Re: S'V Seekers

Jaime Tiempo wrote:

>The mass and power to produce a seeker I took out of drone construction
>specs. Perhaps 1 mass/2 energy would be better.
>
>You have to also take into accound that pods can't be defended against
>while a seeker you can hit with PDS. You get longer range, but only a
>50% chance to hit against 1 PDS.

Gee, what a penalty. Only a 50% chance to hit against 1 PDS, at any
range 
up to 60mu from the launch point, no matter the facing of the mothership

when the "seeker" is launched.

The Lance Pod, which costs the same amount of bio-mass and three times
as 
much energy to launch, gets a 50% or better chance to hit out to range 
*12mu* - provided, of course, that you managed to point its single-arc 
launcher in the right direction to begin with.

>Ships that are designed as missile barges can launch more MT missiles
>then a ship of equal mass can produce seekers.

Excuse my french, but this is bull.

>It takes 2 mass to use a MT missile, It takes 3 mass for the drone
womb, 1 
>mass for the seeker, and whatever energy is finalised on. That's
already 
>more mass.

Six MTMs = 12 Mass, 36 pts
Six "seekers" + 1 Drone Womb = 9 Mass, 21 pts

>The deciding factor with the envergy cost is how much of a penalty the
SV
>will take to be able to produce them.

Unless you attempt to grow the "seekers" when the enemy is already
within 
weapons range, the energy cost is virtually irrelevant. You don't have
much 
else to spend the energy on anyway - no need for radical maneuvers that
far 
away from the enemy, no need for defences, and even vast amounts of
energy 
put into Stinger nodes won't produce much effect.

>Current SV problems?I'm not sure what they are. The [Official] changes
>that were made to the SV fixed what I considered the unbalancing
>aspects.

Your "seekers" would put the unbalances right back.

Regards,

Oerjan
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

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