Re: S'V Seekers

Kevin Walker wrote:

> I've seen them used in games effectively, used like pulse torps but
> usually used in the closer two range bands.  They give an extra punch,
> especially since they penetrate armor well.

Either I miss with them (range is too far) or the ship is getting too
damaged to use the power there. I put pod launchers on ships for fighter
defence. If I can use them against ships that's only a side bonus.
 
> I'd trim the consideration of the mass of the power generators down to
> 1/2 or 1/4 of the full value as the generators are useful elsewhere
when
> not applied to the seeker creation.  The SV *carrier* demonstrates
this
> issue with being able to create a large number of drone squadrons,
> depleting itself of a large amount of it's mass only to hang around at
> longer ranges using it's large amount of now available power to do
some
> heavy or long range shooting.

hmm.. I've always looked at using generators to build drones on the one
turn basis. But now that you mention it, having more wombs then you can
power and just growing a percentage of the wombs and launching at once
is very obvious. With that, yes, taking power into account @ 1/2 makes
sense.
 
> With SV balance issues usually rear up with the larger ships, those
that
> tend to have a large number of generators.  The FB2 SV Mothership
could
> generate over 18 seekers in a turn (assuming 2 mass and 2 power per)
and
> has enough mass for nearly double this amount over the space of the
> battle.  Once this much mass is used up all the ship commander has to
do
> is keep out of serious harm using the hordes of power now used for
> little else to shoot the enemy, usually at long range.

The whole SV system starts breaking down as ship size increases. I'm not
sure where the balance limit is, I have Vorlon Heavy Cruiser which I run
as 300mass since that's how big it is, and it's pretty cheesy in power
terms. I prefer designing for heavy cruiser size.

> If growing seekers is done via the same method (not costs) as drones
> then womb space is the major limitation.  A ship that cannot generate
> enough or spare enough energy to do the maximum seeker growth in a
turn
> just combines two or more turns in generating the full swarms, waiting
> to launch them until the full strike is ready.

Ok that all clicks. Then perhaps 2 mass, 4 energy per seeker.
 
> The more I think about it the more I don't like the secondary move
> principal for seekers (or MT missiles).  It allows them to dodge out
of
> the way of defensive ship networks and area weapons like Phalon PBs.
> Some may like this but if they can dodge like this it makes defense a
> lot more difficult.  I'd prefer that fighters be the only users of
> secondary movement, hence my earlier objections to a weapon system
that
> had an area effect that had a limited movement in the secondary
movement
> segment...oh...I probably shouldn't mention that...  ;-)  Part of the
> challenge to SMLs, PBs, and MTMs is the need to guess what the enemy
is
> up to - the secondary move makes it three times easier to guess unless
> you're typically playing at the speed Oerjan is use to while using
> Cinematic movement.

I look at it from what the unit should do, and then work the game
dynamics for it. To me SMs are basically unguided rockets that are
launched in a general direction and have minimal to target guidance,
which is why they go in swarms. PB are basically diretion fired
artillery. Fighters work like small space ships, but are far more
menuverable because of their size. MT missiles are like modern cruise
missiles, that can guide themselves into the target much like a fighter
would. I can't see any reason to justify having fighters move 6mu more
then missiles a turn. To me it doesn't make sense.

I orginally put it in that way to match in my mind how MT missiles
should work. What it really ment was that seekers would have the same
system as MT missiles.

So the current proposal would then be 2 mass, 4 energy, and have the
same mechanics as MT missiles (which is basically what I'm trying to
duplicate).