Re: FB2 Status???

Mike Miserendino wrote:

>I had done considerable playtesting with the new Kra'Vak and Sa'Vasku 
>rules and wanted to post the details, but wonder if it's valid 
>anymore.  

Depends on which version of the new KV and SV rules you used <g>

>In any case, all went well and everyone seemed to enjoy the 
>new rules and found them to be quite balanced.  

That's a relief, since FB2 has already been printed... :-)

>We liked the way the 
>Kra'Vak played a lot better, but still found the best defense with 
>human ships was using vector movement and plenty of missiles.	

That's interesting, since it is the direct opposite of my experience -
the KV aren't particularly afraid of the first few SM salvoes thanks to
their scatterguns, and Vector movement makes it much easier for them to
aim their (F)-arc weapons than Cinematic does (unless the targets have
thrust-2 human engines, in which case they have no chance whatever to
dodge no matter which movement system you use :-/ ).

>When we tried using beam ships and cinematic movement, the >Kra'Vak
won everytime.

Then your ships are too slow ;-) Ships that are effective against other
human designs aren't necessarily good against the KV and vice versa;
IME the NAC is the FB1 fleet which is best suited for anti-KV
operations (being fast enough to dodge and not wasting a lot of mass on
SMs :-/ ). (My opinions on the efficiency of the NAC units against
human-tech fleets has been expressed often enough in the past, so I
won't repeat them...)

>The game can be balanced with equal point fleets as long 
>as you design the non-Kra'Vak fleet to meet the threat.

Yep. There are a bunch of OK anti-KV designs in FB1, though (at least
for Cinematic).

Later,

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