I'm new to the list and was wondering if anyone had found a good way to play
large (10+ SD's per side) fleet battles.
A friend and I have tried several methods, from using the straight FB2 rules
(you end up rolling huge numbers of dice), to grouping weapons in multiple
weaponn groups (i.e. rolling one die for every 5 Class 2 batteries). Neither
method seemed satisfactory.
A bigger problem was that SM's have dominated the game every time we play
(even when we have an integrated PD net: every SD has Area Defense fir con and
10 PDFs). In one particularly agregious game 2 SD effectively crippled
(i.e. 50-75% damage) more than 10 opposing SD's in a single turn. Does
any one have effective tactics for defeating SM heavy SD's?
Or should the SM point costs just be higher?
Clearly more players would be great, but I can't seem to find any in Boston.
So, I'm stuck with just two of us. And we'd really like to be able to play
large fleet battles. That's why I'm looking for some possible rules
modifications. Unless somebody knows FT players in Boston.
As for speed, most of our SD's are MD2 or three so they tend to be
predictable. Also, while you may miss one ship, it's had to miss a fleet of
them (especially if they stay in ADF range of each other). I'll try MD 4
fleets and see how they fare.
As for Escorts, that's probably the key issue. Although I must admit it seems
distasteful that the missiles can't sort for size. Yes, I'm sure you can make
all kinds of ECM arguments, but still...
Adrian
----------
From: Sean Bayan Schoonmaker
To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: Re: FT - Large scale fleet engagements
Date: Wednesday, April 05, 2000 11:25AM
> A friend and I have tried several methods, from using the straight FB2
For larger battles, generally adding more players makes things move along
quite nicely. It sounds as if you might be playing too many ships per person.
The regular rules work fine.
> A bigger problem was that SM's have dominated the game every time we
The key to SML defence is escorts - lots of DD hulls to protect those
expensive SDNs. It sounds to me as if your fleet mix may be a little on the
heavy side.
Schoon
From: "Reen-Shuler Adrian" <reen-shuler.a@mellon.com>
Subject: FT - Large scale fleet engagements
> I'm new to the list and was wondering if anyone had found a good way
Rolling lots of dice is the way we normally do it. But rather than having 10
SDs
per side, we'd be more likely to have 4 SDs, 2 BBs, 12 CAs and 20+
smaller. Usually with multiple players per side.
If you have 10 SDs, I'd suggest 10 players per side. And also another 100 or
so smaller ships. Play it on a parking lot.
> A bigger problem was that SM's have dominated the game every time we
Try using Banzai Jammers. Remember a Salvo Missile will go after the nearest
enemy ship. Try to make it so that stack of 10 SMs hits a 28 pt scout not a
450 pt SD.
Try keeping your speed up. assuming you have a speed as low as 12, then with
thrust-4
you can be at speed 8, or speed 16 next turn. Or you can turn quite a way, so
if he places all his SMs as if you're going straight, you can be out of the 6"
radius. Safer is
> A friend and I have tried several methods, from using the straight FB2
For larger battles, generally adding more players makes things move along
quite nicely. It sounds as if you might be playing too many ships per person.
The regular rules work fine.
> A bigger problem was that SM's have dominated the game every time we
The key to SML defence is escorts - lots of DD hulls to protect those
expensive SDNs. It sounds to me as if your fleet mix may be a little on the
heavy side.
***
Try keeping your speed up. assuming you have a speed as low as 12, then with
thrust-4
***
Er, thrust-4 SD's aren't the norm, right? Been awhile since I've flown
big
ships. If you run tourney rules, say initial speed of d6+something, big
things tend to be wallowing pigs.
Banzai jammers, of course, work but suicide ships are distasteful.
BIG tables, either physically big, or using centimeters's on normal sized
table means you can start far enough out of range to build speed, but I find
it awkward.
I've never been completely satisfied with SM's. If you're slow, they're sudden
death, if you're fast, they're a pretty safe crap shoot.
The_Beast
> Reen-Shuler Adrian wrote:
Geez, this is a blatant cry for a plug about the...
[drum roll, please]
UNOFFICIAL GZG PLAYER LOCATION PAGE!!!
[commercial music here; your choice, depending on your mood]
http://www.bcpl.net/~indy/full-thrust/location.html
I'll let the page primarily speak for itself (Adrian, there is someone listed
for the Boston area by the name of Peter Mancini). If you would like to have
yourself noted in this growing list, please email me (OFF
LIST) to: kochte@stsci.edu and I'll get you on there asap (usually
immediately, if not sooner, if I'm not too swamped with work - which
at this very moment I am, but...:)
> As for Escorts, that's probably the key issue.
Then make a houserule that missiles have to be 'programmed' for a certain mass
range prior to launch. I've dabbled with this before; it worked okay. But
since it negates Banzai Jammers, people are less inclined to use this
houserule.
Mk
[ps: you can end the commercial music now; thanks]
> Reen-Shuler Adrian wrote:
> I'm new to the list and was wondering if anyone had found a good way
Is that 10+ SDs *and escorts* per side, or 10+ SDs on their own?
10+ SDs without escorts isn't much more work than 10+ smaller ships (I
usually field fleets of around 20 ships of varying sizes), but your comments
about problems with SMs doesn't sound as if you have any escorts nearby.
Anyway; I don't think 20-30 ships (of all sizes) per player is any
problem. I wouldn't go above 40 ships per player though, and others would put
the limit lower. The best way to shorten the gaming time for big battles is to
have multiple players per side rather than only one.
> A bigger problem was that SM's have dominated the game every time >we
PDSs. PDF is a file format, PDSs shoot down incoming missiles...
This debate came up immediately after FB1 was published, but died down after a
couple of months when the list members had learned how to cope with the SMs.
There should be quite a few tips in the list archives (Jerry, what's the
address?) from the summer and autumn of 1998.
Anyway:
> In one particularly agregious game 2 SD effectively crippled
Lessee... 10 SDs with 100 PDS between them and at a guess about 600 hull boxes
in all; call it 400 points to reach the damage levels you indicate... that's
just over 50 SMRs on target assuming average rolls. (Given the number of dice
involved, I'd be mildly surprised if the die
rolls were very far from average.) IOW, that's some 200-220 (or
300-330, if you used SMR-ER) Mass of single-shot weapons, so those two
SDs must either have been very big or have had nothing except minimal hull,
minimal engines and their missile payload.
Defence against SMs have two tiers:
1) Don't let them lock on to your ships
2) Shoot them down if they manage to lock on
2) is obvious - lots of PDS systems, including those on nearby
ADFC-equipped ships, and possibly some Class-1 batteries as well.
1) can be done in two ways: either you don't end your movement within 6 mu of
the enemy SMs (or 3mu, or whatever, if you play Vector; there's a very strong
reason why the SM rules in FB1 suggest that the SM target acquisition radius
be reduced if you use the Vector movement rules), or
you mix in a bunch of smaller ships between your capitals - ie, the
Banzai Jammers Alan was talking about.
Elaborating on 1a):
In Vector, dodge your ships around as much as you can. Whatever you do, don't
fly in nice predictable lines. Dodging as much as you can won't help that
much, but every salvo you can evade is one less that's able to hurt you.
Reducing the target acquisition radius makes it easier to dodge, but it still
isn't very easy.
In Cinematic you need to fly fast enough to force your enemy to spread his
salvoes out (and guarantee that some of them miss), or risk missing
with *all* of them if he misjudged your maneuvers. For a thrust-2 ship,
"fast enough" is speed 23 (which is "too fast" for my taste); for
thrust-4 ships "fast enough" is IIRC speed 7. IOW, equip your ships
with thrust-4 engines or better if you play Cinematic. If your opponent
can't predict your maneuvers far too accurately, this type of dodging
should cut the number of salvoes that manage to lock on by 30-50%.
A completely different solution is to use weapons that outrange salvo
missiles, and play with floating edges (ie, effectively unlimited
playing area) so you have space enough to retreat. Class-4 beam
batteries work well for this; if you can make him chase your ships
Class-3 batteries and even Pulse Torps work OK too. It results in a
rather drawn-out and boring battle, but it is one the missile fleet
have no chance of winning unless they're considerably faster than the
long-range fleet.
> Or should the SM point costs just be higher?
No.
Regards,
> Reen-Shuler Adrian wrote:
> I'm new to the list and was wondering if anyone had found a good way
> Is that 10+ SDs *and escorts* per side, or 10+ SDs on their own?
10+ SD's on their own. I think we'll try with escorts now.
But, don't they just get picked off at range by Nova Cannons?
> 10+ SDs without escorts isn't much more work than 10+ smaller ships (I
> Anyway; I don't think 20-30 ships (of all sizes) per player is any
Game time isn't really an issue, just having to count up all the damn dice.
> A bigger problem was that SM's have dominated the game every time >we
> PDSs. PDF is a file format, PDSs shoot down incoming missiles...
> This debate came up immediately after FB1 was published, but died down
Great, I'll take a look through them.
> Anyway:
> In one particularly egregious game 2 SD effectively crippled
> Lessee... 10 SDs with 100 PDS between them and at a guess about 600
Indeed. We've been designing ships as "line of battle" ships, not as
multi-purpose.
We've rarely seen a ship receive fire for more than two turns and still be
operational, so we tried a few designs with minimal armor, hull, and SMR's not
SML's. The ships die horribly, but have tremendous firepower. Of course they
need protection from small ships, but we found a few beam heavy SD's generally
takes care of that.
> Defence against SMs have two tiers:
> 1) Don't let them lock on to your ships
> 2) Shoot them down if they manage to lock on
> 2) is obvious - lots of PDS systems, including those on nearby
Yes, but the mass cost is tremendous and useless versus non-SM equipped
ships.
> 1) can be done in two ways: either you don't end your movement within 6
> Elaborating on 1a):
> In Vector, dodge your ships around as much as you can. Whatever you do,
We only play vector. we found that targeting any one ship was problematic, but
hitting a group wasn't too difficult and isolated ships got mugged real fast.
> In Cinematic you need to fly fast enough to force your enemy to spread
> A completely different solution is to use weapons that out range salvo
We talked about this but decided that it was dull and pointless (why not just
build a big ship with a few class 6 batteries?) More to the point, the out
ranged side would realistically always disengage. not much fun as a game.
> Or should the SM point costs just be higher?
> No.
Maybe this is in the archives, but why do all weapon systems have the same
cost? They don't all seem equal. Also, has anyone ever come up with a point
cost for the special missiles from MT (i.e. the EMP and Needle missiles)?
> Regards,
> Oerjan Ohlson
G'day Adrian,
> 10+ SD's on their own. I think we'll try with escorts now.
Nova cannons aren't that scary anymore <well in my opinion, but then many wold
say you'd be a fool to listen to me;)> given the damage other things
can dish out and the fact you can't fire/do anything else that turn. If
you're opponent is silly enough to take one, let him. Escorts are a vital part
of the game to me (mainly because you could count the number of SDs I own on
one hand, even if you chopped four of the fingers off) and their
worth shouldn't be under estimated - they're another layer of defnse the
opposition has to get through and they can be annoying - I've got one
scout that has been the ship to deal the deathblow to an enemy SD on 3
occasions (probably becuase they didn't see it and it crashed into their view
screen).
> Indeed. We've been designing ships as "line of battle" ships, not as
When you're talking smaller ships, how many and what type have you tried?
Unless they've got an impressive number of FC then there's only so many
targets thay can shot at. The other thing to note is that cinematic plays out
as a vastly different game to vector in many respects, you'll rarely see a
vector game that lasts near as long as the cinematic games discussed
here. A vector game of 5+ turns is a long one in my experience, 3 maybe
4 is closer to normal.
> Yes, but the mass cost is tremendous and useless versus non-SM equipped
So I take it carriers don't feature highly in your battles either?
> We talked about this but decided that it was dull and pointless (why
While I agree that class 6 batteries maybe a little over the top, why not try
a mix of beams (especially if you take escorts too). Make the SM player work
for their kills by pinging them as they come in (i.e. have a few big beams on
a couple of ships) <as an SM player I can't believe I just sad that!>
> More to the point, the out ranged side would realistically always
Harping back to those escorts again <;)>, that's another thing they're for to
be a mobile platform or to annoy the opposition enough they want to stop and
fight.
Hope that helps
Beth
Hi folks,
> Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
Starship Jockey
You could try to work something out using some of the Abstract Thrust stuff I
did last month.
http://home.pacific.net.au/~southernskies/ft/abstract.htm
It should prove useful for any huge fleet battles you want to resolve.
Neath Southern Skies -http://home.pacific.net.au/~southernskies/
[mkw] Admiral Peter Rollins; Task Force Zulu
[pirates] Prince Rupert Raspberry; Base Commander
> -----Original Message-----
Does
> any
On 5-Apr-00 at 10:52, Reen-Shuler Adrian (reen-shuler.a@mellon.com)
wrote:
> I'm new to the list and was wondering if anyone had found a good way
Does any
> one have effective tactics for defeating SM heavy SD's?
Nope,
assuming cinematic, speed, speed, and more speed. Realize once those SM ships
have spent their missiles they are nothing more than heavy cruisers. If you
force them to spend the missiles guessing where you'll be you take out much of
the punch.
Thrust two ships need to be going faster than 24MU, Thrust 4 needs to be
going faster than 10MU, these are minimums. At these speeds you force them to
waste half their missiles guessing. Even faster is better,
with thrust 4 ships moving at 18 you can force them to waste 2/3 of
their missiles.
If you are playing vector limit them to 3MU range and have no ships with
thrust less than 5, one to swing you and 4 to move. Zig zag, go directions he
thinks you won't. Make him waste missiles. Take your lumps and once he is out
of missiles hammer him.
RE your SM problem,
I don't understand how you are having a problem anyway. If you have 10 PDS and
ADFC on all your ships and you keep them tightly grouped he is going to have
to hit you with an extremely large number of SMs. Let's see, 10PDS x 6 ships
within 6" gives you 60 PDS's, which should take out around 48 missiles. That's
what, almost 14 salvo missiles?
The Beast wrote in reply to Alan:
> ***
Of the 29 human-engined SDs currently in my ship design database
(consisting of all legal FB1 designs I've come across on the 'net and
elsewhere):
11 SDs are thrust-2
5 are thrust-3
11 are thrust-4
1 is thrust-5
1 is thrust-6
I guess you *could* say that "thrust-3 and slower SDs are the norm"
since there are currently slightly more of them than there are of the
thrust-4+ types, but maneuverable SDs are quite common.
> Been awhile since I've flown big ships. If you run tourney rules, say
Speed is irrelevant for missile dodging in Vector; all that matters is your
thrust rating.
In Cinematic, a thrust-2 ship needs to move at speed 24 at the start of
a
turn in order to have a 50% chance to dodge an SM salvo; a thrust-3
ship needs to move at speed 23. Both of these require quite a bit of
acceleration if you start at speed d6+something.
A cinematically-moving thrust-4 ship however needs to start the turn
with speed *7* in order to have a 50% chance to dodge an incoming SM. It'll
move this fast at the start of turn 3 at the very latest, so unless its
enemies manage to launch their missiles on turn 2 it will be able to dodge at
least some of the missiles. If you're able to launch missiles on turn 2 you
either set up very closse to one another (>=60mu if
you're using SM-ER, >=48mu with normal SMs), or your initial speed was
big enough to allow you to dodge anyway.
(Roger's speeds of 24 for thrust-2 and 10 for thrust-4 ships are the
speeds you need to move at the *end* of the turn the missiles are
fired. Mathematically the thrust-4 ship only needs speed 9, but the
safety margin is only 0.14mu - a bit too close for comfort, maybe <g>)
> Banzai jammers, of course, work but suicide ships are distasteful.
Banzai jammers work very well against a fleet with nothing but
missiles, or unable/unwilling to use their secondary weapons. They
don't do nearly as well against a fleet combining missiles with decent
secondary batteries sturdy enough hulls to survive a beam exchange of a turn
or so before the missiles are launched... but such a fleet is a
very far cry from the ships Adrian suggests :-)
> I've never been completely satisfied with SM's. If you're slow,
In Cinematic, that is. If you're very slow (up to thrust-3 for human
ships,
or up to thrust-1 for KV) massed SMs are sudden death in the absence of
BJs; if you're medium-speed (thrust-4 or -5 for human ships) they're
dangerous but not overpowering, and if you're able to maneuver
(thrust-6+ for human ships) they're not very much of a threat, but OTOH
you won't have that many weapons to fire back with <g>
> Reen-Shuler Adrian wrote:
> 10+ SD's on their own.
Then there's no real problem IMO. It doesn't take much longer to roll 50 dice
in one batch than it does to roll 10... OK, you need 50 dice to do it, but
that's usually not a problem if you're a gamer <shrug>
Of course, if you don't use any smaller ships you can scale the SDs' size down
by a factor 4 or so. Same number of ships, same ratio of firepower per enemy
hull box (giving the same game length), but much fewer dice to roll. Since you
have no smaller ships to compare with,
no-one can say "but that's only a cruiser" <shrug>
> I think we'll try with escorts now.
At long range, you have several turns to dodge long-range Nova Cannon
shots.
Your paper-hulled missile SDs have roughly the same amount of hull
integrity as a normal heavy cruiser or 2-3 times that of a normal
destroyer, but unlike a normal destroyer or cruiser they're too slow to dodge
effectively. If you're into NCs, why don't you use them to pick off the
missile SDs from long range?
> Indeed. We've been designing ships as "line of battle" ships, not as
I usually don't think of a ship a single which one of my Mass 20 strikeboats
can cripple with one shot as a "line of battle" ship <shrug>
> We've rarely seen a ship receive fire for more than two turns and
No ship survives for very long while being shot at by 10 of its peers, even
at long range. However, by using paper-hulled ships you guarantee that
the enemy will be able to knock out one or more of your ships with
*one* of his, rather than with ten - IOW, if he gets to fire first you
lose and vice versa.
> The ships die horribly, but have tremendous firepower.
Assuming that they survive to launch/fire, that is. With their paper
hulls, the chances of them doing that is... not too good, like, if the enemy
knows how to counter them :-/
> Of course they need protection from small ships, but we found a few
Not fast enough, if the small ships are well designed and your SDs are
as paper-hulled as you seem to suggest above. Besides, "small ships" in
this case are anything less than Mass 140 or thereabouts :-/
> Defence against SMs have two tiers:
Ever heard about fighters...? And, well... you haven't seen FB2 yet <shrug>
> We only play vector. we found that targeting any one ship was
If your enemy relies on SMRs, isolated ships able to dodge (ie, thrust
4+)
will force him to burn *lots* of missiles to mug them. Think of them as
"baits" Flying maneuverable ships in smaller groups - up to 3 capitals
or so, with a screen of escort vessels - should help quite a lot
against this massed missile threat.
> A completely different solution is to use weapons that out range
Because there are some quite effective counters to such ships as well -
it's just that missiles aren't part of those particular counters. Full Thrust
is a game of stone, paper, scissors; every gimmick design or
tactic has a counter-design or counter tactic able to beat it.
> More to the point, the out ranged side would realistically always
Assuming that they *can* disengage - ie they're not too close to one
another to risk blowing each other up, they're far enough away from the
nearest planet or star (depending on your background/scenario), they're
faster than the longer-ranged ship, etc.
Since your missile barges are only thrust 2-3 I wouldn't count on being
able to disengage without fleeing into hyper, and if you use the FTL rules
given in FT2 they'll spend several turns spreading your formation
out enough to allow safe jumps. Your paper-hulled ships will take quite
a lot of damage in those several turns :-)
Besides, if I can force you to disengage in every battle without your ships
being able to launch missiles against or fire at my ships, bases or planets...
then I've effectively won the war <shrug>
> not much fun as a game.
Any less fun than launching one huge missile salvo per side, effectively
ending the battle in one turn?
> Maybe this is in the archives, but why do all weapon systems have the
Class-1 battery: 3 points
3-arc Class-2 battery: 6 points
6-arc Class-2 battery: 9 points
1-arc Pulse Torpedo: 12 points
6-arc Pulse Torpedo: 18 points
Nova Cannon: 60 points
...etc.
I'm afraid don't quite see how you can say that "all weapon systems
have the same cost" - unless you mean to say that 3 = 6 = 9 = 12 = 18 =
= 60, but I seriously hope that you don't!
> Also, has anyone ever come up with a point cost for the special
MT and FB1 both say that they cost 6 points per missile...
Remember that PDS shoot down MT missiles on rolls of 4-6 in FB1 (and
Class-1 batteries shoot them down on rolls of 5-6), rather than just
rolls of 6.
> Roger Books wrote:
> RE your SM problem,
Which leaves the other 38 or so missile salvoes unengaged (assuming
only 2 missile barges in the enemy fleet) - and since Adrian flies slow
ships, they all hit something <shrug>
Regards,
Sorry, Oerjan. I tend to think of FB designs, not FB-legal designs, and
in cinematic only, when I'm making tactical/fleet comments. Even Really
Big Tables (tm) or the use of centimeters is a bit foreign to the way I think
of playing. Not wrong, of course, just not the way I'm thinking. I'll try to
make those codicles with every FT comment in the future.
Otherwise, I thought most of the rest of what you said had already been
covered.
***
and if you're able to maneuver
(thrust-6+ for human ships) they're not very much of a threat, but OTOH
you won't have that many weapons to fire back with <g>
***
Banzai jammers work very well against a fleet with nothing but
missiles, or unable/unwilling to use their secondary weapons. They
don't do nearly as well against a fleet combining missiles with decent
secondary batteries sturdy enough hulls to survive a beam exchange of a turn
or so before the missiles are launched... but such a fleet is a
very far cry from the ships Adrian suggests :-)
***
Well, the more secondary batteries, the fewer the missles, too. I'll take your
word on the trade off in most cases, of course.
Not that that will stop you from creating explanatory statistics. ;->=
Please note that I'm not saying I don't try alternate designs, just never
completed testing on any. However, now that I've got decals for
my Texaco fleet... ;->=
The_Beast
> The Beast wrote:
> Sorry, Oerjan. I tend to think of FB designs, not FB-legal designs,
Can sometimes be a bit misleading when the situation being debated
involves FB-legal designs (ie, not "official" FB designs) using Vector
movement <g>
> Even Really Big Tables (tm) or the use of centimeters is a bit foreign
> I'll try to make those codicles with every FT comment in the future.
I know... I got some of the comments just after I sent my post :-/
> ***
Exactly my point. A very far cry from the ships Adrian suggests :-)
Later,
> Reen-Shuler Adrian wrote:
Depends on how good you are at dodging. ;-)
And frankly, I haven't had a lot of success with the NC (granted
I've only used it a few times in genre-specific scenarios, but...)
> >10+ SDs without escorts isn't much more work than 10+ smaller ships
This is easily solved!
FT is a very generic game, and you can abstract the hell out of it. When
designing ships based on other miniatures, it is often impossible to have each
weapon on a mini be represented by a beam weapon, so you have
to abstract and say 'those three turrets are represented by this Class-2
battery on the SSD'. So in order to drop the number of dice you are throwing,
make the ships smaller!:) Instead of playing with Mass 200 ships, play with
Mass 80 ships and CALL them superdreadnoughts! Make their thrust ratings
comparable (say you have a bunch of Mass 200
thrust-2
ships; make an equivalent number of thrust-2 Mass 80 ships). Things will
abstract down fairly well (you have less hull per ship, but then again, you
have less weaponry to shoot, and by consequence, less dice to throw
:).
The Mass 80 ships will survive an amount of time similar to what a
super-
dreadnought would, given the amount of weaponry that is then available (Oerjan
can work out exact ratios; I'm just offering up the idea and the basis behind
it).
Just a thought to make life simpler. And to not let yourself get caught up in
artificial restrictions.
Mk