Re: (FT) Point Value for Hulls

There is one big problem with everyone's analysis. 
The larger ships essentially discount initiative.  Let
me explain where I'm coming from.

One of my buddies ONLY plays giant ships.....he never
has more then one ship on the table, always for full
points.  I have a lot of experience fighting this type
of battle as I usually try to mimic more realistic
fleets having a range of ship sizes.

One issue I noticed.  (Just giving and example)

We write movement orders...so far so good.  

Everyone moves according to orders....so far so good. 

Then we roll initiative to see who fires when.	

Here's the problem.  Even if I win initiative, I fire
ONE of my ships, for maybe 10% of my total
firepower.....then it's his turn....he can fire 100%
of his total firepower in one volley.  

It essentially turns out like modern
artillary........massed fire is the only way to make
it effective (I spent 8 years in the USMC, heh heh
heh)

It comes down to the fact that he almost always is
able to get 100% of the firepower out before even
coming close to getting internals, meanwhile, my ships
are being eaten alive before they have ANY chance to
fire.

Big ships are just plain more effecient.......unless
you build in artificail limits into the game.  My
friend is not so willing to accept artificial limits
because he says it's not fair to favor my style of of
play over his.

--- Jeremy Seeley <jbs@Aros.Net> wrote:
> I said
> > >
> > > It seems to me that the size vs. point cost
> issue could be solved by
> > making
> > > the cost more realistic.	What I propose is that
> the mass cost be
> > squared
> > > (if not cubed), because bigger means bigger in
> proportion.
> 
> 
> > Laserlight said
> > Unfortunately it doesn't work that way.  Volume is
> a function of
> > radius cubed, surface is only a function of radius
> squared.  Therefore
> > bigger ships will be able to pack in more stuff
> per square meter of
> > hull.  That hurts escorts rather than helping
> them.
> 
> Well, yes, that's right.  It would mean that the
> amount of available space
> would be bigger.  That is realistic, and means that
> big means REALLY big, in
> comparison.  Still, the bigger means more cost for
> the hull and its
> internals.  I am not trying to 'help" escorts.  I am
> merely trying to give
> them a realistic necessity, which is that of
> resources.  Why not use 23
> SDNs?  Because it costs a ton, and it is not
> necessarily good to dump so
> much into so few units.
> 

=====
Thank You,

Shawn M Mininger

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.