On Thursday, April 13, 2000 4:19 PM, Chris DeBoe
> [SMTP:ChrisD@jubileetech.com] wrote:
(Alan B/Chris) occasionally you send these attached messages which are a
pain in Outlook 97 as the actual message can't be directly replied to.
(Pasting original from Notepad)
> That's not related to Brendan's rules, which aren't talking about MT
We played with Brendans initial rules which were a hybrid MT vector missile.
The playtest results were, its way too complicated and not much fun.
> if you get the salvo into the right area in the first place, there's no
Agreed.
I'd abstract HH missiles either to a ER or greater (56MU) SLM with a 3MU
aquisition range or use MT missiles with cinematic.
If using ER+ SLM's you could do it that missiles greater than 36MU (ER
range) had to be launched two turns in advance. That would give the correct
mechanic for long range targetting and minimal book keeping as the target
markers would be on the table but would require a note of the turn on which
they reached the target point, easy with a marker pen and a plastic counter.
> If using ER+ SLM's you could do it that missiles greater than
Or use poker chips--Blue=first turn end point, white = second
turn, red = third. Or multi colored golf tees.
Perhaps I'm missing something, but wouldn't this make dodging the long range
missiles really easy? Since the marker is put on the table one turn in
advance, the target gets one turn's worth of movement plot KNOWING where the
missiles will hit. Or was the suggestion that the markers are placed on the
field the turn they hit, but that the color of the marker represents when the
salvo was actually launched? Sometimes I'm dense that way...
Rob
[quoted original message omitted]
From: "Tim Jones" <timcjones@waitrose.com>
> (Alan B/Chris) occasionally you send these attached messages which are
Please let me know when this occurs. I have the following methods of sending
e-mail:
a) From primary Internet machine, via Netscape Gold 3.04
b) From secondary (non-Internet) machine using Outlook Express
c) From primary work using Outlook 97 d) From secondary work using Netscape
4.7 e) From any site using WebMail
e) can be detected by the fact that the date is 1970 or 00
But probably b) (like this one) or c) could be the culprit.
On Saturday, April 15, 2000 3:17 PM, Robert W. Hofrichter
> [SMTP:RobHofrich@peoplepc.com] wrote:
The idea was to reflect the inaccuracy of long range salvos using simple
existing mechanics. It would be easy to evade very long range salvos, but in
the books missiles launched at long range are evadable or have very little
effect against moving active ships.
In addition you can control your adversaries movement to some extent. As they
evade your salvos you take away some of their initiative and can direct their
movement for your own tactical ends.
I suggested using the ER SLM range of 36MU as the break point but this can be
increased to better reflect the long range nature of HH combt.
I also envisage HH salvo magazines having a higher throw weight that existing
FB1 designs, so you get more missiles for long range plinking.
> Or was the suggestion that the markers are placed on the
Not the suggestion. It would require book keeping for the firer to remember
where they were going to place the salvos. However not a bad suggestion, but
IMO the bookeeping would be too much of a pain as on a mini table absolute
positions are not readily found, rather it works on relative positions from
the miniatures or markers.
> Sometimes I'm dense that way...
Miscomprehension is usually the authors fault :-0
Another possible mechanic is to fiddle the aquisition range of the salvo.
Launch as normal SLM's. In the long range band make aquisition 3MU but in the
close range band make it 6MU. This reflects long range missiles being
ballistic having used all their fuel for range, so being unable to aquire
their evading target. Closer range missile being able to actively home (as
they do in the books) as they have fuel to do so.