Prev: RE: Stellardyne Minis Was: Space Above and Beyond GZG conversions Next: Re: [FT] PSB and Turn Length

Re: Sensors

From: Roger Books <books@m...>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 09:38:46 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Sensors

On  9-Sep-99 at 23:39, Laserlight (laserlight@cwix.com) wrote:
> From: Roger Books <books@mail.state.fl.us>
> To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU <gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>
> Date: Thursday, September 09, 1999 12:44 PM
> 
> >In a campaign game I won't fight a battle unless I think I
> can do more
> damage to my opponent than I will take
> 
> In a strategic sense, I presume you mean--there are always
> targets that have to be defended regardless of cost, eh?

Not in a campaign game.  If you are fighting a battle that you
will not win, and loss of that territory will cause you to lose,
then it is time to concede.

> I think your ranges are way too short to be useful.  You
> seem to go from "No data" to "Targeting" in one jump, and
> that only at 36" for basic sensors.  That essentially
> cripples ships that rely on maneuver, since if you can see
> him to run from him, his Class 3's are already pounding on
> you.	Or am I missing something?

You could always put a scout with your fleet or put enhanced
sensors on a capital ship, then you go to 48".

I guess you could add another range band, you know something is
there, but that is all.

I find the concept of this crippling ships that rely on maneuver
kind of odd anyway.  They are inaffective until their weapons
are in range, maneuver doesn't really start much beyond where
your weapons are useful.

Roger Books


Prev: RE: Stellardyne Minis Was: Space Above and Beyond GZG conversions Next: Re: [FT] PSB and Turn Length