Re: PDS and fighters

textfilter: chose text/plain from a multipart/alternative

The thing I like about the revised PDF idea is that it helps distance FT
from the "Task Force 16 in SPAAAAACE!" syndrome that tends to plague
space games. I have always liked that, actually, but I think it would be
a good thing for FT to try something else.

What do I mean by this: In FT as currently stands, PDS are
40mm/20mm/etc. (if you're thinking WWII) or
Phalanx/Goalkeeper/Aspide/Sea Sparrow/etc. (if you're thinking
modern).Beam I in this system are twin 5"/38 DP mounts or more currently
5"/54 Mark 45, or OTO Melara 76mm, or other small-caliber DP guns, and
we're all fighting Coral Sea or Midway when the fighters are in the
ether, and Jutland when they're not.

The proposal makes PDS "something else;" they could be a combination of
point kinetic weapons, sandcasters a la Traveller, and maybe even
"burst" ECM that degrades enemy fire control solutions as well as having
some effectiveness against fighters.

If the proposed revision turns out to solve the "fighter quantity
tipping point," you'll _really_ know you've hit on something, because
the quantity tipping point mirrors real-world experience pretty closely.
You either don't have enough air do do anything, or enough to win
decisively, with little room between the two.

Best,
Ken

________________________________
 From: Samuel Penn <sam@glendale.org.uk>
To: gzg@firedrake.org 
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 4:56 PM
Subject: Re: PDS and fighters
 
On Wednesday 15 February 2012 19:24:34 Ground Zero Games wrote:
> >On Tuesday 14 February 2012 23:29:58 Tom B wrote:
> >>  So, why not treat PDS as a ship-wide system similar to shields
that
> >>  serves to disrupt all incoming attacks? (versus as a bunch of
seperate
> >>  systems that have to be allocated to targets like DF weapons)
> >
> >Isn't this how Interceptors worked in the Earthforce Sourcebook?
> >
> >Re-reading it, it's not quite clear on the exact mechanics, but they
> >can be used either as shields against pulse fire, shields against
> >fighters, or in anti-fighter mode.
> 
> I'll have to dig out my old copy and see what I wrote <grin>, it was
> a long while ago!
> I do recall that the whole "interceptor" issue was a bit of a kludge
> in some ways, because they wanted them to work the way they did on
> TV, which was basically however they needed to for that episode's
> storyline......  ;-)

The scale is slightly different between EFSB and FT2.5 - only 2
interceptors are needed to give the equivalent of 3 shield levels,
but they are limited to a (90 degree) fire arc. Given how easy it
is to have a dozen+ PDS on a ship, something would need to be
tweaked.

It uses slightly different terminology for Interceptors in anti
fighter mode, and specialist Anti-Fighter Batteries. It only
describes rules for the latter (1d6 - 2 fighters destroyed), but
I assume the former work in the same way.

-- 
Be seeing you,	      Games: http://www.glendale.org.uk/
Sam.		      Posts: http://www.google.com/profiles/samuel.penn