Re: Re:Salvo Missile Varients

In message <200007201647.SAA03155@d1o901.telia.com> you wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> You wrote:
> 
[snip EMP-SMs, Interceptor SMs]
> 
> >>>Decoy Salvo Missiles
> >>> 
> >>>Launch as usual, but they don't attack ships, however, their
> >>>placement token counts as a valid target for other salvo missiles
> >>>:-)
> >> 
> >>Nice system.
> > 
> >[CST] Problem - _when_ do they launch - at beginning of Launch
> >Ordnance phase, as usual for SMs, or at the end?
> 
> As usual for SMs and PBs.
> 
> >If the first - opponent can choose not to launch - you've wasted
> >them!
> 
> If my opponent chooses not to launch because I deployed decoys, I get
> one
> "free" turn in which to batter him and hopefully knock out some of his
> launchers or magazines. That's not exactly a "waste" IMO. If the
second
> option is used instead and the decoy-using force loses the initiative,
> it'll
> have pretty much the same problem.
> 
> >If the second - very messy!
> 
> Try using PBs against missiles. *That* is messy! <g> 
> 
> Also, if the SM-D-using force has fewer SM-armed ships than the enemy,
> the
> way it places its decoys tends to give the missile-user a good idea of
> where
> the SM-D force is going (or at least where it *thinks* it is going,
> which
> may or may not be the same thing <g>).
> 
> One thing which needs to be specified though is whether or not
fighters
> can
> destroy the decoys before they sucker any missiles. Again compare with
> PBs:
> a single strength-1 PB will automatically destroy *all* missiles
within
> 6mu,
> but enemy fighters can shoot it down before it explodes allowing the
> missiles to attack normally.
> 
> ('Course, the PB do have an unfortunate tendency to damage your own
> ships if
> the missile targetting was accurate or the PB targetting wasn't.
Still,
> given the choice between 1D6 non-penetrating damage to each of my
ships
> and
> eating a heavy SM salvo which forces me to divert my Pulsers from the
> enemy
> ships and is *still* likely to rip my guts out, the "dive into the
> plasma"
> tactic isn't quite as bone-headed as it might seem <g>)
> 
> >If the third - they're yet another anti-SM SM system!
> 
> Which is exactly why I don't like this option :-/ Well, they're yet
> another
> anti-SM SM system *anyway*, but even so I wouldn't want the decoys to
> always
> fire last.
In a similar vein Roger Brooks suggested an 'Electronic Warfare' decoy
pod for the Sa'Vasku. I guess any comments/proceedures that apply to
Decoy-SMs could apply to EW/Decoy pods as well.
> 
[snip Light Missiles]
> 
> 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
> 
> 

--