[FT] Unofficial stats\design principles for new fleets?

Hi GZG list,

I wondered if there were any unofficial stats or semi-official design
principles that could be used with the new FT figures not detailed in the
Fleet Books? I particularly like the Islamic Confederation designs ( very nice
) but any info would be handy.

Cheers

On or about Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 03:24:43PM +0100, Ashley Culver typed:
> I wondered if there were any unofficial stats or semi-official design

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dreamworld/7643/FullThrust.html has some
thoughts on the Islamics. It is generally believed that another Fleet Book is
likely to be released at some point, covering these fleets.

> I wondered if there were any unofficial stats or semi-official design

Roger said:
> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dreamworld/7643/FullThrust.html has

Good heavens, I'd forgotten I'd even *done* that site! My current thinking
on the IF is at http://quixnet.net/~deboe/ft/ifships.htm  (note to
Oerjan: I corrected the extra mass in the Hattin class, I think all the
designs are right now). Of course, I'll modify all the designs soon as the
rule
changes for FB3/FT3 gets firmed up--especially [deleted by GZGSecurity],
of course.

One of the important changes from previous editions of the IF (such as the one
that was at the angelfire site until this week) is that the IF now have
"balanced" weapons instead of offset arcs. I guess I'll have to try that
on the ORC ships now--if the Alarishi Empire is part of the ORC (which
is plausible), and if the AE uses offset arcs (does anyone here think that
skewed arcs does *not* fit the AE mentality?<g>)...

Going from the ships available, one assumes that FB3 will cover UN, Japan,
ORC, Islamic Fed. I think Derek has done a list of possible UN designs, Roger
has been fiddling with the IJN, and I think Alan cooked up some ORC proposals.

Can anyone give me a link to a site with Full Thrust ships from either the
Imperial Japanese Navy or UNSC please?

I have done some IJN designs using stuff in Fleet Book 1 but the FB2 Kra'Vak
ships tore them apart (and then some) so I am wondering whether I made some
design blunders or what!!

The KV are a bit hard, their Patrol Cruiser was knocking out a destroyer a
round and three Light Cruisers fell to the BS.

The Japanese SBB ran out of escorts so quickly that even though it
nearly crippled a KV BS the battle was lost when all the K-V ships
turned their guns on her.

Also the KV scatterguns render SMLs and fighter groups almost useless. A fleet
needs twice as many fighters or SMLs as against a human opponent just to start
denting the enemy. Mind you once they have spent all their scatterguns they
are easy meat if you have any fighters or SML left but how do you stay alive
that long and ensure they don't KO your systems? The IJN would have lost much
sooner had they not had lucky dice rolls when rolling for system KOs.

I guess maybe a spinal Nova Cannon on the SBB may turn the tables next time?
Anyone have any neat tactical ideas?

Also does anyone know a good fantasy battle game (by that I do not mean
Warhammer).

Regards

> --- Ian Cotgias <icotgias@SurrendaLink.co.uk> wrote:

> I guess maybe a spinal Nova Cannon on the SBB may

> I have done some IJN designs using stuff in Fleet Book 1 but the FB2

That's a common first experience. Once you get used to how the KV operate, you
will likely be able to do better with the same ships. There *are* some
designs which make  the KV's life easier--ships with high armor and
screens but weak hull, for instance.

> Also does anyone know a good fantasy battle game (by that I do not mean

Fantasy Rules! 2nd edition http://www.sabersedge.com/chipco/index2.htm
has gotten good recommendations

Hordes of the Things is popular as well

> --- Ian Cotgias <icotgias@SurrendaLink.co.uk> wrote:

> I guess maybe a spinal Nova Cannon on the SBB may

Pulse Torpedos. Pulse Torpedos are GOOD.

I had a nasty set of fights with Kra'Vak which resulted in the St.Theodore
Tyron and St.Andrew class dreadnoughts, with 8 pulse torpedos, no shields, and
no armor. Laserlight can attest to their effectiveness, and someone else was
gushing about 'em recently also.

For a good skirmish Fantasy game I would highly recommend Chronopia. It has
great background and interesting units. Also, the 2nd Edition has just been
released so it's a good time to start.

Cheers

Ash

> -----Original Message-----

On or about Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 08:31:18PM -0700, John Atkinson typed:

> Pulse Torpedos. Pulse Torpedos are GOOD.

Probably me. Pretty effective against just about anything, though
against a traditional beam-armed opponent shields might be more
efficient.

My IJN designs concentrated on Pulse Torps with every class (even the Frigate)
carrying at least one. However the SBB only had 3, not 8! All ships gave up
armour and shields for structure.

I was wondering whether missiles ala More Thrust may be a useful addition?
Although they take up 2 mass, a KV scattergun only takes it out on a "6". Has
anyone tried this?

Ian

[quoted original message omitted]

From: John Atkinson johnmatkinson@yahoo.com
> I had a nasty set of fights with Kra'Vak which

> Ian Cotgias wrote:

> I have done some IJN designs using stuff in Fleet Book 1 but the FB2

Judging both from my own experience from the FB2 playtests and from the
reactions I saw in the first half-year or so after FB2 was published,
I'd
rate "design blunders" and "tactical blunders" as about equally likely -

particularly if you use Cinematic movement. Designs and tactics optimized
against Cinematic-moving FB1-tech ships tend to be much less effective
against Cinematic-moving Kra'Vak.

> The KV are a bit hard, their Patrol Cruiser was knocking out a

"BS"? There's no "BullShit" class of vessels in any of the FB2 fleets AFAIK,
and no "BattleStars" either <g>

More seriously:

How to counter the Kra'Vak depends very much on what movement rules you use.

The FB1 and FB2 ships (and, indeed, the entire FB ship design rules) are

designed for Cinematic movement, where ships with mostly forward-mounted

single-arc weapons need to be highly manoeuverable (at the very least
capable of 3-pt course changes) to be able to point those weapons
towards
the enemy more than once or so per battle - and the KV, with their
Advanced drives, are indeed highly manoeuverable. They still need to predict
where the enemy will end up however, so a highly manoeuverable enemy can be
very tricky targets for them. If in addition this enemy has decent firepower
all around and therefore is able to shoot at the Kra'Vak no matter what arc
they're in, the KV are in trouble. IME the best "official" anti-Kra'Vak
ships in FB1 are the thrust-6 NAC and FSE destroyers and cruisers -
well, apart from the Trieste, that is. The ESU Volga and Tibet classes are
less capable of evasive manoeuvers than the NAC and FSE ships, but their very

wide-arced beam armaments still make them quite dangerous for the
Kra'Vak.

In Vector OTOH a single thrust point is enough to turn the ship to face any
direction you want, and even high-thrust ships have a pretty limited
area where they can end up after movement. Therefore you don't need high
thrust
ratings to use single-arc weapons effectively in Vector - not even if
your
enemies have extreme thrust ratings or Advanced drives. Since single-arc

weapons are also smaller (and thus cheaper) than wider-arced ones,
custom-designed Vector ships tend to have low to moderate thrust ratings

and very heavy single-arc armaments, possibly with a few wider-arc
batteries as emergency back-ups.

The NAC Furious-class CE, which is pretty much a complete failure under
the
Cinematic rules, is a quite typical Vector design - it wasn't
intentionally designed to be, but that's how it turned out in practice! John's
P-torp-heavy Theo- and Andy-class dreadnoughts are also very typical
custom
Vector designs with limited usefulness in Cinematic - if they miss their

first P-torp shot, they're unlikely to get a second shot in. (Side note
to
John: Strictly speaking the Andy has a Strong hull - less than 45% of
TMF -
rather than a "Custom" one.)

Of all the "official" (non-Sa'Vasku) FB fleets the Kra'Vak is the one
which
is best optimized for Vector movement, having mostly single-arc weapons;

but since they're usually over-engined for Vector and their weapons are
more expensive than human single-arc weapons with similar range and
damage
potential it is quite easy to design custom human-tech Vector ships
which
both out-gun and out-hull them. Of course, such custom Vector ships tend
to wipe the floor with FB1 or custom Cinematic designs as well... *in Vector*
<g>

(The reason I leave the SV out above is that the FB2 Sa'Vasku rules
are...
let's call it "seriously unbalanced". The designs actually published in FB2
aren't too nasty, but they're pale shadows of the custom designs you can

create under the FB2 rules <shudder> We're working on fixes.)

> Also the KV scatterguns render SMLs and fighter groups almost useless.
A
> fleet needs twice as many fighters or SMLs as against a human opponent

Fighters can essentially do two things against Kra'Vak: keep the KV fighters
off your own ships, and kill KV cripples which have fallen out of formation
and (are likely to) have lost scatterguns in threshold checks.

SMs can only do the latter, though not nearly as well as the fighters. Neither
of them can be used as your primary strike arm against KV. Since you can't use
fighters or missiles as your primary strike arm against the
KV, you obviously have to rely on direct-fire weapons for that role
instead
- ie., your beams and P-torps.

(Side note: an "SML" is a magazine-fed Salvo Missile *Launcher* - you
only run out of those by losing enough threshold checks, or by having the
ships carrying them destroyed... The missiles themselves are SLMs (Salvo
Launched Missiles) or, more commonly and less confusing, SMs (Salvo Missiles).
SMRs
are the single-shot Salvo Missile Racks.)

> In another post, Ian wrote:

> I was wondering whether missiles ala More Thrust may be a useful

More Thrust scatterguns only take MT missiles out on rolls of "6".

Fleet Book 2 scatterguns, OTOH, kill MT missiles automatically. For FB point
defence purposes each MTM counts as an "SM salvo which rolled an 1

for the number of missiles on target", and you can't roll less than "1" on a
D6. Of course, this also means that no scattergun can kill *more* than 1 MT
missile.

So, to summarize: In Cinematic you stay out of the KV (F) arc, avoid
letting them into your (A) arc, use your wider-arced *direct-fire*
weapons to wear them down, and you should be fine. (Of course, if your thrust
rating is too low the first two of these may be a tad tricky!) In Vector
you simply load up on single-arc direct-fire weapons of your own and
smash
the Kra'Vak head-on.

Regards,

> --- Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com> wrote:

> shot in. (Side note to

> --- Ian Cotgias <icotgias@SurrendaLink.co.uk> wrote:

What else was on it?

> I was wondering whether missiles ala More Thrust may

No, a KV scattergun automatically destroys it.

> John A. wrote:

> >(Side note to John: Strictly speaking the Andy has a Strong hull -

Well, considering that I complained about some of the older NRE designs for
several years... <g>

> But I thought a Strong Hull was as close to 40% as rounding permitted.

Re-read FB2 p.3, "Basic Ship Design, Rules Change" :-)

> My IJN designs concentrated on Pulse Torps with

> What else was on it?

3 class 3 beamers four class 2s and a lot of hull boxes. I allowed the
IJN to swap PDFs for Class-1s on the grounds that since they are turret
mounts they can probably be fairly easily retro-fitted. They may even be
the same basic weapon configured differently. It's Sci-fi so it's make
it up as you go along I guess.

> I was wondering whether missiles ala More Thrust may

> No, a KV scattergun automatically destroys it.

Yikes

> --- Ian Cotgias <icotgias@SurrendaLink.co.uk> wrote:

What percentage was hull mass? And what arc were your beams?

> --- Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com> wrote:

Noted, changed, thanks.