Re: Re: Re:[GZG] [FT] Tactical jump

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Laserlight" <laserlight@verizon.net>

> JohnT said:
>> Doesn't this argument actually describe why it makes good fleet
tactical 
>> sense to deploy like it is done in the games?
>
> If you meant "tacjump would result in engagements which occur in the
same 
> way the FT games are actually set up", then my answer is "that's the 
> reason for discussing tacjump." I'm not certain that's what you meant.

Almost. What I meant is that doesn't the current FTL rule result in 
engagements that would look like the current game deployments.

I am not sure that tactical jumps add anything to the type of games.

>
>> If you can only jump once every 6 hours while the FTL recharges then
if 
>> you do a tactical jump you can't jump out if things go wrong. So if
you 
>> are going to jump in you better be really sure that you are going to
win.
>
> Right. How often, when setting up an even-points battle, are you sure 
> before the battle starts that you will win? And if you're on the short
end 
> of a battle with uneven points, why would you stick around? You'd
wantt to 
> jump in on a smaller enemy, and he'd then want to jump out as fast as 
> possible--which currently is one turn.

I agree with all of this, and this is exactly why you would not go
jumping 
around the system near the enemy. If you tac jump into the wrong place
then 
you can't get out and have to sit around waiting 6 hours for your FTL to

recharge.

You would only jump in anywhere near the enemy if you were very
confident of 
victory and expected the enemy to flee as soon as you arrived.

Jumping 6 hours travel time away from the enemy position and then
closing 
gives the enemy enough time to respond and if you get closer, they can
move 
towards you have a look and then jump. You can't then jump because you
have 
not yet completed your 6 hour recharge time.

>
>> Same thing goes for why don't you rush towards the enemy with a big 
>> initial velocity? If you are doing speed 20+ towards the enemy then a

>> turn when you try and jump out puts them on top of you before you can

>> jump.
>
> Not necessarily. You could zoom in, shoot, and then jump out when
you've 
> gone past.
>
>> Also there would  be a good chance of there being an enemy ship
within 
>> 6mu of your jump point  and so making you escape very dangerous.
>
> If there's one thing that needs to be changed about FTL, it's the
"damage 
> from jumping out"

Why does this mechanic need changing? If you make it too easy for a
fleet to 
jump out you could just end up with fleets sitting back salvoing MT
missiles 
and then jumping.

>> If you go in at a low velocity and don't like the look of the enemy
fleet 
>> you can disperse and jump before the enemy fleet can get to close
range.
>
> Not if you can only jump every six hours.
>
>> Also tactical jumps sound a lot like parachute drops to me.
>
> Imagine two opposing paradrops into the same area.
This would be random chaos on both sides. Most admirals would not like
this 
idea because they then don't have control of their fleet. Deployment
would 
be random and specialised units like carriers and ADFC units end up out
of 
formation.
There is a reason that paradroping is not used into a warzone often.
It's 
high risk and the casualties are often heavy.

Most admirals are cautious and know that if they lose a sizable % of
their 
fleet they won't retain their command, if they are not executed. It's
much 
safer to advance cautiously and either drive off the enemy fleet without

loss or run without loss if heavily overmatched.

John 

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l