[GZG] [AAR] Aventines v Sopovar, playtesting new FT3 fighter rules (long)

4 posts ยท May 18 2010 to May 20 2010

From: Eric Foley <stiltman@t...>

Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 18:48:48 -0400 (EDT)

Subject: [GZG] [AAR] Aventines v Sopovar, playtesting new FT3 fighter rules (long)

Okay, caveat time. This was just one playtest, with me up against a player who
had a lot less experience at Full Thrust than I do. We used the new point
defense system that Indy posted to the list a couple weeks ago and, with a few
house rule tweaks, the new turn order. The main house rule deviations we used
were as follows:

1. Salvo missiles were fired and moved in two parts on the same turn similar
to how fighters go in the new system. They moved their full movement minus 6
MU in the first phase, and the final 6 MU in the second phase. This was an
adaptation of mine, intended to help a bit with high speed maneuvers and
making banzai jammers a little less perfect a defense, while still requiring
the missile user to at least get it close to right.

2. Fighter overkill from one group always spills over to the next in a close
area engagement of whatever sort. Old rule from my groups, have always found
it to be good for large numbers of fighters, kept it.

3. Point defense weaponry has to fire at an entire swarm of fighters,
and cannot cherry-pick which groups it wants to hit first.  Another old
rule from my groups, which became necessary to make bombers something other
than useless whenever somebody was bringing over a hundred PDS (which they
always did).

4. Fighter speeds and armor were taken as modifiers to cost, as I've laid out
in previous emails.

5.  Minimum 6 mass for lightning shield/CIDS.

With those in place, we ran a one-off 5000 NPV game.  My opponent played
as the Aventine, who were vaguely FSE-inspired with a little over twice
as much PDS as the fleet books and hull integrity swapped out for lightning
shields (a name we will probably always like better than
"CIDS").  I played as the Sopovar (pronounced "SOAP-oh-vahr", with the
intentional emphasis on "soap"), who were built around a variety of
fighter-exploiting ships.  Each of us knew the range of designs the
other could pick from, but we went in blind as to what the other side would
actually bring to the game. The actual order of battle went basically like
this:

SOPOVAR:
- Two basestars, mass 320ish, hull 48, thrust 1, armor 12, level 1
screens, 15 fighter bays, 3 SMLs, 3 SMR-ERs, magazine with 1 ER and two
normal salvoes, light B2s (all arcs) and B1s suite, 5 PDS.
- One attack cruiser, mass 160, hull 48, thrust 2, armor 10, level 1
screens, 3 SMRs, 2 B3s (3 arcs), 4-5 B2s (all arcs), 2 fighter bays, 5
PDS.
- Ten twin podships, mass 23, 2 fighter bays.  (In short, optimal soap
bubble carrier.)
- One solo podship, mass 12, 1 fighter bay.  (The classic but not quite
optimal soapie that I went with because I was up against the 5000 NPV limit
instead of another twin.)
- 43 standard fighters, 10 slow heavy torpedo bombers (at 42 NPV per
group)

(Options not taken: cloaking mass 40ish cruisers with two SMRs and four needle
beams, thrust 6.)

AVENTINE:
- One fleet carrier, mass 270, hull 52, thrust 4, level 1 screens, level
2 lightning shield, 8 fighter bays, B2 (3-arc) and B1 suite, 8 PDS.
- Two dreadnoughts, mass 262, hull 52, thrust 4, level 1 screens, level
3 lightning shield, 3 SML (magazine 3 normal each), B3s and lots of B2s all at
3 arcs, 11 PDS.
- Three missile-escort cruisers, mass 62, hull 14, thrust 4, level 1
lightning shield, 1 SMR, 3 B2s (3 arc), 8 PDS, 2 ADS.
- Six pure escort cruisers, mass 62, hull 14, thrust 4, level 2
lightning shield, 3 B2s, 6 PDS, 2 ADS. (Same as missile escorts but with
missiles and a couple PDS swapped for an extra level of lightning shield.)
- Eight heavy interceptors.

(Options not taken: either or both dreadnoughts were allowed to swap either
two or three SMLs with their magazine space for two or three fighter bays.)

The Aventines deployed with the two dreadnoughts and six pure escort cruisers
in front, the fleet carrier and missile cruisers slightly behind, all still
close enough for mutual defense. The heavy interceptors were in a fighter
screen around the carrier, where they could easily deploy to assist point
defenses in the area against anything that attacked the other ships.

The Sopovar had the attack cruiser in front with the intent that by the
time if/when a direct firefight broke out its firepower would draw fire
away from the basestars and podships, the basestars forming the other two
points of a triangle behind it as the core formation, with the podships
arrayed around them as missile soaks. I had their fighters out immediately but
held the heavy bombers in reserve to start the game.

The two fleets started out roughly 100 MU apart. They came in at 12 MU, I
started at 4.

I started out offering the fighters in a line ahead, seeking to confront the
interceptors away from the rest of the ships while my heavy bombers (launching
in turn 2 or so) came in behind them to strike, but the Aventines were having
none of it. Realizing that they weren't going to come out and play, I held
back the fighters for these early turns to keep them out of the range of the
Aventine main guns until I was ready.
I kept it slow at 5-6 MU per turn, the Aventines stayed at 12.

By about turn 3 or 4, I had come to the conclusion that I was going to want to
not commit my fighters unless they had a missile strike going in to support
them, it was probably going to have to be all ER missiles from the basestars,
and I probably didn't want those interceptors to still be there when I sent in
the bombers. So I detached 16 of my fighters and sent them into a dogfight
with the interceptors so that the rest of the fleet around him couldn't help
them, and they accepted the engagement. I lost almost 10 groups while killing
all the interceptors, and estimated that the big hit was going to have to come
on the next turn.

I sent in the 10 heavy bombers along with the remaining 33+ fighter
groups as point defense soaks, together with the basestars' ER alpha strike of
12 salvoes. I hoped to get the missiles into the dreadnoughts at the heart of
the Aventines' front part of the formation, but he decided to accelerate the
fleet carrier and its escorts forward to compact the formation while leaving
the dreadnoughts and theirs at 12
MU, and I didn't have _quite_ enough range to hit the dreadnoughts.  So
with my secondary move I committed the missiles four salvoes each to the front
three escort cruisers, which (without further adjustments) would
leave the dreadnoughts uncovered in front from follow-up strikes.  The
attack cruiser didn't commit its missiles in this part, it was out of range. I
had contemplated sending it ahead so that it could add to this big first
strike, but decided that it wasn't going to be a good idea to send it against
the larger dreadnoughts and their escorts by itself and it was going to be
more valuable staying behind to draw fire away from the basestars. I knew that
whatever was going to happen, I was going to
lose a _lot_ of fighters to get it, so I put the whole swarm of them on
the two dreadnoughts, because they were the only things in there that were
worth losing the bulk of my fighters for.

I had 199 fighters and 60 heavy bombers coming in on them (splitting
roughly 50-50) along with 12 salvoes of ER missiles on the front three
escort cruisers (none of them being missile guys). The Aventine player
had 109 total PDS/ADS to defend plus the level 3 lightning shields on
both ships. Partly from unlucky rolling on his part and partly because the
fighters drew most of the PDS fire, 37 of the 60 bombers made it through both
PDS and lightning shields, which was enough to destroy both dreadnoughts
outright by themselves, which basically wasted the fighters' strike. However,
the fighters seriously paid to get those things into play, as only 55 of the
199 survived the amassed point defense and the lightning shields. One
dreadnought was barely in B3 range of my attack cruiser, but missed with both
dice before it died.

So now I had killed most of their ship-to-ship firepower but had lost
the bulk of my fighter wing to do it. They still had 63 PDS against my less
than 63 surviving fighters (and 37 surviving but now depleted bombers), and
their remaining ships continued undaunted straight into my formation. They
were still at extreme ER missile range at a mix of 12 and 16 MU, so I knew if
they slowed down my next missile strike (which would have to be normal range)
might miss altogether, so I held off firing it. Without the missile support, I
also didn't want to have the fighters in there, and with them coming right at
me this also meant I couldn't yet recover the torpedo bombers either without
exposing them to enemy fire. So I flew them out wide, held my missile fire and
gritted my teeth for a beam exchange. They accelerated to 16 MU across their
whole force and plunged straight in to do so. The basestars and attack cruiser
picked out the front two missile cruisers to shoot at, while t
 he two in question fired their missiles at me (somewhat ill-advised,
all they got was a podship and I had enough PDS to kill just two salvoes and
preserve it). My attack cruiser took one threshold from beams, losing two SMRs
and half drives. I destroyed one missile cruiser and did two points of damage
to the other.

Due to their speed and that they were close enough that they'd likely
overshoot me if they sped up further, my missiles were now no longer in play
at all, as what I could put out through side arcs wasn't enough that it would
get through their defenses, so I held my fire to wait for a shot where I might
actually do some damage. I turned towards the fighters to recover the bombers,
while they sped up in order to
overshoot me outright -- as it turned out, to intentionally get off the
board at high speed. Most of their beams were 3 arcs while mine were all 6's,
so this actually gave me the beam firepower advantage. The two basestars both
fired at point blank and destroyed the undamaged missile cruiser, while my
attack cruiser miraculously managed to roll six 6's out of 8 dice to kill off
the damaged missile cruiser before rerolls.
Their fleet carrier was the only thing with back-arc firepower, and
popped one podship for spite out of intent to at least kill _one_ of my
ships. The bombers were still out but I was in position to recover them the
next turn if the Aventine changed their mind; they didn't, and flew off the
board at 24 MU to withdraw with their fleet carrier and three escorts still
alive.

The total losses for the Aventine were two dreadnoughts and six escort
cruisers (three missile, three pure) along with the eight heavy interceptors
for a total of 3392 NPV of materiel. The total losses for the Sopovar were one
podship, 23 heavy bombers, and 203 fighters for a total of 857 NPV destroyed,
plus the armor and single threshold on the attack cruiser; neither basestar
took any fire in the game (i.e. the attack cruiser did its job of presenting a
better target once it got to close range).

On paper, it was a pretty disastrous defeat for the Aventines. Off
paper, it _felt_ a lot closer than the bean counters would have called
it. The Sopovar fighter fleet was all but annihilated and was a
complete non-factor after the first strike -- with a lot of cleverness
they were still able to get their first hit in, but didn't have enough left to
make a second or even to hang around afterwards. If the
Aventines had had just a _little_ bit more ship-to-ship firepower that
would've survived, or if they'd come with just a few more heavy interceptors
(either by taking a battlecarrier option on the dreadnoughts or maybe having a
second fleet carrier) they could've dampened my fighters a lot more.

For my part... if I'm playing for keeps with fighters, I don't think I
ever want any non-heavy fighters trying to attack ships with the new PDS
and especially not the lightning shields. If I hadn't had the bombers, or if I
hadn't made them heavies (even if I cheaped out on them by making them slow
with Sopovar assurance of fighter superiority to cover them), I would've lost
this game, and badly. We're pondering continuing this campaign partly to
explore this and partly to see how the tactics evolve (and whether or not
further refinement on the Aventines' part would utterly annihilate the Sopovar
eventually or not). The Sopovar might be forced to depart from the doctrine
I'd envisioned for them of cheaping out on every fighter they can get while
still giving enemies a
_little_ reason not to just rush down their basestars, maybe with either
fast needle battlecruisers to blast away some lightning shields in
advance or going to a doctrine of three fighter lines -- cheaper (and
maybe fast) fighters in front to force dogfights with interceptors, heavy
fighters in the middle to support the first line if needed and
survive a ship strike better, and the slow-heavy bombers in back to be
the main antiship hammer.

Anyways... thoughts can be sent on or off list. I'm interested in what people
think of this so far.

E

From: Indy Kochte <kochte@s...>

Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 10:15:55 -0400

Subject: Re: [GZG] [AAR] Aventines v Sopovar, playtesting new FT3 fighter rules (long)

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lThanks for the
AAR, Eric!

Mk

From: John Tailby <john_tailby@x...>

Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 13:53:33 -0700 (PDT)

Subject: Re: [GZG] [AAR] Aventines v Sopovar, playtesting new FT3 fighter rules (long)

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lHi

How different would the game have been if you had used Islamic Federation type
missiles rather than salvo missiles, more like a cylon base star?

I'd be interested in seeing some further games with the same ships to see
whether a little variation in tactics or luck changes the result.

________________________________
From: Indy <indy.kochte@gmail.com>
To: gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
Sent: Thu, 20 May, 2010 2:15:55 AM
Subject: Re: [GZG] [AAR] Aventines v Sopovar, playtesting new FT3
fighter rules (long)

Thanks for the AAR, Eric!

Mk

From: Eric Foley <stiltman@t...>

Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 20:34:45 -0400 (EDT)

Subject: Re: [GZG] [AAR] Aventines v Sopovar, playtesting new FT3 fighter rules (long)

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l