Gentlemen,
Do you enforce "fleet composition", meaning having to field a bunch of
different ships only.
We play _only_ with the ships from Fleet Book I & II and the
"reinforcements" from Star Rangers website
http://www.star-ranger.com/SRStuff.htm.
Tuesday night we played a 3000 vs 3000 pt game NAC/FSE vs Kra'Vak, never
having played NAC before and wanting to try out the pulse torpedoes I took
with my share of the "allied" points.
1 CH Vandenburg/T (2 PT)
3 BB Vanguard (4 PT)
Which is slightly less than 1500 pts but it felt right for a heavy battleship
squadron.
Some of the non-playing persons that where present mumbled something
about cheese, apparently they feelt that this wasnt "right"...
Now being relatively new to FT, I have owned the books for years and years but
only recently started playing. I am would like to know your "style", do you
consider fieldig only cruisers and battleships "cheesy" shoud I field a bunch
of DD's and FF's as well.
I should mention that the Kra'Vak player fielded a couple of Battleships and
Battledreadnoughts of his own. And that the FSE player had a bunch of light
ships.
YT
> On Thursday, November 22, 2001, at 05:57 AM, Andreas Ãrlyng wrote:
> Do you enforce "fleet composition", meaning having to field a bunch of
Yes, but not strictly. Our group usually builds "realistic" fleets that would
be OK under the old restrictions anyway, so it's generally not a worry.
...and being a little bit off one way or another isn't as important as
having fun anyway ;-)
My knee-jerk reaction to the kibitzing you described would also point
out their not actually playing, but the few times I've been in the mood to
play lately, I'd have been delighted in any interest.
Aside from the 'just have fun' already pointed out, you can also remember
you're experimenting. While it's nice to do that with supposedly balanced
fleets, it's obvious no one has a lot invested in the outcome, so learning is
the goal.
And, as I have proven on more than one occasion now, even a bear like a
Kormorov can fall to a pack of much smaller hounds. 'I went, I was stupid, I
died.'
Of course, shite rolls on PDS's help. ;->=
Gentlemen,
Thanks for you replies.
In the game I mentioned those four ships singlehandedly wiped out about 2000
points of Kra'Vak, of course that the Kra'Vak player placed the one of his
superdreadnoughts less than 6" away and in the front arc of all of my ships
helped a wee bit. 14 Pulse Torpedo launcher needing a 2+ to hit hurts a
lot.
I had an inkling of the PT's effectiveness but when used "right" and with some
help from your opponent they are nasty.
Me like!!! ;)
mvh
Andreas
--- Andreas_Ørlyng <andreas.orlyng@rikshospitalet.no>
wrote:
> 1 CH Vandenburg/T (2 PT)
Yes.
> Some of the non-playing persons that where present
At any game I run, be it wargaming or roleplaying, I have absolutely NO
patience with kibbitzers who want to interject their two bits worth. Newbies
who want to watch and ask questions, I can deal with. Assholes get politely
invited to piss off.
> Now being relatively new to FT, I have owned the
Depends on what you're running. My heavy battle squadrons have nothing lighter
than an escort cruiser. On the other hand, I run (and have had much fun with)
destroyer squadrons with nothing heavier than mass 44. Much of this is
scenario dependant. While I can and have taken down capital ships with smaller
ships, it is much easier, especially for newbies, to use larger vessels.
In my mind, it sounds ok to me also...real history is filled with some of the
strangest arrangements.
Donald Hosford
> John Atkinson wrote:
> --- Andreas_Ãrlyng <andreas.orlyng@rikshospitalet.no>