RE: [FT AAR] New Israel/Islamic Federation
From: "Robertson, Brendan" <Brendan.Robertson@d...>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 14:44:52 +1100
Subject: RE: [FT AAR] New Israel/Islamic Federation
But sometimes, especially in campaign terms, it's better to take out all
those transports and take the casualties. If you know they have high
cargo on board (munitions etc) wouldnt you rather lose a few destroyers
have their main battleline reprovisioned?
Neath Southern Skies - http://users.mcmedia.com.au/~denian/
[mkw] Admiral Peter Rollins; Task Force Zulu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Laserlight [SMTP:email@example.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 1999 11:19 AM
> >Noam wrote:
> >> By now I've seen adjustments from +10%-
> >> 25% for converting non-FTL ships to FTL equivalent, evening
> things up a tad (1320-1500). +10-15% should be close.
> >> That makes it less balanced than I would have liked, and the NI
>> victory more marginal. In terms of total NPV in that case,
>> scenario really was a wash.
> Oerjan (which, for you newbies, is more-or-less pronounced URyan)
> >Well, yes. The +10-15% is for a straight fleet battle, which is what
> >Laserlight turned the scenario into by attacking the HK group :-/
> I could've bored in and attacked just the freighters but I didn't see
> a way to scoot out of range from the HK group and I don't generally
> favor shooting at unarmed ships while ignoring the people who are
> shooting at me.
> BTW Noam, ready for a rematch?