[FT] Starting speed

Thinking about a little pre-battle maneuvering, and of course that
involves starting speeds. Aside from specific scenarios, what starting speed
do you usually allow?

> "laserlight@quixnet.net" wrote:

"Allow"?  ;-)

We usually aim for a range from 10-14 +/-d6, and sometimes that might
be force-dependent (and a total off-the-cuff judgement call at the
time the game is set up).

On or about Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 09:04:31AM -0400,

WELL, unless it is an all out assault already underwy, most battles start with
troops and vehicles moving into contact at less than balls to the wall speeds.

for infantry this usually means slogging along loaded lke a packmule, or
making short rushes by fireteams in the advance or withdrawal, going to ground
a lot.

vehicles are either rolling along at normal road or cross country speeds,
making frequent stops for over watch movements.

this is not the balls to the wall air assault, parachute drop, armored
advance, thundering mounted charge, etc, so beloved by Hollyweird.

un-necessary speed is just too hard on troops and vehicles to race about
all of the time.

DAWGIE

Back from dropping the daughter off following GenCon, feeling pretty addled.
640 mi driving, 1120 mi van passenger, and four days of convention will do
that to you.

Hearty kudos to Schoon, Mike M., Mark S., and Dean for yeoman service in the
cause of GZG fandom. Schoon, I'm still amazed how well those Lego ships
looked. Though, I think you may have been amazed how well my daughter
looked. ;->=

If I missed somebody's effort, my sincere apologies; it was a somewhat reduced
con, but still difficult to catch everything.

My first comment on coming back was to have been to amplify the FT campaign
discussion, but I'm not feeling coherent for deep theology, merely minor
heresies. Also, my mechanism for a planetary assault campaign met with mostly
underwhelming response at the con.

Back to topic, games I've played have almost all started near 'dead slow';
I think we saw tourney's starting at something like 6 + d6, or even
less, and stuck with that range through the introductions of the FB's, though
we've not played much of late. Natch, this made SM's, when they came along,
and smaller, higher thrust ships more valuable when they had big build
advantages.

The heresy part is that this makes SOME sense if you assume, as I do, that FT
fits into the concept of battle pass I've bored you with before.

> 640 mi driving, 1120 mi van passenger,...

Sorry, make that 1280 driving; two round trips to daughter's home.

> DAWGIE wrote:

> WELL, unless it is an all out assault already underwy, most battles

[snip]

> un-necessary speed is just too hard on troops and vehicles to race

Err... Dawgie? If you look at the header you'll find that Laserlight was

asking about starting speeds in Full Thrust. Unless you fly through an
asteroid belt or there's a planet or star in your way, coasting along at

very high speeds is at most very marginally harder on your ship than
drifting at a space-snail's pace :-/

As for me, I usually start out somewhere in the 16-30 mu/turn speed
bracket (for Cinematic battles); my usual opponents usually fly slightly
slower.

'Course, given the size of my gaming table both sides have a couple turns
to accellerate before the shooting begins :-)

Later,

> On Mon, 19 Aug 2002 11:02:44 -0500 (CDT), DAWGFACE47@webtv.net wrote:

> WELL, unless it is an all out assault already underwy, most battles

Umm... Chris was asking about starting speeds for FT games, not SG2 or
DS2...

To answer the question, the FT tournaments at GenCon usually allowed starting
speeds up to 10 (cinematic).

G'day,

> Thinking about a little pre-battle maneuvering, and of

What ever you want, you've got to live with the consequences after all
;)

Cheers

> --- Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:

Now, in vector, what's the advantage to a high (20+)
starting speed? I'm a bit lost. By my reckoning, that would lead to a single
pass with exchange of fire, and then a dozen turns maneuvering around to slow
down enough to make another pass. In vector I
know you will be no more than (2/4/6/8/whatever your
thrust is) from a point determined by your velocity, so you're almost
guaranteed to be in the arc, and for at least some of my SLMs to hit. What's
the point of zipping around like that?

G'day,

> Now, in vector, what's the advantage to a high (20+)

For one, depends on what you're mission is. Fast recon may mean you want to
take a quick fly-by. Raiding a base may mean you want to beat the outer
perimeter and get some shots in before they catch up. In one-on-one
battles I've sent the small fry in on a fast pass so they could dump mines,
missiles, submunition packs etc and generally shake up the opponent's main
line without hanging around too long to get super badly beaten up themselves.
It can also be good to come in fast if you're weapons are shorter range than
the opponents. As to turning around afterwards, that's what I mean by living
with the consequences. Having a planet to sling yourself around can be very
handy. Also thinking about fleet position can be helpful, I've played my
fleets like ancient armies and had some success (flanking wings of "horse
archers" and then shieldwall in the centre
etc).
Can also mean they've got less chance to successfully SM you. Ultimately
though it could just be the wacko way I play... and the fact most of my
opponents play sllllooooowwwwww fleets;)

Cheers

From: "John Atkinson" <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com>
> Now, in vector, what's the advantage to a high (20+)

This is the prudent course, if you're the Islamic Fed or someone else

DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
HHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...
.

On or about Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 07:59:25PM -0400, Laserlight typed:
> From: "John Atkinson" <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com>

If you're not defending something really important, it allows either side to
disengage after any pass. This is consistent with the sorts of "trial of
strength" battle that I suspect would take place during "peacetime".

Once the K'V arrive and each side is trying to cause maximum damage (and
worrying a bit less about preserving its forces), I'd expect to see more
slugfests.

Lego ships? How big are they? Anyone have any pics of these wonders?

Donald sez:
> Lego ships? How big are they?

I think they ran four to six inches, simple in design, but I thought they
were low-slung and rather stunning. Black and a different color for each
player, they had color distibuted enough to distract from the 'lil LEGO
bumps'.

I know I've a piccie or two of the table, but not certain how much detail
shows, as I was more interested in the people around it. Secondly, I've a
space to put stuff up, but seldom do, as it's a tough FTP and I'm just lazy.

Should I have an image worth viewing, I'll try getting it, and some others
from the con, up.

However, someone else, perhaps Schoon, must have better.

> > Hearty kudos to Schoon, Mike M., Mark S., and Dean for yeoman

> Lego ships? How big are they?

I have pics that will go up with the rest of the GenCon pics, hopefully this
week. I'll be hosting the build diagrams for the lego ships on my website once
I get them from Schoon but he had to go play Marine right after he got back
from GenCon and I don't know if he's done with that yet.