Re: Scenario generation and game-balance stuff, a continually evolving thread that started with the Kra'Vak

On Mon, 28 Apr 1997, David Brewer wrote:
 
> ...Elite? I remember Thargoids, or, as we called them, "Alien 
> artifacts". 

Yup. They also had this neat ability to stop you in mid-jump.

> Bingo. See FT section on FTL use. I think this can be used as a
> default assumption.

The section implies this, but it's never very specific.

> How much dug-in bonus can the defender actually get? 

How about an infinitely dense minefield? Technically speaking, it 
doesn't have a point cost (only actual minelayers do).

But true, there's not much else.

> Not if you can "micro-jump" easily within the system. 

That, OTOH, goes against "FTL only outside system" principle. If this is
allowed, what would stop you from micro-jumping all the way to the
target
(in a series of jumps if necessary)? 

> We have rules 
> for FTL entry in FT, so we could just chuck them in. Flank arrival 
> in normal space seem more problematic, since it could lead to off-
> table combat.
 
I personally think the game would benefit from a possibility to hold 
reserves for chasing those elusive "launch-n-go" ships. But it gets hard

to justify.

> Hmmm... bit of an absurdist example. I understand the point tho'.

Meant to be. A real "torp" system would be more like an anti-ship
only scattergun with one arc mounting and max 6" range, IMHO.
 
> I'm not sure about this analysis. The annihilator ships are more
> likely to go straight for the heavies than fight amongst each 
> other. Indeed, they'd resolve into annihilator missiles, a mass-2
> Thrust-8 boat with the AT. The heavies would probably be more 
> interested in shooting them than shooting "over" them.

True. The problem is that movement speeds often equal or exceed weapon 
ranges, which tends to make the combat resemble airwar more than naval 
actions.

This carries far-reaching implications: Your screening ships are 
relatively useless. Even on an unlimited floating map, the enemy can 
theoretically build up enough speed to blow past your screen in one
turn, 
maybe less, and then attack the vulnerable TRs (or whatever) in the 
middle of the task force.

> Well, it's often said that an A should mass at 4, rather than 3, 
> and has a basic value of 2 B's. You may not agree (I can't recall 
> if you've passed any opinion). Your simpler system gets you 
> something better than A (4-2-1) for 2 B-equivalents without any
> fear that a poor threshold role with lose you your weapon.

The *numbers* can be tweaked. I'd like to know if the *idea* is
worth exploring. You could take a square root of the factors at each 
range or whatever.

> Hmmm... I may have mistated the needle firecon rule somewhere
> down the line. I thought it was implicit that this too would be a 
> trait of a needle firecon, that you could direct any number of 
> beams at one system. 

Ok, that changes the equation.

> I'd give C's all three capabilities. A's would likely still be the
> weapon of choice for proper ships-of-the-line (ignoring missiles), 

I'd still prefer disposable launcher ships for missile carriers.

> B's for smaller craft. Everyone would get C's. The danger (IMHO)
> lies in huge fleets of large B-toting ships that burn your drives
> out ASAP. 

True... which could be cured by the "one FC, ONE needle attack"
approach.

> So you add the time factor. Didn't I metion that, somewhere along
> the line? That the objective expires? I'm sure I did.

Must have missed it if you did. That does change things, but still
I think it should be balanced so that even with the time limit, just 
sticking to materialgeschlag should net you a minimal (max. 10%) chance 
to win. Simply because even though realistic in some conditions,
it produces mighty boring games.

Pre-assault bombardment is nice to have, but it doesn't take and hold 
trenches.

--
maxxon@swob.dna.fi (Mikko Kurki-Suonio) 	  | A pig who doesn't
fly
+358 50 5596411 GSM +358 9 80926 78/FAX 81/Voice  | is just an ordinary
pig.
Maininkitie 8A8 02320 ESPOO FINLAND | Hate me?	  |	     - Porco
Rosso
http://www.swob.dna.fi/~maxxon/     | hateme.html |