Thanks for the comments Laserlight and Oerjan.
Interesting that the thought is turning back to a movement point per 60
degree turn - isn't this how it was in the original FT rules?
> If you try that,
It will be my pleasure, my Christmas present is a KV starter pack with some
destroyers, fighters and a couple of capitals thrown in. The plan is to have
them assembled and undercoated at the very least by early new year!
> From: Oerjan Ariander <oerjan.ariander@telia.com>
Hmm, I see your point. In theory the KVs then have to double team the SDN and
split its Fire Arc, the unengaged one nipping in for a close range punch?
Having said that, the SDN may be able to flip around to stop a shot up the
draws. but it will now be facing the wrong way to accelerate or station keep.
I guess heavy ESU ships (and NSL units for that matter) will go into
engagements at low velocity, otherwise if they're rotating to engage, they'll
just delta V off the table unless they sacrifice shooting for manoeuver. BTW
are there SSDs for the new ESU SDN and Carrier?
> Against the *Fleet Book 1* ships (which are designed for Cinematic
I would have thought that wide fire arcs would be of very much use in
Vector - you're options to manoeuver are more open as you don't have to
be pointing directly at your target to shoot. This is the balance of the KV
narrow arc/move in any direction at full thrust. Or am I missing
something?
> OTOH, human-tech ships which are specifically designed for Vector
How would these ships differ from the FB1 ships? I haven't designed enough
ships of my own to have tried all the tricks.
Roll on Christmas and a happy and safe new year to you all.
Regards
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2005 at 11:48:37PM +1300, David Billinghurst wrote:
> I would have thought that wide fire arcs would be of very much use in
You don't in practice need to manoeuvre very much, so the mass for the extra
arcs ends up being wasted space that could have been packed with bigger guns.
R
> I would have thought that wide fire arcs would be of very much use in
Not really. Ships in vector movement have a very good chance of being able to
point themselves at a hostile target every turn, irrespective of
speed, and thus the points and space spent on the extra arcs is wasted.
> OTOH, human-tech ships which are specifically designed for Vector
The basic point is above, but instead of having a collection of weapons with
wide arcs, the ships instead have a collection of weapons with only
a single arc, or two at most. This allows them to pack more firepower into the
same sized hull, since vector movement allows you a better idea
as to where your opponent's ships are going to be, hence the lesser need
for additional arcs.
> Roll on Christmas and a happy and safe new year to you all.
David Billinghurst
> Thanks for the comments Laserlight and Oerjan.
Don't know about the *original* FT rules (the little yellow booklet), sorry.
FT2 and derivatives OTOH have all used either unlimited rotations
for a single thrust point (FB1 and FB2 Vector) or *30* degrees per thrust
point (Cinematic and EFSB Vector - not that EFSB was actually part of
the Full Thrust rules corpus, of course).
> >To put it in a different way: in FB2 Vector a single thrust point is
That can work if you can trick the SDN into tracking the wrong KV squadron. In
practise OTOH, since the SDN only needs one single thrust point to rotate to
any facing it likes it is quite likely to be facing directly towards the KV
squadron that attempts to close the range... which will hurt
quite a lot for the KV :-/
> I guess heavy ESU ships (and NSL units for that matter) will
Pretty much, yes.
> BTW are there SSDs for the new ESU SDN and Carrier?
Ask Jon :-/ (He'll be off-line until after the New Year, though.)
> >Against the *Fleet Book 1* ships (which are designed for Cinematic
The problem is that you gain very little manoeuvrability from it. The standard
Vector manoeuvring sequence is:
1) Rotate to the facing you want to do your Main Drive burn, if you aren't
already facing that way (1 Thrust Point) 2) Do your Main Drive burn 3) Rotate
to face the expected location of the enemy ships, if you aren't already facing
that way (1 Thrust Point)
If you have Advanced drives you can skip step 1; if you have wide fire arcs
you can often (but not always) skip step 2 - but both the Advanced
drives and the wider fire arcs cost more than simply buying an extra Main
Drive
thrust level or two, and in Fleet Book Vector you rarely need more than
thrust-4 (Standard engines) anyway.
> Or am I missing something?
I'd say that you're missing just how easy it is to keep a target in your
chosen fire arc in Fleet Book Vector, and probably also how little even
relatively high-thrust ships can manoeuvre in Vector compared to how
they behave in Cinematic.
> >OTOH, human-tech ships which are specifically designed for Vector
Massed batteries of single-arc, long-ranged weapons (P-torps, Class-3
and
-4 beam batteries etc.) all facing the (F) arc. The NAC Furious-class CE
from FB1 is a decent escort cruiser in Fleet Book Vector (by accident rather
than by purpose, but still); a "combat" version would replace the
ADFC and some PDSs by another single-arc P-torp or Class-3 Beam battery.
Regards,