Re: [GZG]FirstlookatnewNSLships!:-) [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOn 3/15/07, James
Moore <jmooreou@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> One of the reasons I gave the beams so many arcs is due to the fact
that
> the ship is not very manueverable, and will potentially be fighting
highly
> manueverable opponents (i.e.e Kra'Vak). At 12", it can put out 29 beam
> dice in any arc except for directly aft. I've also thought about
dropping
> the fighters for more beams and possibly an AFDC- I can see NSL fleets
> having a nasty "network" of PDS fire among ships of cruiser size and
larger,
> with their escorts destroying enemy "swarm" units at range.
>
> I personally find beam weapons larger than class 4's to be examples of
the
> law of diminishing returns (Grasers have the same problem, IMHO). A
class-5
> beam that fires through two arcs is 20 mass- you could get two two-arc
class
> 4's for the same mass and have almost twice the firepower (albeit not
out to
> 60"). I see the Neu Swabians as being just as efficient as modern day
> Germans and Austrians, they'd have figured this out too.
>
> So there you have it, my rationale for building the ship the way I
did.
> Also keep in mind that a Kra'Vak superdreadnought could conceivably
destroy
> this ship in two salvos if it lucks out and does max damage with it's
K6's
> twice in a row (Not hard to do when they only do 6 damage on a 6).
I've
> never fought a Yu'Kas, but that seems a bit excessive to me.
>

One of the things that bothered me about the ships in FB1is that they
make
much more sense in vector than they do in cinematic.  Long range weapons
in
a single arc, forward, force the vessel to close with the enemy--
significantly reducing the value of the extra range.  Given that a three
arc
beam-3 is only better than three three arc beam-2's at more than 24mu,
you
need some way to keep the range open.  As cinematic requires you to move
in
the direction that you are pointing, a centerline arc is truly aweful
for
keeping the enemy at arms length.

The aspect of the Kra'Vak that bothers me is that the k-5 and k-6 are
overkill.  They are only useful as elephant guns (hunting phalon
pachyderms).  Against human ships and Sa'Vasku constructs, the k-3 has
the
best bang for the mass point and the k-4 will poke holes clear through
to
the innards of all but the largest phalon warships.  What really limits
the
desireability of k-5's and k-6's is that they have exactly the same
range as
a k-1 (not that 30mu is anything to sneer at).	If you thought the stock
Yu'Kas was a fright, try fighting it with a non-phalon after the four
k-6's
have been swapped out for eleven k-3's and another scattergun.

You solve the problem of too many arcs by making them asymmetrical.  The
weapons are mounted to fire forward, forward port, and aft port.  If you
need to fire to the other side, you roll the ship.  The only problem
becomes
when the enemy will move past you, but that puts your vessel in his aft
arc.

As for designing a heavy ship for the NSL to face the Kra'Vak with, they
will probably have to finally bite the bullet and kick the thrust up to
4.