Re: MT Heavy Missiles and Ship Defenses

----- Original Message -----
From: Shawn M Mininger <smininger@yahoo.com>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 9:26 PM
Subject: MT Heavy Missiles and Ship Defenses

> I was re-reading the More Thrust book and I came up
> with a few questions about MT heavy missiles.
>
> When I was looking at the prices, my initial reaction
> was that MT heavy missiles are too costly.  2 mass, 6
> points for a one shot weapon that can be shot down
> seemed a bit pricy. I started doing some comparisons,
> and they're not too bad.  Figure that 3 MT heavy
> missiles have a mass and cost the same as a fighter
> group.  The fighters have more flexibility as far as
> movement, and a bit more combat duration, but the MT
> heavy missiles are harder to shoot down and do a lot
> of damage.
>
> Here's my question....
>
> A fighter group is hit on a 4,5,6 with PDS, and a 5,6
> with Class-1 beams.
>
> A heavy missile is hit on a 6 with PDS, but there is
> no note in FB1 as to how Class-1 beams would fair
> against MT heavy misses.
>
> I was thinking that if you follow the trend of PDS and
> Class-1 beams against fighters, Class-1 beams are less
> effective by 1.  So, my conclusion is that the Class-1
> effectiveness against heavy missiles would also be
> reduced by 1, which would mean that Class-1 beams
> cannot fire on MT heavy missiles in a defensive mode
> (no way to roll a 7 on a six sided dice.....at least
> not any of MY six sided dice).
>
> Can anyone tell me if this is a correct extrapolation?
>
> BTW, I have realized that this is my next tactic
> against the giant customized Sa'Vasku monolith ships.
>
>
> 3 MT heavy missiles are the same cost and mass as a
> fighter group, but it would need three times the PDS
> to target all three MT heavy missiles.
>
> I am thinking of converting my carriers (4 fighter
> groups each) into MT heavy missile platforms (12 MT
> heavy missiles for same cost and mass as the 4 fighter
> groups).  The enemy ship would need 12 PDS instead of
> 4 to target all the MT heavy missiles.  Plus the MT
> heavy missiles are less likely to be hit (although the
> ones that are hit are TOTALLY destroyed, vs fighters
> which lose a bit of combat effectiveness, but usually
> have a few fighters remaining to press on the attack.)
>
> If my conjecture above about Class-1 beams not able to
> be used against MT heavy missiles, then they are a
> great concept for swarming the Sa'Vasku mother ships.
>
> A combination of normal MT heavy missiles (2d6 damage)
> and EMP MT heavy missiles (threshold rolls against all
> systems) could potentially ruin someone's day!!
>
> Can someone let me know if my assumptions about
> Class-1 beams vs. MT heavy missiles are correct, and
> if so, has anyone tried this tactic?
>
>
>
>
>
> =====
> Thank You,
>
> Shawn M Mininger
>
In MT, the missiles introduced were shot down on a roll of a 6 only, but
in
FB, missiles (SML`s and MT`s) were intercepted/shot down per salvo on a
roll
of 4, 5, or 6 for two missiles plus a reroll. As each MT missile is a
salvo
in it`s own right, it will be shot down on a 4, 5, or 6, but the two
missiles and reroll is ignored. Cl.1 bats in PDS shot them down on a 5
or 6
(? I think, memory fuzzy). Also, F.Cons are required to fire the MT
missile,
but can be used afterwards just like SML`s.

This makes MT missiles underpowered now (in my opinion). They will
require
heavy PDS to stop, but are harder to hit with. My own alteration used is
to
increase the speed of MT missiles to 24 MU per turn just like SML`s
(same
cost/mass, exchanging dammage for endurance).

BIF

"Yorkshire born, yorkshire bred,
strong in arms, thick in head"