Re: S'V Seekers

Oerjan Ohlson wrote:

> >It's tiAmpo.
> 
> Sorry 'bout that :-(

A lot of people do that. Boggled me for the first little bit since my
identity had it as "Tiampo" so I couldn't figure out where in the
software the "a" was being turned into an "e" when people did a quoted
reply.

[OT] Do people not use a quoted reply that puts in the sender's name
automatically?
 
> That's the drawback of being too reasonable too often. People get
unnatural
> expectations...

I don't see it as unnatural. I always expect reasonable responses, and
am always boggled by unreasonable ones. Of course I'm one of those
people that is for people being lined up infront of a firing squad for
stupidity.
 
> Sure. But this particular thing - growing "seekers" - is something
they
> can, should, and in 90% of the cases will, do *before the enemy gets
so
> close that the SV has anything else to spend the energy on*. You don't
have
> to launch the "seekers" immediately after growing them any more than
you
> have to launch Drones immediately after growing them.

With that, aren't then drines underpriced in power?
 
> Correct figures:
> 
> MTMs with fighter movement and no other changes inflict between five
and
> twenty times as much damage as the same cost of torpedo fighters
against
> the same defence, or between ten and fifty times as much damage as the
same
> cost of standard fighters can inflict in one attack against that
defence,
> in both cases assuming that the fighters use the morale rules. (Of
course
> the standard fighters have a theoretical possibility to attack more
than
> once, but against heavy point defences... the chance isn't all that
big :-/ )
> 
> Without the morale rules the MTMs "only" inflict 4-8 times more damage
than
> the torp fighters, and 10-15 times more damage than 1 strike by normal
> fighters.

Is this one missile against 1 flight, or equal mass of each?
 
> >The balance problem with size is only solvable by some sort of
> >exponential cost system.
> 
> Yep. In the tests I've done to date, replacing the "basic hull cost =
TMF"
> with "basic hull cost = TMF^2/100" seems to work reasonably OK up to
around
> TMF ~400... it makes ships bigger than this overpriced though :-/

hmm.. the equation is too simple for the model. There's probably an e in
the equation that would work. :)
 
> But you must remember that the official MT missiles *do not use
fighter
> movement*. They still use the old "move up to 18mu per turn and may
change
> facing by up to 1 point at mid-move each turn". If you want to balance
the
> "seekers" against the currently official MTM rules, the "seekers" also
have
> to use the same or a very similar movement system. If instead you want
the
> "seekers" to use fighter movement you have to balance them against
> fighters, and of all fighter types the torpedo fighters are the ones
most
> similar to the "seekers".

And if you were to balance them to MT missiles, you'd cost them how? I'm
still hoping for some numerical input. I'm really not trying to create a
monster system, but something that is the SV equivalent of an MT
missile.