> One way or another, I just don't like the whole PSB behind human
The simple, and honest, reason is that it comes from the very early days of FT
(the game itself, not the timeline...) when beams were pretty much all that
were used on most ships (apart from the occasional PT or SMP as very
"specialised weapons"). Of course, since then the expansion of the game has
added missiles,
K-guns, Grasers and all the rest; so yes, screens are no longer
anything like as generally useful as they originally were, depending
of course on who you are fighting. :-/
Jon (GZG)
> (It may shock you all to know that I almost never used screens in my
> I think the Kravak K-guns use a gravitational field
Bu**er.
Another great idea done in by (fictional) reality.
M.
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
http://mead.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOn
> 9/13/07, Michael R. Blair <pellinoire@yahoo.com> wrote:
Just have to select the PSB you want to follow. So if the K'V are using
gravity assist to accelerate their projectiles, what's to say that the humans
haven't come up with some sort of gravity "screen" to help deflect them as you
described earlier? They probably have, after all, some sort of artificial
gravity on board the ships already, so there's precedence for generating
gravity fields even with human tech.
Mk
> On Sep 13, 2007, at 7:33 AM, Indy wrote:
> Just have to select the PSB you want to follow. So if the K'V are
Have the Humans ever managed to capture a KV vessel? Even a small one?
Might make for a good FMA game at the con.
D.
> Stiltman wrote:
> One way or another, I just don't like the whole PSB behind human
> one particular limited class of weapons by 20-30%, do absolutely
Mass for mass and point for point, the most devastating weapons in the current
Full Thrust rules are the standard B2 batteries, standard fighters
(when not opposed by sufficient anti-fighter defences), and the Phalon
Plasma Bolts (likewise). Last I checked screens protected against all of
these weapons :-/ (For those who use the beta-test weapons, screens also
protect against Grasers, EMP beams and AMTs.)
The numerous screen-skipping weapons in Full Thrust fall in three
categories:
* Direct-fire single-shot weapons (SMP, MKP) with short range and
narrow fire arcs. They pack a great punch if they get to fire at all, but they
also restrict the user to very predictable tactics and forces him into prime
B2 killing range.
* Direct-fire multi-shot weapons (K-guns, P-torps, Needle beams).
Averaged over range these weapons inflict at best 80% as much damage per
weapon cost
against unscreened targets as similarly-ranged beam batteries do, and
often less. IOW, if your opponent uses these weapons to counter your screens,
he
voluntarily gives up some 20-30% of his potential (ie., beam) firepower
against *all* your ships (including those escorts that are too small to carry
screens at all) in order to avoid having his beam firepower reduced
by 20-30% against *some* of your ships (ie. the ones that have
screens)...
Awesome plan?
* Placed-marker 'single-shot' weapons (SMs, HMs, torpedo fighters) that
to a greater or lesser extent have to predict the target's manoeuvres to hit
and pray that they aren't smothered by the targets' PDSs or equivalent.
Screens don't defend against these weapons, that's true - you'll have to
rely on manoeuvre, false targets (BJs) and point-defences for that...
but since this is an even narrower selection of weapons than the ones screens
protect against, missiles and torpedo fighters by themselves hardly make
screens useless :-/
> (It may shock you all to know that I almost never used screens in my
That *is* a bit surprising, considering that those designs of yours that I
can find described on this list were said to carry level-2 screens...
(IIRC for protection against plasma bolts, which you and your opponent seemed
to be quite fond of at the time.) But if you say so <shrug>
Regards,
[quoted original message omitted]