[GZG] [FT] PSB

When setting up a FT battle, the two forces usually set up  within 60-96
mu; they usually don't know what the other side has brought until it shows up
on the table; and everyone usually starts at relatively slow speeds ((less
than
20, say, and often 6-12mu/turn), and in tight formation if they wish.

Anyone have any suitable PSB to explain this?

Passive sensor ranges and a particularly heavy debris count within the
system (relatively speaking) or lots of pockets of gas/dust etc (can't
remember the MT terrain feature).

If the sensors can't detect the dust/gas in the clutter, then
intrasystem
travel will be slowed (even an SDN with screen-2 can't take that sort of
pounding long-term).

Contact is often in clear pockets of space (where scout ships have "directed"
each force towards the other).

Brendan 'Neath Southern Skies

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

IMPORTANT 1. Before opening any attachments, please check for viruses.
2. This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential
information for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient,
please contact the sender and delete all copies of this email.
3. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are
not a statement of Australian Government Policy unless otherwise stated. 4.
Electronic addresses published in this email are not conspicuous publications
and DVA does not consent to the receipt of commercial electronic messages.
5. Please go to http://www.dva.gov.au/feedback.htm#sub to unsubscribe
emails

of this type from DVA. 6. Finally, please do not remove this notice.

> Laserlight wrote:

> When setting up a FT battle, the two forces usually set up within

The closest I ever saw was an SFB scenario wherein an advanced race brought in
ships to fight. For the common "meeting engagement" nobody has ever come up
with anything better than "academy exercises."

It's a good excuse to write campaign rules though.

> When setting up a FT battle, the two forces usually set up within

I'll have a go...

FTL jumps are not precise in GZG and other genres, and may
inflict short-term disruptions on electronics and/or crew,
for instance Alderson drives in Mote in Gods Eye or the
Cherryah Union/Alliance setting. So you don't want to jump
in too close to the enemy, as you might get zotted before you can figure out
where your own ships are and deal with any glitches. Nor do you want to jump
in with a high real space velocity, because they'll scatter themselves much
further apart. In some settings they simply can't use FTL too close to planets
or other big masses anyway, and mostly the interesting bits of a solar system
are inside this hyper limit or whatever you call it.

Also assume that sensor systems, especially passive, are good enough to pick
up the presence of enemy ships at great distances (by drive heat if nothing
else), or FTL jumps, and give some idea of ship sizes and velocities.
Warships can jam radar, run the engines hotter/slower, or
whatever else it takes to reduce the enemies information. But there's no real
way to hide a fleet.

So the attacker, which can be both sides if they're after the same system,
takes the time to form up before going after the enemy. Any defenders likewise
have a rough idea where the enemy is and where they're coming from. If there
are planets or something as an objective, it's going to be obvious what the
approach vectors are, and the distances (usually) and passive sensors will
make feints impractical.

As for the slow speeds, the enemy passive sensors will be able to estimate
your speeds fairly well, so building up too much velocity too soon just makes
it easier for the enemy to predict where you'll be and either get around your
flanks or put mines or similar nasties in your path. Plus, gravity
compensators or not, running your ships at high speed is tougher on the
machinery and crew, so you want to move at cruising speed outside actual
combat.

cheers,

> When setting up a FT battle, the two forces usually set up within

Well, this is the way it's often run, though the whole sensor issue is part
of the advanced/optional section. I'll have to ignore this, as it's been
VERY contentious in the past. Even current optics offer combatants better
intel, though I've held that any sensor had the possibility of defeat, and
waxing and waning of either side is an interesting part of history.

Chris, remember back in '98 when you reminded me of the editor of the The
Future of War series being Reginald Bretnor? I think back then, I was talking
about one of the articles in one of the three books. Unfortunately, that seems
to be the one book I can't find presently, so I can't give specifics.

However, the thrust of the article was that for ships to fight, the situation
would have to be voluntary on both sides. Weapons would be so
short ranged and require such long times-on-target that tactical evasion
would be relatively easy. I just assumed, for FT's sake, that was unless you
had some place you REALLY had to go. Attack could not occur unless the
attacker was willing to face the defender.

Course, I also recall the opinion that reaction mass would be so limited as
leave all participants floating hulks, mission kills, if you will. Nice thing
about PSB, you usually get to pick and chose.

To evade is to change direction, and to do that you surrender initiative. I'm
pretty sure the numbers would disagree, but I'm doing PSB, right?

Frankly, I'd prefer options for oblique and even crossing-the-T action
starts; at the last possible moment, one or the other commander gets the drop
on the other. I guess, with the preponderance of forward facing
weapons, you'd WANT your T crossed. ;->=

The_Beast

> Chris, remember back in '98 when you reminded me of the editor of the

Spear of Mars, and Orion's Sword, and one other which I don't think I ever
found.

[snip]
> Unless you had some place you REALLY had to go. Attack could not occur

Yeah, that's part of the reason I asked this. Sensor ranges are long enough
that, if there's no restriction on where you can jump from, you should
*always* be able to avoid an uneven fight. And if you're unrestricted on
jumping in, you just pick a random spot near your target planet, jump in,
salvo a massive load of missiles, and jump out again. I'm thinking that we
really need jump gates that are large enough that you can't just build fixed
installations to fortify it, but small enough that a squadron or two can cover
it.

> >Chris, remember back in '98 when you reminded me of the editor of

Hammer of Thor, which I can't seem to find now; I'm assuming the article is in
it, but it may be a) I'm remembering it from another book, b) it's in one of
the two above, and I'm just not seeing it. Mature moment fast and furious
lately, and suffering bronchitis doesn't clear my thinking.

> [snip]

Ah, also, I probably should have said, 'especially if the defender is between
the attacker and the target'. Still, I can assume that the defender could
close and match speeds as the attacker slows to set up on target. Again, I'm
thinking the PSB can't stand up to good number crunching.
;->=

Hey, we vaccheads have NEVER been as picky as you gropos.

Please note that, if you accept that the defender can always close as the
attacker is on approach, it's not too difficult to assume it's in a favorable
position UNLESS the attacker 'turns to' the defender.

> Yeah, that's part of the reason I asked this. Sensor ranges are

If you assume pin point jump accuracy, and I'm talking a lot less than a few
AU's off here. Don't make me bring out the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy's
description of space!

At some point, defensive ships become useless; save the expense of real drive
units and build forts and minefields. Sounds kinda dull to me.

The whole discussion of the vulnerability of planets awhile back, when the
whole 'push an asteroid out of orbit' came up, gave me the image of, if it
takes only a small nudge way out there to put into trajectory means a slightly
larger nudge sometime later can make it miss. Then you might have to have a
task force guarding the asteroid in, and the target sends a force to accompany
the second 'nudge', and you'd have the whole meeting engagement thing again.

The whole concept of a space ship battle requires more than a few assumptions.

The_Beast

Sorry to be ignorant about this but what does PSB mean?

TIA

> --- Doug Evans <devans@nebraska.edu> wrote:

> > When setting up a FT battle, the two forces

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lPseudo-scientific
balony.

Or

Pseudo-scientific backtalk

Or other 'b-' words of your choice

Mk

> On 3/17/06, brian kearney <brianwill16@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

All is now clear! Thank you very much.

> --- Indy <indy.kochte@gmail.com> wrote:

> Pseudo-scientific balony.
___________________________________________________________
> > Win a BlackBerry device from O2 with Yahoo!. Enter
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
> >
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

Ok to break this down into several questions.

Why do ships travel towards a battle in a tight group all at roughly the

same speed? Not sure that this ones needs a PSB answer it's likely that its
effective to have the ships in a mutually supporting formation. If you spread
your ships out in a big dispersed arc you risk being defeated in detail.

Why are initial velocities usually in the region of 6-12 mu.
Game PSB, the game is designed to work that way. If ships accelerate to speeds
faster than fighters and missiles can move then those weapon systems don't
work and if you can go from outside weapon range to point blank range in one
move followed by turns of moving to require the game can get a bit slow.
Reality PSB Ship components wear out if they try and sustain very high speeds
for very long. Tactical PSB Its not wise to travel faster than your sensor
range, especially if you are an ordinance based attack fleet or one that wants
to try and fight from longer ranges. If you were travelling with an initial
velocity of 30mu and so were your enemy fleet you would go from beyond sensor
range to point blank in one go. A bad time to determines the other side has
loaded up with MKPs or submunitions. Most military commanders are cautious by
nature and like to gather as much information about the enemy as they can so
they can use their tactical skill to good effect.

Rushing around wildly is very likely to get you killed on some mine field or
other ambush.

John

[quoted original message omitted]