[FT] Salvo Missile Range

The real trick is getting you opponent to chase your missile boat. The you can
use the things as mines <EG>

[quoted original message omitted]

SRM range limitation finally came up in a game that I was playing in. It was
a tail-chase. But both sides were able to exceed a velocity of 24mu
before the SML carrying ships could get into range. At this point any SMLs
launched would end up behind the firing ship. Has anyone else had this
problem? Oerjan (since you are the perceived King of high speed)?

Has anyone toyed with ideas for handling it?

Ship velocity +24mu? Seems OK for the forward arc, but not for side
arcs.
Ship velocity +12mu? OK for FP and FS, but a little close for Fore arc.

Deviation from the ship's course?
Arcs of deviation:    Max Range:
  0                   Ship Velocity + 24
  1                   Ship Velocity + 12
(or 24 if greater) 2 24
  3                   24 - Ship Velocity

Place SML markers as stated, but then move them the same course and velocity
as the ship that fired them?

Other Ideas?

Well the obvious answer is to just be more physics correct and give anything
launched from a ship (fighters included) the same vector as the ship. The
SRM's then would, relatively speaking, see the launch vehicle as standing
still (assuming no ACC or direction change).

Of course this is a fundamental change to the way the game is played, but with
FT3 coming out, perhaps it is a necessary one?

--Peter

> From: "Bell, Brian K" <Brian_Bell@dscc.dla.mil>
It
> was

___________________________________________________________
Get more from your time online. FREE MSN Explorer download:
http://explorer.msn.com
From - Mon Dec 04 11:29:51 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
        by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA06852;
        Fri, 1 Dec 2000 19:30:56 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB21PDW98121;
        Fri, 1 Dec 2000 17:25:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 1 Dec
2000 17:24:12 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB21OBf97983
        for gzg-l-outgoing; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 17:24:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:08LbJweGDinrs/fOGmlScXI54T94ifIu@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB21O9P97975
        for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 17:24:09
-0800 (PST)
Received: from hotmail.com (f4.pav0.hotmail.com [64.4.33.4])
        by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB21O9f36542
        for <gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 17:24:09 -0800
(PST)
        (envelope-from peter_mancini@msn.com)
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
         Fri, 1 Dec 2000 17:23:46 -0800
Received: from 206.154.117.221 by pv0fd.pav0.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,
06 Nov 2000 22:50:27 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [206.154.117.221]
From: "Peter Mancini" <peter_mancini@msn.com>
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: SG2 vehicle targeting not good enough?
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 17:50:27 EST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F4OImd1UtYj7XGeFaat00001b81@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Dec 2000 01:23:46.0904 (UTC)
FILETIME=[847DED80:01C05BFE]
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000672

> Now, this is rules lawyering,

It is also specific in the text that you are to play the game not the rules.
  :-)  Lawyer your way out of that one.  :-P  lol!

--Peter

___________________________________________________________
Get more from your time online. FREE MSN Explorer download:
http://explorer.msn.com
From owner-gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU  Wed Nov  1 00:01:57 2000
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
        by soda.csua.Berkeley.edu (8.8.8/) id AAA19015
        for gzg-l-outgoing; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 00:01:57 -0800 (PST)
        env-from (owner-gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU)
Received: from cartman.flexnet.net (ns0.flexnet.net [212.1.130.250])
        by soda.csua.Berkeley.edu (8.8.8/) via ESMTP id AAA19006
        for <gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 00:01:54 -0800
(PST)
        env-from (jon@gzg.com)
Received: from [212.1.136.66] (ppp-1-52.cvx4.telinco.net [212.1.148.52])
by cartman.flexnet.net (8.9.1/) with ESMTP id HAA26469 for
<gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>;
Wed, 1 Nov 2000 07:55:19 GMT
X-Sender: gzero@flexnet.co.uk
Message-Id: <v03130301b62579cfdf66@[212.1.136.66]>
In-Reply-To: <5usuvs82cupp2imn0qpvm93spej0mrjd1h@4ax.com>
References: <v03130309b624e91a8569@[212.1.149.21]>
 <417DEC289A05D4118408000102362E0A34C9AF@host-253.bitheads.com>
<v03130309b624e91a8569@[212.1.149.21]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 08:02:45 +0000
To: gzg-l
From: Ground Zero Games <jon@gzg.com>
Subject: Re: [OT] Selling Figs, old games stuff, etc.
Sender: owner-gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu

> On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 21:30:00 +0000, Ground Zero Games <jon@gzg.com>
wrote:
> The usual method on THIS side of the big pond is to take them along to
It's a
> function of the fact that the US and Canada (especially Canada) have a

Yes, we could go to at least one if not two shows every weekend through most
of the year if we really wanted to.... As it is, we take the tradestand to
about a dozen each year, and none of
them are more than a four-hour drive.
> Of course, driving from Glasgow to London is considered a big deal and
about 10
> hours from Toronto. GenCon is 12 hours in the other direction.
I'm not
> sure exactly what they are, either. I mean, I can guess based on the

A "bring and buy" is a large table run (usually) by the club organising the
show. Visitors bring their surplus wargame stuff along early in the day,
tell the booking-in chap how much they want for it, and it gets labelled
and put out on the table. Then the frothing hordes browse what's on the table
through the day, if they want to buy something they just pick it up and pay
the table staff, who will check off who's it is from the label and take the
money; at the end of the day all the people who put stuff out for sale go back
to the organisers and get their money (less a commission, usually around 10%,
which goes to the organisers' funds or sometimes to charity), or to collect
their stuff if it's unsold. Works pretty well, though at big shows the crush
of people in front of the table can make it almost impossible to see anything
till all the best stuff has gone! (Oh, and whatever you do, DON'T inhale....
<grin>). Bring and buys are a very good source of bargains, especially painted
figures that people are clearing out, and they are a low-hassle way of
selling if you don't want silly prices for stuff. It isn't good for very
high-value, rare or collectable items. Very occasionally something does
go "walkies" off the table without being paid for, almost inevitable in the
throng, but it's thankfully rare - gamers generally are an honest lot -
but the organisers normally state that all stuff is left at owners' risk to
cover themselves. At the UK shows, even the big ones like Colours and Salute,
it works very well.

Jon (GZG)
> [quoted text omitted]

G'day Brian,

> SRM range limitation finally came

Hurts doesn't it, that's why I always take some extended range stuff vs people
I know fly fast.

> Has anyone toyed with ideas for handling it?

Yes, but never found a good way of doing it.

> Place SML markers as stated, but then move them the

In my experience it just doesn't work, game balance wise. You just see the FSE
rock up at speed 50 drop all their missles at the person at the other end of
the table and game over. Basically it removes the need for SM using races to
put themselves at risk in the flyby. Unfortunately I have yet to come up with
any other idea.

Cheers

Beth

Beth replied to:
> >SRM range limitation finally came

Actually, I _had_ SMR-ER, and I still never got a shot off--at the end
we were traveling 40mu/turn.  Fortunately I'd decided to take a
beam-heavy IF squadron instead of a missile squadron.  However, the
threat of facing massed SMR may have influenced my opponent's maneuvers
to my benefit--he turned away (at a point when I, benefiting from
hindsight, think he should have turned toward me), and as a consequence I was
able to stay in his A arc for longer than he was happy with.

But if I'd had an all-SMR squadron, I'd have been hurting.

Which brings up a point: if you have AP/A/AS facing SMR, can you place a
missile in your aft arc on a turn that you're thrusting? I think that
it would be logical (although not with the rules-as-written) and it
could help dissuade a pursuer.

> on 11/6/00 12:16, Bell, Brian K at Brian_Bell@dscc.dla.mil wrote:

> SRM range limitation finally came up in a game that I was playing in.
It was
> a tail-chase. But both sides were able to exceed a velocity of 24mu

I look at altering this for some games and feel that if this alteration is
done SMs become the weapon that can out range all others against static
targets.

> Ship velocity +24mu? Seems OK for the forward arc, but not for side

After saying what I did above I like the idea but still have yet to find a way
to balance it. If the SM firer is moving at 30 mu a turn then these SMs would
have a weapons range of 54 mu for regular SMs and 66 mu for ER type. The
ranges of course go up with speed. Quickly it's possible to fire your SMs
outside of any other weapon's range, providing a possibility for some really
lopsided engagements and IMHO some boring scenarios for one side.

> > Deviation from the ship's course?

Kevin Walker riposted:
> After saying what I did above I like the idea but still have yet to

The difficulty isn't range, exactly. You're still only ending up with the
missiles reaching 24" past your end point. The difficulty is that you can drop
the missiles, then turn 3 points and be out of range of any return fire. You
could do it if you said the missiles had to end up 24mu from the ship's final
position.

  Or you could just play cinematic, in which case the Range/Deviation
chart above would work.

G'day,

> You could do it if you said the missiles had to end up 24mu from the

You'd still have the problem of the SM force not risking any whittling down
before launch, and if they did their job properly there shouldn't be much to
do any firing after the launch.

Cheers

Beth

> Bell, Brian K wrote:

> SRM range limitation finally came up in a game that I was playing in.
It >was a tail-chase. But both sides were able to exceed a velocity of
> 24mu before the SML carrying ships could get into range. At this point

It's not a "bug", it's a "feature" <g>

> Oerjan (since you are the perceived King of high speed)?

I've encountered it often, but I've never had a problem with it. It's in the
same category as the "two ships can fly past each other from
outside weapon range without getting a chance to fire" - ie., somewhat
unrealistic but difficult or impossible to do anything about without a
total re-write of the game.

> Has anyone toyed with ideas for handling it?

The course and velocity before or after the ship has maneuvered?

Beth has it spot on, though: All of these make Mikko's "dread missile boat
horde from hell" tactic extremely powerful, particularly in
Cinematic. In Vector you at least get a chance to shoot back at them -
*if* you survive the missiles, that is.

> Other Ideas?

Leave it as is?

Vector salvo missiles--Oerjan sighed:
> > <sigh> This only about the fifth time I've seen this one suggestion

Oerjan, you're saying this is a problem if we have accumulated vectors added
to missiles while *playing in cinematic*, is that right?

I don't expect it would be a problem in Vector because you can't alter your
course as dramatically as in cinematic. If you launch from 160 mu away and
your missiles have an added vector enough to hit enemy ships, your missile
boats will also be arriving in the same vicinity as his ships. The missiles
attack before the enemy gets to shoot, of course, but you can arrange that
under the current system. And if you use sensors rules, banzai jammers etc,
that should solve the problem.

Either way, it's weird to fire a missile and have it end up behind you.

What seems odd is that, while pursuing, you can launch missiles that not only
can't catch your target, but also end up behind the launcher.

> >Oerjan, you're saying this is a problem if we have accumulated

<snip>

> With vector missiles, you can arrange to launch missiles before your

I don't have a problem with one side being able to fire before the other
side--as long as there's at least a chance of missing and/or
retribution.
It wouldn't do to have SMR-eggshells be able to launch an alpha strike
and be certain of a) hitting and b) getting away. However, if you don't know
what you're launching at, it doesn't make sense to expend all your missiles
(of course, the solution is to send scouts on ahead...).

But if adding the accumultaed vector doesn't work, how are we going to solve
the "I'm chasing him, therefore my missiles are useless" situation Brian and I
got into?

This discussion came up awhile ago (on the test list I think...not sure
anymore) We were discussing the effects of fighters having a fixed speed, and
ships usin g vectors vs large and small table sizes.

What this means is that on a large table, vector units can attain higher
speeds
than on a small one.  Fighters did (move-wise) just fine when the table
was somewhere between small and medium sized. On the really small tables,
fighters could dominate. On the large tables, the fighters almost always
lagged behind the carriers that had launched them. (ie: the carrier would
arrive at battle range, long before the fighters would.)

This discussion also came up when the SML/Rs were first discussed.

I had always thought that if everything used vector during vector games,
everything would always be balanced. (ie: fighters could always out accellerat
e the ships, and the various missles could out accellerate the fighters. Of
course the fighters/missles would have a limited duration, in exchange
for thei r high accellerations. As normal.)

That way, it wouldn't matter how large or small your table was...every unit
during vector games would have the same advantages/disadvantages caused
by tabl e size.

Donald Hosford

> Peter Mancini wrote:

> Well the obvious answer is to just be more physics correct and give
The
> SRM's then would, relatively speaking, see the launch vehicle as
From - Wed Dec 06 17:41:39 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
        by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA02906;
        Tue, 5 Dec 2000 03:03:55 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB593Wr94772;
        Tue, 5 Dec 2000 01:03:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 5 Dec
2000 01:03:26 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB593Pe94751
        for gzg-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 01:03:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:1+4Mj0B5/JJn+Pkj3ELm8xPfcTCFuJJ6@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB593OP94746
        for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 01:03:24
-0800 (PST)
Received: from dynamite.com.au (m1.dynamite.com.au [203.17.154.18])
        by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB593Lf55389
        for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 01:03:22 -0800
(PST)
        (envelope-from aebrain@dynamite.com.au)
Received: from avis (isp895.canb.dynamite.com.au [202.139.71.133])
        by dynamite.com.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA27257
        for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 20:03:13 +1100
Message-ID: <01bf01c05e9a$8af10640$85478bca@avis>
From: "Alan and Carmel Brain" <aebrain@dynamite.com.au>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
References: <NEBBKHOOCLECLODFJBHIEEFACBAA.jdarnold@siu.edu>
Subject: Re: New firearms technology
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 20:05:08 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de0000071c

[quoted original message omitted]

Does Derek use any PD?

If your major weapon often (seems) to be SMLs, why doesn't he have a few PD
ships in his formations...like the escort Chris mentioned.

They should at least take the edge off of your SML swarms...

Donald Hosford

> Beth Fulton wrote:

> G'day,
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> [quoted text omitted]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> Elizabeth Fulton
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
        by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA05299;
        Tue, 5 Dec 2000 13:35:30 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB5JYra13230;
        Tue, 5 Dec 2000 11:34:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 5 Dec
2000 11:34:52 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB5JYpa13209
        for gzg-l-outgoing; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 11:34:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:EdaHhu4LBUhaKjxeVDlFMDR8jwYweM8x@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB5JYnP13203
        for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 11:34:49
-0800 (PST)
Received: from spacemsg2.jhuapl.edu (spacemsg2.jhuapl.edu
[128.244.47.194])
        by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB5JYnf55751
        for <GZG-L@csua.berkeley.edu >; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 11:34:49 -0800
(PST)
        (envelope-from Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu)
Received: by spacemsg2.jhuapl.edu with Internet Mail Service
(5.5.2650.21)
        id <WZFDNZAP>; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 14:34:43 -0500
Message-ID:
<6B3C0EEAB4FED3119F5F009027DC5E9EA9AD04@spacemsg3.jhuapl.edu>
From: "Izenberg, Noam" <Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu>
To: "'FT List'" <GZG-L@csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [FT] Salvo Missile (and Fighter) Range
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 14:34:37 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000745

I haven't been reading this thread until the last digest or two, so please,
please forgive, and/or ignore me if I'm covering trampled ground. But I
do think I have at least a start for a workaround of SML range and possible
fighter range issues. SMLs first.

This sounds a bit complex at first, but I think should execute pretty simply
in 4 steps. I hate added complexity, but think this may really be workable.

1) Launch salvo missiles in vector form. That is, apply the launching ship's
velocity to the salvo before moving the salvo's 24 MU (or 36 for ER) in the
allowed arc directions. Then measure the total distance the salvo has
travelled (in MU) from the true launch point.

2) When the target moves, determine determine its relative velocity this way:
        If the salvo is between 10 and 2 o'clock, this is "head-on" and
the target's velocity is added to the salvo's
        If the salvo is 2-4 or 8-10 o'clock, this is "orthogonal", and
the target velocity is not considered.
        If the salvo is 4-8 o'clock, this is "chase", and the target
velicity is subtracted from the salvo's

3) Add the "closing distance" (1-6 MU, round up) the salvo needs to hit
the ship, regardless of the direction.

4) The total number is the Attack Velocity of the salvo. Normal SM's can have
a total Attack Velocity of 30 MU without penalty. For each 6" above 30" the
salvo loses one missile.

So:
Miissle Lock Roll      AV (Norm)     AV (ER)
    1d6 (1-6 missiles) 0-30 MU       0-42 MU
    1d6-1 (1-5)       30-36 MU      42-48 MU
    1d6-2 (1-4)       36-42 MU      48-54 MU
    1d6-3 (1-3)       42-48 MU      54-60 MU
    1d6-4 (1-2)       48-54 MU      60-66 MU
    1d6-5 (1 max)     54-60 MU      66-72 MU
    1d6-6 (0)          60+ MU        72+ MU

Probably some numbers would need to be run, but I think SML overall effectm
and therefore cost, should not be too affected by these alterations. High vs.
low veolcity games (and high differential velocity) will balance somewhat
differently, natch.

Quick and dirty examples:
Head-on attack: FSE is moving 16", NSL is 12" head on. Salvo is
launched, placed 16" ahead of the FSE ship, and moved an additional 10"
forward to come within 3" of the NSL ship.
AV is 16+10+12+3 = 41" or a -3 on the missile lock roll.

Orthogonal: FSE and NSL are at the same speeds but NSL pulls a 2 point turn
and is hit at 3 o'clock.
AV is 16+10+3 =29": No missile lock modification.

Chase: Raider tries to take out a convoy escort: Raider at speed 30" direction
1 Convoy is 6" direction 1. Raider launches savo, which is placed 30" ahead.
Slavo moves additional 24" to reach 6" radius convoy escort.
AV is 30+24-6+6 or 54: Missile lock roll is at -4 or -5 depending on the
fractions.

Fighters next:

For fighters, I lean towards "fixing" them by giving them vector movement at
all times.

AV is determined similar to Missiles: 1) Move fighter with vector, then move
target ship with whatever movement, then apply fighter reaction move as
desired. Determine total
start-endpoint
distance traveled ***Target of a reaction move must be announced. Reaction
move toward a specific target must be towards the target's center post, so the
clock facing of the attack does not change. A fighter group may not attack a
non-targeted ship with a reaction move even if it is base to base,
though it may egage other fighters.

2) Add, igore, or subtract target speed as with SMLs
3) Add "closing distance" (1-6)
4) Total up Attack Velocity with 1+2+3

To engage any target - including other fighter groups, the attacking
fighter
AV has to be less than 42 (+12 for fast fighters) (OPTIONAL: +12 for
interceptors vs other fighters, +12 for torpedo fighters vs. ships)

At the start of each turn (before movement orders are written) a fighter group
that attacked a ship last turn can declare that they are "pressing the
attack". That means that the fighter groups move with their target (as in
screening). This gives the advantage that once attacking a ship, they can
stick with it, but the disadvantage that the target ship can peel out of
formation and drag the fighters with them away from the action. The fighters
can choose to break their attack _after_ movement by spending a CEF to
move
12" in any direction (adding it to the target's ships _ending_ velocity
for the purpose of next turn). Fighters breaking off a pressed attack can't
attack another ship this turn, but can engage in dogfights.

(Extra Detail) Fighter furballs drift. Add the incoming velocity vectors of
all fighter groups in the furball to determine the direction of drift. Speed
of drift is the speed component of the slowest fighter group that that joined
the furball.

I'm sure there are some holes in these ideas, though I hope they are
reasonable first cuts. Please poke away.

Noam

G'day Donald,

> Do you mean that you start onto the table doing 36?

Both;)

Cheers

Beth

------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Elizabeth Fulton
c/o CSIRO Division of Marine Research
GPO Box 1538 HOBART TASMANIA 7001 AUSTRALIA
Phone (03) 6232 5018 International +61 3 6232 5018
Fax 03 6232 5053 International +61 3 6232 5053

email: beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au
From - Wed Dec 13 16:38:48 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
        by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA17794;
        Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:22:03 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eBB4LaO12626;
        Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:21:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 10 Dec
2000 20:21:35 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eBB4LY712605
        for gzg-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:21:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:KvT/qgr8+FAe0LPHiBtG+0rgJGxlPnUR@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eBB4LWP12600
        for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:21:32
-0800 (PST)
Received: from strait.hba.marine.csiro.au (strait.hba.marine.csiro.au
[140.79.17.2])
        by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eBB4LQf43408
        for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:21:26 -0800
(PST)
        (envelope-from beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au)
Received: from fulton.hba.marine.csiro.au (fulton [140.79.21.56])
        by strait.hba.marine.csiro.au (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id
eBB4Kt111052
        for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 15:20:55 +1100
(EDT)
Message-Id: <4.2.2.20001211151948.00a381c0@pop.hba.marine.csiro.au>
X-Sender: fulton@pop.hba.marine.csiro.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 15:21:17 +1100
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au>
Subject: Re: Uplift FT (was Re: Am I a Republic revisionist?)
In-Reply-To: <3A33BE86.6020607@ice.net>
References: <20001129195105.28051.cpmta@c008.sfo.cp.net>
<3A2C222B.ABB975C8@brewer.to> <3A2D868C.1B256632@sympatico.ca>
<3.0.5.32.20001205212355.00a17a70@mail.HICom.net>
<004301c05f62$e743fc40$0100a8c0@brodm1.vic.optushome.com.au>
<001e01c06041$aafcaa40$4c468bca@avis> <3A3017AD.20202@ice.net>
<00e801c062a3$f8c7aa40$97478bca@avis>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000829

G'day guys,

> BTW, anyone else in America find it scary that it

What's scary is when any one in Aussie land contemplates ordering overseas,
but I guess that's what I get for living in a country where the local dollar
is really worth about 2 brass razoos!;)

Cheers

Beth

------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Elizabeth Fulton
c/o CSIRO Division of Marine Research
GPO Box 1538 HOBART TASMANIA 7001 AUSTRALIA
Phone (03) 6232 5018 International +61 3 6232 5018
Fax 03 6232 5053 International +61 3 6232 5053

email: beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au
From - Wed Dec 13 16:38:47 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
        by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA15571;
        Sun, 10 Dec 2000 19:31:01 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eBB1Tvb10602;
        Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:29:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 10 Dec
2000 17:29:56 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eBB1TtR10581
        for gzg-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:29:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:mFTss7Id8tceAZGG7thxCp4TisvMV3TL@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eBB1TrP10575
        for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:29:53
-0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp1.quixnet.net (psmtp1.array3.laserlink.net
[63.65.123.51] (may be forged))
        by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eBB1Tqf28734
        for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:29:53 -0800
(PST)
        (envelope-from laserlight@quixnet.net)
Received: from pavilion (1Cust147.tnt18.princess-anne.va.da.uu.net
[63.31.7.147])
        by smtp1.quixnet.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA29827
        for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 01:29:48 GMT
Message-ID: <000d01c0632a$dd50a500$93071f3f@pavilion>
From: "Laserlight" <laserlight@quixnet.net>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
References:
<417DEC289A05D4118408000102362E0A34D0F8@host-253.bitheads.com>
Subject: Re: Attachment levels
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:28:49 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000827

> A thought occurred to me (no doubt those who know me will consider

Actually, Tom, just "you + John Atkinson" is quite enough for us to
worry about.
From - Wed Dec 13 16:38:48 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
        by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA04384;
        Mon, 11 Dec 2000 00:12:20 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eBB6Bvk14495;
        Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:11:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 10 Dec
2000 22:11:55 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eBB6Bsc14474
        for gzg-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:11:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:eU494QbhFH+swMxshdkliaQFfMF5lFQG@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
        by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eBB6BqP14469
        for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:11:52
-0800 (PST)
Received: from dfw-smtpout3.email.verio.net
(dfw-smtpout3.email.verio.net [129.250.36.43])
        by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eBB6Bpf54971
        for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:11:52 -0800
(PST)
        (envelope-from mwbrown@veriomail.com)
Received: from [129.250.38.64] (helo=dfw-mmp4.email.verio.net)
        by dfw-smtpout3.email.verio.net with esmtp
        id 145MBj-0004oP-00
        for gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 06:11:51 +0000
Received: from [207.20.233.89] (helo=saber6)
        by dfw-mmp4.email.verio.net with smtp
        id 145MBd-0003Gj-00
        for gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 06:11:46 +0000
Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:07:41
-0800
Message-ID: <01C062F5.9D649C60.mwbrown@veriomail.com>
From: Michael Brown <mwbrown@veriomail.com>
To: "'gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu'" <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: RE: Attachment levels
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:06:53 -0800
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de0000082a

I'll try this on. My comments <MWB> below

Michael Brown

[quoted original message omitted]