Re: Missile Balance

On Wed, 2 Apr 1997, Mikko Kurki-Suonio wrote:

> > Mikko, do you measure in cm or inches? My average speeds (and my
tactics) 
> > changed drastically when I started measuring in cm - and that
included my 
> 
> Inches. I like to be in range before my models touch each other :)

Well... my largest models are about 12 cm long (meaning they extend 6 cm

forward and back from the center point you measure from), but they 
usually aren't that wide :) Unless a ship ends up straight ahead of 
another, there's no problem getting into close	range even with SMPs!

It does make extending shields a little less useful, though...

My table is only 80cm * 120cm (2'8" * 4'), which is why I have to
measure
in cm. That "translates" the board size to 6'8" * 10' ("200cm * 300cm").

Enough space for maneuver :)

> > opinion of fighters, which are much more maneuvrable than fighters:
they 
							      ^^^^^^^^
						I meant MISSILES, of
course...
> > suddendly weren't able to catch anything!
> 
> Oops?

My reaction exactly, no matter why you say "Oops" :)

If it is because of the "fighters are more maneuvrable than fighters" 
slip, well... I didn't exactly mean that :/

If it is because the fighters weren't able to catch anything, I
elaborate:

To be more exact, they _were_ able to intercept the enemy heavies - if
they went to the right place some turns in advance (preferrably from the
turn they launched!). If they didn't go to the right place, they weren't
able to catch up (not in time to save their carriers, anyway); if they
did, they could get one shot in before the enemy ships left them behind.
That usually wasn't enough to hurt the capitals badly, while the
fighters 
themselves suffered badly from *DAF fire.

The fighters usually weren't able to get even one shot in against the
speed 40+ escorts unless the escorts either screwed up badly or
deliberately engaged the fighters. 

The tactic of spreading the fighter groups over a large area could mean 
(if the enemy was kind enough to spread out) that more fighter squadrons
had 
targets - but it also meant that _fewer_ squadrons would engage each 
target, and that more PDAFs could engage the fighters. No good :(

Fast fighters were better able to catch starships, of course. Even they 
had trouble with the escorts, though, and their extra cost meant there'd

be somewhat less of them.

This was with the FT turn sequence and movement system. With the MT turn
sequence (fighters move before starships), the problem would be even
worse. 

With the vector movement, well... I gave fighters unlimited ability to
change facing both before and after the move (ie, they needn't end their
move facing the direction in which they applied their main thrusters),
as
well as a main thrust rating of 12, which helped a lot :)

I did the same with vector-movement missiles, too, but that was far too 
effective (since it basically gave the missiles a 24mu attac range. 
Ouch!). They need to be limited as to how much they can change facing; I

haven't played enough with them to know how limited they should be.

Oerjan Ohlson

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