Fleet structure

Hi all,

I was wondering if anyone could give me some advice on fleet structure. Let me
clarify, some. I am trying to get a good handle on ratios and practices today
which could be translated to Full Thrust.

Eli

> staremu wrote:

Depends how you like to play. I like SDs with cruiser and destroyer support
and carriers. Lots of carriers.

> From: staremu star_emu@hotmail.com

A lot of people seem to start off that way, but the situation for an FT fleet
is different than that of a modern navy. FT has no equivalent of a submarine,
so there's no need for lots of little ASW platforms. Think more
along the lines of pre-WWI fleets, then add some point defence to deal
with fighters and a few expendable "scout" ships to soak up salvo missiles.

> A lot of people seem to start off that way, but the situation for an

That's true if you use Canon ships. If you use some of the systems from More
Thrust (which is available freely in PDF format on the GZG site) you can
simulate Submarines quite nicely. I'm thinking along the lines of Cloaks and
Missles.

Damond

Just a quick note to consider; Our group really likes FT because you can
really customize your ship designs to suit your individual preferences and
tastes.

We've noticed that Fleet design evolves as the players become more experienced
at ship design and as knowledge of the ruleset increases.

Doctrine tends to follow players particular preferences with those players who
prefer the missile chuckers vs the armored beamers vs the speed demons vs the
swarm of fighters evolve their own force mix.

My own preference is for slightly slower armored capitals using pulse &
missiles with a slew of fast escorts (DD & CL's) with the occasional CVL.

See Ya Pat Connaughton

[quoted original message omitted]

> staremu wrote:

Do you mean today as in the current navy's of the world's
fleet structure, or how individual people/groups do theirs?

I've a set of pages out there (yes, Oerjan, I have *not*
forgotten that there are errors in need of fixing ;-) that
have my take on "fleet rosters". If you want to have a look at them, feel
free:

Well, I guess I am lookign for a real world reference to draw from. I know
fleet structure will be dependent upon ship design. I play NSL ships with a
few homebrew designs for variety.

Eli
[quoted original message omitted]

From: Damond Walker dwalker@syncretic.com
> If you use some of the systems from
you
> can simulate Submarines quite nicely. I'm thinking along the lines of

Depends on how you play cloaking. If you can't detect a cloaked ship and they
can't attack from cloak, then it's not the same. Of course, you can fiddle
with the Cloaking rules to make a simulation of submarines (eg "cloaked ships
can detect targets out to 24 mu and identify them at 18mu;
non-cloaked ships can detect cloaks within 12mu and get a firing
solution within 6mu" or something similar) but that's changing the feel from
"baseline" FT quite a bit... which is not what I think the original question
intended.

> laserlight@quixnet.net wrote:

[subs & cloaks]

> Depends on how you play cloaking. If you can't detect a cloaked ship

Naturally any model / comparison breaks down at some point.  But I think

(and I'm no military expert by any means) the basic idea behind the comparison
is valid. Simplistically, subs can hide, surface ships can't; sometimes subs
can be detected. Cloaked ships can hide; sometimes they can be detected (e.g.
uncloaking in order to fire).

On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 16:05:20 -0400, Jerry Acord <acord@imagiware.com>
wrote:

> Naturally any model / comparison breaks down at some point. But I

Note that the More Thrust cloaking rules has a very serious problem: the
cloaked ship does _not_ get any kind of feedback as to whether or not he
made an error in his orders. I played them and my opponent made a simple error
on the first turn: he wrote an "S" for starboard instead of a "P" for port.
The rest of his cloaked maneuvers were based on that error. When he decloaked
and moved his ships, he found he was nowhere near where he thought he was. His
fleet was pretty much toasted. The cost of the cloak was seriously over priced
for what he got, and probably even if he hadn't made the mistake.

> Note that the More Thrust cloaking rules has a very serious problem:

A player mistake causes a rule to have a serious problem? Hmmm.. In that case
I hate ptorps cuz I always miss with them.:)

Damo

[quoted original message omitted]