So would
40 or so points be more worthwhile for your Space Station's defenses ?

Gene
>

Prev: Graf Spee tonnage was Re: Historical DD's Next: Re: Capital vs. others Debate