Re: Conformal Movement

Argh. Forgot I'd unsubbed from the list for a week. No doubt everyone
has
already realised this, but here goes anyway :-)

> Michael Blair wrote:
> 
> > Conformal Movement
> 
> This is virtually identical to the Squadron Operations rule on p.8 in
> More Thrust, except:
> 
> > Each of the escorts will maintain a fixed position relative 
> > to the ship they are escorting so should probably be within a short 
> > distance of her (2 MU or so).
> 
> .....unless your ships' bases have a radius of more than 1 mu (mine
have
> 1.5 mu radii)...
> 
> > I like this idea but it may be abusive. 
> 
> Very rarely in my experience. The little extra movement you gain for
one
> of the ships in the squadron, you lose for another on the other side
of
> the formation <shrug>
> 
> > It will hinder the use of SMLs 
> > although this may be more 'realistic', they now have to tear a hole
in 
> > the escort screen before they can reach the heavies.
> 
> Should be "they now may have to tear a hole..." - usually they will,
but
> a lucky SML shot can get spot on where the heavy ship(s) are. ADFC are
> nice, though :-)
> 
> > Another loss (for 
> > good or ill) is that it would simplify fleet movement, this saves
time 
> > but a commander (and his opponent(s)) now have a much clearer idea
of

> > where his ships are going.
> 
> Not if you allow squadrons to split up, no ("All ships scatter! All
> shi<static>"). A split-up squadron would have severe problems to
> re-group, though.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Oerjan Ohlson
> oerjan.ohlson@nacka.mail.telia.com
> 
> "Life is like a sewer.
>   What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
> - Hen3ry
>