FT-Banzai ships

> From: david smith bifsmith207@hotmail.com

> When missiles attack, the do all attack simultaneously. If they do,

The Islamic Federation BBs and SDNs have FTL tow capacity to bring along a
couple of Remora scouts like this.

> > Using banzai jammers (BJs) is a common anti-missile

"Banzai jammers" means small ships which are kept in formation around your
valuable ships; since salvo missiles hit the "closest" target, there's a good
chance your opponent's missiles will be wasted against the BJs rather than the
real target. ( I remember dropping 5 salvos
for a total of 22 missiles on a battledreadnought--except that a Mass
18 frigate turned out to be just a little closer...).

The counter tactic is to knock off the BJs with long range beam fire.

MT Missles can be set at Size selector (15, 150, 150 Mass and bigger) So BJ
will only work if they can hit the MT missles first... oh it takes a 6 on a
six sided die to kill it, by any defence system.

Laserlight <laserlight@quixnet.net> wrote:> > Using banzai jammers (BJs)
is a common anti-missile
> > tactic

"Banzai jammers" means small ships which are kept in formation around your
valuable ships; since salvo missiles hit the "closest" target, there's a good
chance your opponent's missiles will be wasted against the BJs rather than the
real target. ( I remember dropping 5 salvos
for a total of 22 missiles on a battledreadnought--except that a Mass
18 frigate turned out to be just a little closer...).

The counter tactic is to knock off the BJs with long range beam fire.

> From: Charles Lee (in Evil HTML Format)

A reasonable house rule, but not the way the proposed rule works. If a Heavy
Missile is close enough, though, it can use its secondary movement to select
its target, regardless of what else is nearby.

> So BJ will only work if they can hit the MT missles first ...

BJ usually aren't armed, so would be difficult for them to hit the missile

> oh it takes a 6 on a six sided die to kill it, by any defence

I'm assuming by "it" you mean the missile? The usual interpretation
since Fleet Book 1 came out is that a Heavy Missile/MTM is a missile
(with a salvo size of 1), and is killed by PDS on a 4-6.

> Charles Lee wrote:

> MT Missles can be set at Size selector (15 , 150 , 150 Mass and bigger)

This is a house rule. According to the published rules in MT the MT missiles
can choose any one target within 6mu (ie., not just the nearest

one); the proposed HMs need to attack the nearest target but can use their
secondary moves to make sure that the nearest target is the one they want to
attack.

> So BJ will only work if they can hit the MT missles first ...

BJs are no use at all against MTMs/HMs.

> oh it takes a 6 on a six sided die to kill it, by any defence system.

That's another house rule. According to the published rules, the *only*
systems that require a '6' to hit MT missiles are the old FT2 PDAF and ADAF
- and very few players use them any more. PDS hit MT missiles on 4+, B1s

and K1s on 5+, and each Scatterguns and Interceptor pods kill one MT
missile automatically (since they can't roll less than '1' on 1D6).

Regards,

Kravak defence weapons would carry over like B1/ PDF since they came out
and the game designers forgot people use them. The salvo missles were supposed
to simply missle use, but the long range and smart targetting use keeps it
alive in 54 MU's choice. Had in the new system used MT missles the kravak
weapons would have been better discribed against them. House rules generally
lead the designers because of prefferences.

> Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com> wrote:

> MT Missles can be set at Size selector (15 , 150 , 150 Mass and bigger)

This is a house rule. According to the published rules in MT the MT missiles
can choose any one target within 6mu (ie., not just the nearest

one); the proposed HMs need to attack the nearest target but can use their
secondary moves to make sure that the nearest target is the one they want to
attack.

> So BJ will only work if they can hit the MT missles first ...

BJs are no use at all against MTMs/HMs.

> oh it takes a 6 on a six sided die to kill it, by any defence system.

That's another house rule. According to the published rules, the *only*
systems that require a '6' to hit MT missiles are the old FT2 PDAF and ADAF
- and very few players use them any more. PDS hit MT missiles on 4+, B1s

and K1s on 5+, and each Scatterguns and Interceptor pods kill one MT
missile automatically (since they can't roll less than '1' on 1D6).

Regards,

Oerjan

> Charles Lee wrote:

> Kravak defence weapons would carry over like B1/ PDF since they came

If we had forgotten that people use scatterguns and B1s as point defence, we
wouldn't have included updated versions of these rules in the Fleet Books (FB1
p.7 for B1s as point defence, FB2 p.10 for scatterguns).

Since however there *are* updated versions of these rules in the Fleet
Books, the older MT versions do not carry over - they are superceded by
the Fleet Book versions.

> The salvo missles were supposed to simply missle use, but the long

Say again? The Salvo Missile rule explicitly says (in the first sentence) that
SMs are a completely new system, ie. *not* a replacement for anything.
Furthermore the FB1 ship design rules explicitly give the mass and points cost
values for both MT missiles and SMs, which would have been pretty pointless if
SMs had been intended to replace MT missiles.

> Had in the new system used MT missles the kravak weapons would have

The FB1 and FB2 rules for defensive systems *are* written assuming that the
old MT missiles would still be in use. That's precisely why these rules talk
about shooting at "missiles" (as in "all types of missiles") instead of "salvo
missiles" (which would've referred to SMs only).

> House rules generally lead the designers because of prefferences.

Certainly, but you nevertheless have to specify when you're talking about
house rules since otherwise others will think that you're talking about the
published rules.

Regards,

Understood,

However I has been my experience FT that "jammers" refer to ship systems and
terms like "missile sponge" and "missile bait" refered to smaller ships that
absorb [missile] damage before the prime ships

> --- Laserlight <laserlight@quixnet.net> wrote:

> Thomas Westbrook wrote:

> However I has been my experience FT that "jammers"

The term "Banzai Jammers" is not specific to Full Thrust; it comes from
today's US Navy (slang, not doctrine :-/ ).

Regards,

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 06:39:04 +0100, Oerjan Ohlson
> <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com> wrote:

The idea behind the "Jammer" bit is that modern cruise missles try to attack
bigger targets rather than smaller ones. But if the smaller ships use
deceptive jamming to look like bigger ships, then they will divert off the
missles intended for the carrier. Thus they dilute the effectiveness of the
strike. But it is kind of rough on the smaller ships sometimes. Since FT
missles aren't quite as smart as modern cruise missles (granted, they have
much longer distances to deal with and more complex ECM environment) you do
this by physically positioning your small ships.

> --- Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com> wrote:

> The term "Banzai Jammers" is not specific to Full Thrust; it comes

I seem to remember it from the original FT/MT sensor rules as a ship
with a system designed to emit the signature of a larger size vessel
(escort/cruiser/capital) as a deception when playing with unknown
sensor contacts, but I don't have the books in front of me to check.

J

> Jared Hilal wrote:

> The term "Banzai Jammers" is not specific to Full Thrust; it comes

You're thinking of "weasel boat" (FT2 p.22).

Later,