Re: (FT)Escorts

On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 12:18:20 -0500 "laserlight@quixnet.net"
<laserlight@quixnet.net> writes:
>From: Peter C petrov_101@hotmail.com
>>Has anyone considered limiting the types of weapons that may be 
>targeted on 
>low mass, high thrust starships?  I was wondering if the really small 
>ships 
>should receive some of the benefits that fighters do.
>
>>(Inspired by the Millenium Falcon in action scenes in Star Wars)
>
>If you take the oft-repeated view that "size doesn't matter, it's what 
>you do with it that counts", then ...stop snickering, Beth... you may 
>want to consider a house rule to the effect that a ship which isn't 
>using its full main drive capacity can increase its effective range by 
>6" (or 12", whatever you feel like) per unused thrust point, to 
>simulating jinking and dodging. Maximum effect = 1/2 main drive 
>rating.
>
>If you do this, your MD6 escorts can keep formation with your 
>lumbering MD2 BB's, but, from the point of view of the enemy gunners, 
>is 18" (3 MD capacity x 6") farther away and therefore less attractive 
>targets.
>
>

Okay, this is the best (untested??) idea yet but I thnk that the real
improvement od escorts is making victory conditions that allow the
escorts to fight other escorts or cruiser instead of Caital ships
(except
in extremis such as Samar (?) or the little guys in WW2 who took on the
German Cruiser to try and save the convoy ships - [help me here you
RN/RAN types!]) and contribute to victory.  Attack/defense of beachheads
(Leyte Gulf)/convoys, patrol of the channel type stuff.

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit: