Re: [FT] SMR's

Bell, Brian K wrote:

> > It'd be better to (explicitly) give them the same bonus as Heavy
> > Fighters, since screens don't normally protect against PDS and C1
> > batteries don't kill missiles on a roll of "4" anyway. Yes, I know
the
> > Heavy Fighter description calls this effect "level-1 screens", but
it
> > also spells out exactly what is meant.
> > 
> > > Reduce the effective radius by 1" for each missile hit by PDS
fire.
> > 
> > It'd have to "attack" one specific ship in order to let PDS shoot
at it
> > under the current rules. Also, I'd rather make it affect "all
*targets*
> > within 6mu" than "all *missiles* within 6 mu", since any enemy
ships
> > further than 6 mu away from the PenAid salvo would automatically
count
> > it as a "miss" and ignore it.
> [snip]
> 

> [Bri] 
> Not if it is using ADFC/PDS. ADFC/PDS can extend the range of PDS up
> to 12".

Debatable. ADFC/PDS can engage missiles attacking a ship within 6mu of
the ADFC/PDS, but the point where you put the missile marker may be
only the point where they start looking for a target. After that, they
may maneuver for the attack (ie, move closer to their target) or may
detonate where they are (ie, bomb-pumped lasers or something like
that); the rules don't say.

Either way, if the PenAid is not within 6mu of any enemy ship even an
ADFC will ignore it since it can't attack anything...

> However, as you pointed out PDS only works against fighters/missiles
> targeting it or a friendly ship for ADFC/PDS (unless the rules have 
> changed [Jon?]). 

Not that I've seen. The FT2 ADAF could have engaged non-attacking
missiles within 6mu, but the ADFC is not allowed to do this.

> And I think that the idea was that salvo missiles outside of the 6"
> radius did not gain the bonus.

Again it depends on how you interpret the missiles' attack. If they
"fire" from where the marker is put they don't move outside the 6mu
radius; if they make an attack run to close with their target from the
point where the marker was placed they may move outside the jammers'
radius. 

Laserlight's original version can be interpreted in either of these
ways, but my first impression of it was that it leaned more towards the
"missiles fire from the position of the marker". My suggestion is
definitely a "missiles make an attack run from the position of the
marker" variant, but it is less open to different interpretations :-/
 
> Another idea for Salvo Missiles is to have a "Control Salvo". The
Control
> Salvo has no warhead, but has a small AI and sensor package. Same
cost/mass
> as regular salvo. Each missile in the Control Salvo may control one
other
> Salvo within a 12" radius. It allows the Salvos that are controlled
to pick
> a target rather than the "closest ship". Trade-offs: trade 1 salvo to
allow
> up to 6 other salvos to pick their target.

Ouch. That would be worth *very* much, particularly when fighting NSL
and other low-thrust fleets. Probably considerably more so than
Oliver's "one missile per salvo carries jammers" version.

Regards,

Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Hen3ry