Re: Start For Sa'Vasku "Fix"

kaime@mindspring.com wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noam Izenberg <noam.izenberg@jhuapl.edu>
> To: gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu <gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
> Date: Saturday, August 18, 2001 1:59 PM
> Subject: Start For Sa'Vasku "Fix"
>
> >I'm generating a few cents of input based on some PBeM experience in
> >Brian's Sentient Strife game.
> >
> >So far:
> >
> >The Pool shuffling (Pods from R, Spicuels from D) seems to work.
> >9" range bands overcompensate any erstwhile SV advantage in vector.
I'm
> >beginning to think they're bad all around, but reserve judgement for
> >Cinematic. (One solution I like is 13" - 1" per range band (0-12,
12-23,
> >23-33, 33-42, 42-50)
>
> If I have read you message correctly, I agree that the 9" range bands
may
> hit the Sa'Vasku far harder than people think.  Again playing the
Sa'Vasku
> with these 9" range bands makes them very difficult to deal with the
massive
> beams that can be utilized by other fleets, namely at 12" range.
>
> I think the power pool change is fine, but the range band shift will
kill
> the Sa'Vasku in many ways.
>
> >As for custom designs, I think that requiring Screen nodes and Pod
> >Launchers to be grown when a construct reaches a certain size
> >(biological rules - One node/lancher per X mass) would help prevent
> >abuse. Further, not letting Power generator mass exceed 30% of total
SV
> >mass would  also help (No FB2 SV Violates this rule, if I recall).
>
> Very trues, when the huge custom ships are made with the ability to do
50+
> dice or release 20+ fighters, people get a negative image of the
Sa'Vasku.
> When I played, I used only book fleet Sa'Vasku and there was little
problem,
> but then a few people heard that they were not balanced 'at all' and
others
> started making the huge super Sa'Vasku ships and that hurt the
Sa'Vasku
> being played in the area.  The limits you propose are interesting and
maybe
> if the large ships could be fixed by a system to fix that aspect -
that
> would balance things out with other minor changes.

Last year, after purchasing and reading FB2, I noticed that the Sa'Vasku
construction rules were open to certain abuses (although I will not
claim to be
the first that noticed).  It is possible that the people that designed
the
Sa'Vasku construction rules had never played StarFleet Battles (where
power is
more important than speed).  As a tongue in cheek way of drawing it to
people's
attention, I submitted the "Starstreak" SDN design (40% power
generators, 96 in
total) to the registry, for which I was awarded the title "Sa'Vasku
poseur".

I suppose the real problem is that we need a fix that does not enforce
arbitrary
restrictions on design, nor emasculate the ships in the book.  The one
problem
with limiting power generators is that from a tactical and strategic
perspective, you want your ships to be able to flee if they can no
longer
contribute to the fight.  The Sa'Vasku automatically lose 25% of their
power
generators with every threshold check (but mercifully cannot lose any
more).
Jumping out requires energy points equal to 10% of the ship's mass.  So,
if you
intend to flee after the third check, without sticking around to repair
power
generaters, the ship must start with 40% of its mass as power
generators, or be
prepared to divert a significant fraction of its reduced pool to repair
damaged
generators.

Sa'Vasku ships also seem to be disproportionately vulnerable to needle
beam fire