Prev: Re: Re:counter sheet back-up Next: Re: [FT] SM Magazines

Re: [FT] SM Magazines

From: Roger Books <books@m...>
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 08:21:44 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [FT] SM Magazines

On  5-Aug-99 at 18:30, Laserlight (laserlight@cwix.com) wrote:
> Roger said:
> >One Magazine or several?
> 
> 
> You forgot the other option which is zero magazines (all racks).  I
buy all
> SMRs because the plan is to have a lot of missiles arrive all at once
and
> overwhelm his PDS.  The cost savings of a magazine isn't worth
spreading
> out my salvo over time, IMHO.

I've considered this and in normal situations I agree, SMR's are much
more affective than the mass difference indicates.  However, in the
carrier situation the racks aren't there so much to do damage as to
force my opponent to use point defenses on them rather than on the
fighters.  Given that I am using ER salvo missiles and want as much
support as possible a launcher makes much more sense.  With carriers
I tend to send the fighters to the same place the SM's are going if
I can.	If I can't the fighters take their lumps.

Roger Books


Prev: Re: Re:counter sheet back-up Next: Re: [FT] SM Magazines