Prev: Some more comments to the WeapDef archive Next: Re: FMAS names

Re: General EMP Thoughts

From: "Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@t...>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:17:11 +0100
Subject: Re: General EMP Thoughts

Schoon wrote in reply to Brian, who had written pretty much the same
things I posted minutes before I got his post so I've snipped that part
of Schoon's reply:

>Well done on this. I concede the point. However, I still disagree 
>that adding a large-ship killer (in EMP form or otherwise) to the 
>game is the solution.

The MTM-EMP is a large-ship killer? Not really. A large-ship softener,
but since it doesn't inflict hull damage or kill DCPs that's all it is.
Or *nearly* all it is - it is also a pretty good reason to stick
level-2 screens on your dreadnoughts and bigger <g>
>I actually feel that the fleet construction limits (must have 1 
>escort for every cruiser for every capital) is a reasonable way to 
>limit abuse.
>I've always played mixed fleets simply because I understand the 
>purpose of escorts in the economic scheme of things (you can't use a 
>SDN as a customs cutter).

But you also can't bring a customs cutter to a fleet battle, unless you
want it to get destroyed for no return.

During many time periods fleets *in fleet battles* (as opposed to the
total fleet) weren't particularly mixed. The Napoleonic era in
particular; small ships simply had no chance against a ship of the
line, so they didn't even try to fight. They fled immediately instead,
or surrendered if they couldn't flee. Battle fleets usually consisted
of a large number of ships of the line ("capital ships") and a few
frigates ("cruisers") for scouting, with no ships smaller than frigates
(ie., no "escorts"). The smaller ships mostly fought their own
counterparts, in patrols and convoy engagements quite separate from the
fleet battles of the big boys.

However, in the Napoleonic era there were technology-imposed limits on
how large ships could be built, and the navies of that era were
"playing a campaign" so couldn't concentrate all their resources in one
place. Those small ships to maintain a presence, even though they
didn't fight in the big battles.

The FB design system currently doesn't have any limits on max TMF (and
unless you tie it firmly to one specific background it is hard to
impose such an arbitrary limit), and most FT battles aren't campaign
battles. The result is that superships, or in smaller battles merely
large SDNs, are far more overpowering than they would be "in reality".


Oerjan Ohlson

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."

Prev: Some more comments to the WeapDef archive Next: Re: FMAS names