Re: [FT] SMLs, Type 3 & Tactics

Charles Choukalos wrote:

You're mangling the attributions here!

> However reading bob's post about his opponent John, I found it
> interesting that you stuck with the rather lame amount of sml's / ship
> that the FB uses, and instead made up by using class-3 beams.  I

That's not me. 

> Oh...... Bob, getting back to your Rhomaioi missle ships.  It seems to
me

That's not any "Bob" that's Me!

> that you don't pack the ship with launchers but more missle carrying
> capacity and beams.  Kinda the way that the fleet book works.  Have
you
> experimented with serious massed sml fire power?  I think I posted
some

This has been sufficient to deal with enemy fleets I've run into so
far.  It. . . amuses me to stick with the same designs until I find them
being defeated on a regular basis.  The designs I've got are varied
enough that none of my opponents can specialize to defeat any particular
configuration.	But as to my reasoning?  I don't like being completely
dependant on expendable munitions.  I'm thinking logistical burden here.

> overwhelming the defenses.  Do you find that your beams are used a lot
in
> your sml fleets?

Yes.  Before the SMLs are fired, the Class 3s weaken the escorts,
perhaps taking out one or two.	Cuts down on the number of ADFCs in the
neighborhood.  Then after the SMLs are fired the first time, I'm in beam
range, and I either finish off what a SML crippled, or work over the
escorts.  After the second salvo, usually the enemy's largest ship or
ships (depending on size of game) are expanding gas clouds, and I start
seriously finishing off the escorts with beams.  

They also complement each other--a Salvo-only fleet means the enemy
doesn't need to waste mass on shields.	A strong minor in beam weapons
means he's got a dillema.  All good tactics are based on leaving the
enemy with dillemas where he's damned if he does and damned if he
doesn't.

John M. Atkinson