Prev: Re: FB2 Fleets (or "How I Learned to Hate the Savasku") Next: Re: FB2 Fleets (or "How I Learned to Hate the Savasku")

Re: FB2 Fleets (or "How I Learned to Hate the Savasku")

From: Mark Reindl <mreindl@p...>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 20:25:08 -0700
Subject: Re: FB2 Fleets (or "How I Learned to Hate the Savasku")



Oerjan Ohlson wrote:

> Mark Reindl wrote:
> IOW the carriers and their fighters made up over half of your entire
> fleet,
> both in mass and in points. Out of curiousity, what were your other
> ships - I'm guessing at BB+2xCS+CL?
>

Let's see, it was one heavy carrier, one light carrier, one BDN, one CA,
2
CL, 1 DD.  I know it goes too much towards the heavy, but given the
points
and current makeup of my fleet, I didn't have a whole lot of choice.

>
>
> He didn't carry anything in the fighter bay aboard the von Tegetthoff,
> then? OK, both of you wasted one fighter bay so I guess it evened out.
> (Bringing empty fighter bays to a battle is IMO a waste of points -
the
> effective cost of the bay is around 40-50 points depending on the ship
> you use, and you can usually use those points in a more profitable way
> :-/)

I used all fighter bays, he didn' t use his.

>
>
>
> Given how fighter-heavy your force was, you had no other choice. You
> don't seem to have used the fighter morale rules, though? If you did
> use them, you must've been extremely lucky not to have most of your
> fighters go berserk and spend all their endurance early on...
>

Didn't use them.  We haven't used them yet, nor have we used Damage
Control
rules.

> Um... Why go after his *missile* destroyers, unless you had already
> killed all of his other small ships (which it seems you hadn't, since
> one FF survived)? Given the number of scatterguns on your ships, his
> salvo missiles were by far the least of your worries.
>

Chalk that up to my previous experiences with salvo missiles.  Remember,
I'm still trying to figure out how this fleet works in comparison to my
ESU
fleet, which I play on a more regular basis.  I didn't truly realize the
effectiveness of scatterguns against missile fire until the game I
played
last night :).

> Considering that you don't seem to have actually used any of the KV's
> advantages against human fleets in general and the NSL in particular,
> that sounds as a somewhat hasty conclusion :-/
>

Perhaps.  That's why I asked :).

>
> NSL ships are favourite targets for the Kra'Vak: slow (which means
easy
> both to target with K-guns and to outmaneuver) and lots of armour
> (which doesn't give much protection against the bigger K-guns). They
do
> however have quite heavy beam batteries, and tend to outgun the KV in
> the (F) arc in the 0-12mu range band (and also in the 30-36mu range
> band where their B3s can hit you and you can't hit back). Because of
> this, trying to attack NSL ships head-on at point-blank range is
> usually a bad idea for the Kra'Vak. In fact, trying to attack *anyone*
> head-on at point-blank range is usually a bad idea for the Kra'Vak.
>

As I am finding out.  As I said before, I wrote this to ask for ideas,
which you are very generous in giving.	Since FB1 came out, I've been
playing ESU.  They are, in many respects, I think, one of the easiest
fleets to play given their relatively good defenses and attack
abilities.
Plus, they're pretty straightforward as well.  The Kra'vak are certainly
a
different breed (and not all of us had the opportunity to playtest them
before they came out :).  I was surprised at the changes from MT, most
notably the lack of armor or other defenses on their ships.  As I am
discovering, they seem to require quite a bit more finesse than their
background would certainly indicate.  I'm not altogether sure that
having
stronger hulls than equivalent human classes is *that* great an
advantage.
The reason I say that is due to threshholds.  For example, a Maria Von
Burgund has only 36 hull points, but also mounts 10 points of armor. 
So,
all things being equal, if the Von Burgund takes 12 points of damage
(let's
assume for the moment it was all in 1-point increments, with no
penetrating
hits) then the ship would be nowhere near a threshhold roll.  OTOH, a
Kra-vak Ko'vol BB has 48 hull points, forcing the KV player to make a
threshold check once it takes 12 points of damage.  For the first check
on
the Von Burgund, seven points of damage need to be done, while that
would
put the KV ship more than halfway to the second check, which the Von
Burgund would have to take twice as much damage as would have to be done
to
the Ko'vol to get the VB to the second check (hope that makes sense, my
apologies if it did not).

>
> However, if the KV are able to attack the NSL ships from the 12-30
> range band, or are able to attack from other angles than the NSL (F)
> arc (preferrably the rear 180 degree arc), the tables are turned.
Which
> of the two attack options is easiest depends on the movement system
you
> use - IME it is easier for the KV to control the range in Vector,
while
> in Cinematic it is easier for them to control the arc (unless the
enemy
> slows to a standstill and spins in place, in which case you're close
to
> the Vector situation again). Unless the table is so small that the NSL
> can sit still in the middle and cover *all* of it with their beams,
the
> KV should be able to carry out their first attack, or even the first
> few attacks, from positions of their own choosing.
>

Very true, I just have to learn to maneuver and be patient.  My problem
is
that I suppose I'm a bit too much like the KV, in that I sometimes have
little patience to setup my attacks (guess I do use morale checks after
a
fashion :).

>
> If the enemy ships have heavy human-style (single-layer) armour, and
> NSL ships do, remember to use your K1s+fighters against different
> targets as your heavier K-guns to avoid destroying armour
unnecessarily
> - NSL ships in particular can be destroyed without losing all their
> hull boxes when hit by heavy K-guns. DDs and smaller are generally
good
> K1 and fighter targets due to their weaker armour. Against multi-layer
> - ie., Phalon - armour, K1 plinking and fighter attacks can wear down
> the outer armour layers enough to let the big guns inflict more hull
> damage.
>

Great suggestion, I hadn't thought of it in those terms.

>
> >Also, the disparity in ship cost seems to make it prohibitive for the
> >Kra'vak to even want to close the range
>

>
> The only times you should attempt to attack up close is when you
*know*
> that you're going to outgun them (eg. when attacking carriers, or when
> you can attack into their (A) arc and you're certain that they aren't
> going to coast and thus be able to shoot back with their all-arc
> weapons), and when they're threatening you with fighters/missiles/
> plasma bolts and you need to end the battle before you run out of
> scatterguns.
>

I suppose that's good advice.  One of the things that I've been thinking
about is splitting up my forces more to be able to hit them with some of
my
ships at any given time, rather than all of my ships at once.

> ...so against the one enemy where you really, *really* want fighters
to
> give him something else than your ships to spend his power on, you
> didn't have any :-(
>

Well, to be fair, we had originally agreed to play a game with CA types
and
below, but then he decided he wanted to use his bruisers.  Thought I'd
try
slightly different mix of ships, for all the good it did me.

>
> >He began firing with his SD at 72" range, chiming in with his other
> ships
> >as the range closed.  I managed to kill a couple of destroyers,
>
> Hm. With the big K-guns you needed about as much damage to kill two
DDs
> as you need to knock the first power generator off the SD. Did they
> maneuver enough to stay out of your (F) arc, so you could only use the
> K1s?
>

No, range was the problem.  I wanted to be able to hit something, and by
the time I was close enough to the SD, I had lost initiative and so
watched
my BDN get turned into so much space vapor.

>
> >but then lost a destroyer and a heavy cruiser on the way in.  On the
> last
> >turn of the game, my battledreadnought ended up within 6" of his SD.
> >He had coasted in, and so used all of his power points to fire
weapons
> >at me.
>
> I hope the reason you allowed it to *coast* to within 6mu of your ship
> was to line up your main guns against it! If he wants to get close to
> your ships, at least force him to allocate power to his engines...
>

Yeah, that was the plan.  Unfortunately......

>
> > In looking at that game, it was pretty apparent that the fact that
> the
> >Sa'vasku don't need to allocate any power to defense is a pretty
> >overwhelming advantage against the Kra'vak.
>
> The only KV weapon able to force the SV to allocate power to defence
> (ie. to defensive weapons, not the D pool) are their fighters.
>
> >Also, the fact that we don't play with Damage Control rules tends to
> >give them a strange advantage as well.
>
> More importantly for you, it gives the Kra'Vak a disadvantage against
> *everyone*, since their main weapons tend to be larger than those of
> most other races (ie., they get more firepower back for each
successful
> repair roll).
>

Very true.

>
> >I do like the Kra'vak, but in my (admittedly limited) experience with
> >them, they seem to be overpriced for what they do.
>
> That was a pretty common reaction for new KV players during the
> playtests. Those who faced experienced KV players for the first time
> seemed to consider the KV quite *under*priced instead, though :-/
>

Well, hopefully the others in the group will feel that way as I gain
more
experience with them.

>
> >So, what I'd like to know is:  Have any of you who have more
> >experience with one or both of these alien fleets seen the same
thing,
> >or am just being whiny?
>
> The SV are overpowered against everyone, but the KV gets a worse deal
> than most. You're not *just* whiny; the odds were rather heavily
> stacked against you - and they would've been so even if you had chosen
> a better fleet mix and been more observant about where coasting SV
> ships would end up :-/
>
> >And second, if I am being whiny, what sort of tactics can you suggest
> >for playing the Kra'vak effectively without having to rely too much
on
> >fighters,
>
> Against the NSL I think you *are* whiny <g> The KV have three
> advantages in this matchup:
>

Thanks!

>
> 1) a firepower advantage at medium ranges even in the NSL's (F) arc,
>
> 2) weapons which bypass much of the NSL ships' passive protection
>

I experienced this one yesterday against the ESU.  Vaped a Voroshilev in
one turn with three hits.  He wasn't happy about that armor and screen
generators which were really so much junk at that point.

>
> 3) the maneuverability to make sure that the KV *aren't* in the NSL's
> (F)
> arc (or at the very least that they are at medium range, if you're
> playing
> Vector), and that their own weapons are trained at the enemy.
>
> Against the NSL, the KV fighters don't figure in any of these three
> advantages (though against anyone with screens, and the ESU in
> particular, they can be included in 2) ).
>
> Unfortunately your carrier fleet replaced both 1) and 2) with
fighters,
> and 3) on its own isn't enough to win battles. When you learn how to
> use all three of the above advantages, you'll do much better.
>
> IME the KV's most dangerous FB1 enemy are the NAC, and particularly
the
> lighter NAC ships (CH and down) - they're fast enough to stay out of
> the KV (F) arcs much of the time, and have decent wide-arc beam
> batteries (but trying to use those (F)-arc P-torps of theirs against
KV
> is rather futile!). FSE can be dangerous as well, due to their high
> maneuverability and their relatively large number of all-arc weapons,
> but their missiles are next to useless against Kra'Vak maneuverability
> and scatterguns. Against the ESU you have the same advantages as
> against the NSL, with the additions that your fighters too are able to
> ignore the main passives (in this case screens) and that it is less
> critical to keep K1/fighter and K2+ targetting separate due to the
> ESU's lesser use of armour.
>

In reading FB1 last night, that's the conclusion that I came to,
particularly the fact that the NAC has high thrust ships with P-Torps.
Those can do a lot of damage.  I'll have to keep the training wheels on
for
awhile before I go after them.

>
> >and/or countering the advantages of the Sa'vasku,  particularly when
> >playing Kra'vak.
>
> Much harder. Some things which help, but aren't enough:
>
> * Use fighters to draw off fire from your ships.
> * Try to keep the range open (ie., outside range 12) - they gain more
> than
> you do by getting close. You know where they'll end up if they coast,
> so
> don't go there yourself unless you have to!
> * SV ships of cruiser size and up are heavily enough armoured that you
> want to keep K1 and K2+ targetting separate as far as possible.
>
> Various measures to adjust the SV in general have been discussed in
> other posts.

Well, as Sa'vasku bait, I certainly hope that something is done.  It's
funny, I can always tell when something in a game is overpowered without
even playing the game.	If one particular player in our group plays it,
it's a pretty good bet that it has some benefit.  Happens in every game
we
play in addition to FT.  He happens to be the SV player currently :)

Mark

Prev: Re: FB2 Fleets (or "How I Learned to Hate the Savasku") Next: Re: FB2 Fleets (or "How I Learned to Hate the Savasku")