I had this idea for movement for MT missiles, and thought I`d post it to see
what replies/comments I got.
MT missiles are miniture spaceships, but move a set distance each turn to keep
bookkeeping down. Instead, how about having the missiles move at their
launching ships starting speed, and accelelerate as they move. I would have
their movement as 12 mu plus launching ships speed on the first turn, 24 mu
plus launching ships speed on the second turn, and 36 mu plus the launching
ships speed on the third turn (or think of it as accelerating at 12 mu per
turn for 3 turns). To remember which turn the missiles are on, use a missile
counter with a number on it to show which turn of movement the missile is on,
and change it when the begining of each turn comes around. It would also
require a note to be made as to the launchng velocity of the ship that fired
the missile(s). The problems with this idea (that I can see) are it opens up
the tactic of small, light ships, with high acceleration flying in, firing
missiles at high speed, to increase the effective range avalible, and turning
away to prevent them entering the enemies range. This can be solved by
limiting how far the missiles can maneuver to intercept the targets
(limited delta-v against the high speed/momentum of the missile). A idea
for solving this problem I had is as follows. The missile has a limited area
that it can maneuver in flight, definded as the arc/area from the point
it started the turn at, and the point it would end the turn at AT THE SAME
SPEED (no acceleration) plus 6 mu (number off the top of my head) to either
side of that point (probably easier if thought as a arc template). The heading
of the missile would be the direct line from the starting point to the ending
point.
Another idea would be to have the missile move it`s speed first, and then
could be placed anywhere in a 12 mu radius from the point determined by moving
it first. The heading of the missile would then be decided by a streight line
between it`s starting point and it`s finishing point, and the distance would
also be the speed it carries over to the next turn. This would allow the
missile to slow down from it`s launching velecity (which the first idea
doesn`t), and also limit the misssile`s maneuverablity to turn at high speeds
(if fired from a standing start, the missile could turn 45 deg each side, but
if it was launched at 12 mu, and acclerated at 12 mu, the angle it could turn
would fall to 22.5 deg (somebody want to check my triganometry here, after
all, this is just a guess, it`s been a long time since I did school).
These ideas sound complicated, but would probably get easier with practice,
and allow you to use a speed boost on launching the missile (after all, with
the rules at present, missiles are useless if your speed is higher than the
missiles movement at launch, because you will overtake them).
I like this idea, but I don't like the thought of having to keep records for
each missile. What you might try is having various different coloured missile
markers, so that whenever a spread of missiles is launched from a ship, they
can all be the same colour and a suitably coloured dot can be put in the
velocity box for that ship. Then you could work out the speed of a missile by
seeing the speed at which it was launched, and how many turns ago, without
having to keep records or use numbered counters. Just a thought.
Matthew Smith
[quoted original message omitted]
The trouble is as soon as you add the 'vector' of the launching vehicle to the
MT missiles velocity is that you will begin to out range everything else. Also
if you do it for one system (MT missiles) then it should be applied to
everything else launched from a ship, fighters, SMs, PBs, other 'smaller'
ships, etc. As it stands with the current turn sequence and fleet book ship
designs certain fleets will absolutely roll over others, the FSE and Phalons
spring to mind immediately. This happened in a playtest game
for Fleetbook 2, the idea was to add the launching ship's velocity to the SM's
range. On the first turn the FSE fleet using standard FB1 designs effectively
destroyed the opposing NSL fleet, a high starting velocity allowed the SMs to
hit the NSL fleet before they even having a chance at
getting to beam range (class 3).
I'm not opposed to the idea of adding the launching velocity to missiles, etc.
It just doesn't fit in well the 'standard game'.
G'day Bif,
> Instead, how about having the missiles move at their
Derek's already mentioned the potential problems with this, but restrictions
on maneuverability may help.... unfortunately I got completely lost in your
explanations (muddle headed today sorry).
Could you give me some examples please
Thanks
Beth
[quoted original message omitted]
G'day Bif,
> Try imagining a triangle, with the
I think I know what you mean, but last time I checked triangles had 3 points;)
> Then have a circle, 12 mu in diameter (I said 6 mu first
Hey?
> The missile can be placed
I think I'm still with you, so how about acceleration/deceleration is
that a straight addition thing or is that constrained by the circle too ( if
I've got it then accel isn't but decel might be??)?
While I applaud your efforts now I've got a clearer picture I don't think it
will actually stop the fly in at high speed, dump missiles and leave problem
that effects "vectorised SMs" unless you remove an MT's attack range (we play
it as 6mu, but off the top of my head I can't remember if
that's from the book or Derek's fevered mind).
Cheers
Beth
[quoted original message omitted]
G'day Bif,
> What I`m trying to do is a way you
OK coming from a vector point of view this is still not going to work. A
player worth their salt will come in with enough speed that they can get
the missiles in amongst you on the turn they're shot so the manoeuvre circle
(though a sound idea) isn't going to be enough to compensate for the "I shot
my missiles before you can shoot me" problem. That's why I think if missiles
etc are to have a vector component there's going to have to be degradation of
lock on with higher velocities (whether a reduce chance of
being effective or much smaller attack range or divergence/scatter).
Cheers
Beth
Well thought out, Beth!
Here are some off-the-top-of-the-head thoughts.
Radius: Perhaps start with a 6mu radius and reduce it by 1mu for every 12mu
the missile travels? That would put a shot of 24mu at a radius of 4mu (as many
people use in vector). I would also probably apply a minimum radius of 1mu.
Somewhat hard to justify with PSB.
Lock-on:
Perhaps a penalty of -1 to the lock-on roll per 12mu (or fraction
thereof) beyond 24mu? Less time to adjust and lock on? Only if the
lock-on and guidance is done at the end of flight.
Divergence/Scatter:
Same mechanic as Lock-on above?
PDS bonus:
Perhaps a bonus of +1 to PDS for every 12mu (or fraction there of)
the missile travels beyond the first?
Distance Missile Traveled Hit on
0-12 6
12.x-24 5+
24.x-36 4+
36.x-48 3+
> 48 2+
Problems: How would you model ER Salvo Missiles?
Slightly related:
Has anyone toyed with a Salvo Missile that has an extended lock-on
range? Same mass/cost as ER Salvo. Same movement as Standard Salvo.
But has a lock-on range of 12mu (8mu vector).
---
Brian Bell bbell1@insight.rr.com
http://www.ftsr.org/
---
[quoted original message omitted]
G'day Brian,
Thanks for the thoughts I'll have to see how they go (or what they inspire),
if it worked well enough for missiles etc I'd be tempted to see how some of
them worked for ships to (to try and capture the "evade" effect people have
been talking about).
Cheers
Beth