Arcs in vector

Milady Beth, 

Whereas my respect for your judgement is boundless, I stipulate a points
of
disagreement. 

>From my observations of the KV vs human multi-arc fleet under vector, I
have
the following comments:
1) the KV don't have to worry about the human ability to fight better
close
in (similarly the humans don't often get this advantage) because good KV
tactics will usually ensure a few decent rounds of closing fire
(generally,
as the KV, I manoevre to keep range at 20-30, and with higher thrust
than
most humans and KV vector movement rules, I have little trouble). The
humans
won't like that. 

I believe a human fleet built with one arc heavies and 2-3 arc
secondaries
would routinely (not in every case) whump the 3+ arc mains/ 4-6 arc
secondary human fleets I've seen. They have a more limited tactical
envelope, but that doesn't matter if the tactics are effective. 

Against someone who can fly speed 30+ in vector with accuracy and
precision,
I'd have some concerns. But I believe that I could routinely smoke
slower
opponents (with strictly average dice) due to the higher throw weight
and my
ability to put the guns on target. 

With the KV, this is particularly pronounced due to their better
manouvre
drives. But even with a human MD4 I believe (since it only costs 1 to
turn
the ship as much as you want) I can mostly arrange to end up facing my
targets until I get very close. 

Maybe I just fly really well, or maybe my opponents aren't inventive
enough.
But Full Thrust has demonstrated to me that it is:
	1) The fist, while not the only formation, is valid in many
cases.
It allows concentrated Area Defence, concentrated firepower (and thus
you
can reduce enemy formations very effectively), and it means an enemy
that
wants to be in range of one of your ships is often in range of many.
Mutual
support, overwatch, whatever. It's all there. Area effect weapons are
rough
on formations, but since few people use waveguns/nova cannons (and prior
to
the Phalons coming out, that was about it), it is a good general purpose
formation.
	2) Ships that (in vector) focus on too many arcs waste points
that
translate to fewer dice thrown at the enemy. It doesn't matter that you
could attack enemies on all sides if you're destroyed during the closing
actions. 
	3) A good pilot with a decent thrust can use oblique manouvres
and
the ability to rotate to face cheaply to be where they need to be with
guns
pointed in the right direction. If the enemy tries splitting up to split
your fire, you focus your formation on the few enemy ships you can bear
on,
annihilate them, and the next round, annihilate a few others. They
probably
can't do as much damage to you (they're spread out usually over more
than
one range band) and you defeat them in detail. If they are very
manouvreable
but stay bunched up, then you have a bit of a problem. But again, good
tactics will keep them at enough range such that you can keep them in
arc
(sometimes this is harder, but it is what you try to achieve). 
	4) Because you concentrate fire on a few CL-->BC class ships per
turn (pick the ship with the worst combination of defences and highest
Firepower/Mass ratio), until they are all gone (during fleet
engagements),
if you can't bear on all of them, that's not a problem. You didn't want
to.
You target them because many of them have weapons that don't do damage
until
Range 24 (or not much anyway) and aren't really dangerous till range
12-18.
If your larger fleet guns can kill them before that range, then those
points
go before they threaten or damage your ships. Escorts get a low priority
because they can usually be popped (popcorn) as an afterthought or with
a
spare weapon. They aren't very threatening. BBs+ aren't usually the
first
targets because it takes a lot of fire to kill them, and their guns
probably
will fire. So get rid of some dangerous ships before they are dangerous,
then worry about the big boys (shoot escorts as situation permits)
later. So
the arc restriction isn't hugely important - when you're firing at the
big
boys, they move slow. You kill early the manouverable, hard hitting
units
(cruisers, battlecruisers, some fast BB designs). So then maintaining
arc on
the remaining forces is easier. 

Oerjan once said that in vector (I'm making up numbers, he'll fill in
the
ones he believes I'm sure), a second arc is worth (say) 20%, a third arc
maybe 10%, and beyond that are almost insignificant. (A three arc weapon
is
nearly as good as a 6 arc weapon with vector turn rules!). I was just
wondering what numbers he would have attached. The point was the
multi-arc
costings are for cinematic and vector (because it allows faster turns)
provides less of a penalty to smaller arc weapons and thus the cost for
more
arcs should be less. 

I'll gladly take a DIY human fleet with restricted arcs and more throw
weight (dice) vs. a multi-arc human fleet identical in most other
respects
in a PBeM if there is interest in putting my theorems to the test. I'll
even
just take NAC ships from the fleet book vs my re-engineered vector NAC
(same
mass of weapons, more limited arcs, more dice concentrated in the
limited
arcs). I believe that with anything thrust 4 or better, it makes a large
amount of sense to concentrate your fire down a limited range of arcs.
Cheaper cost, more effective. 

Anyway, thanks to everyone for their input! 

------------------------------------------
Thomas R. S. Barclay
Voice: (613) 722-3232 ext 349
e-mail: tomb@bitheads.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCS/GE d? s-:+ a? C+++(+)$ UL*U+++(--)
P>+++ L+ !E W++$>+++ N++ o+ K- w+++(++)
O+@ M-- V-- PS+ PE+ Y+(Y--) PGP- t* 5++
X- R++(R*) tv b+++>++++ DI+++ D++>D+++ 
G-- e* h* r y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
------------------------------------------