Oerjan Ariander said:
> Don't know about the *original* FT rules (the little yellow booklet),
Me bad - I had forgotten that the current FT rules are in fact Version
2. I was thinking about the Cinematic 30 degree turns. Having not played
Cinematic, I was unclear on the restrictions, though I was aware they did
exist, hence my thinking that the proposed changes to Vector rotation where
heading back in that direction - not necessarily a bad thing.
<snip thought game of tricking ESU SDN onto wrong facing and thoughts on low
thrust ships>
> >BTW are there SSDs for the new ESU SDN and Carrier?
Will do - he deserves the break!
<snip interesting discussion of Advanced drives v wide arc guns>
> and in Fleet Book Vector you rarely need more than
Seriously? I would have thought the extra movement points would be where
you get that extra bit of turn out of a final port/starboard push. FB2
ships obviously don't need this as much, but for FB1 ships manouvering at
higher than 2 x Thrust, surely being able to trim a couple of MU off the
triangle gets you back in the action sooner. Or do most big actions take
place at low velocity (by big action I'm talking 1500 - 2000 points
plus)?
> >Or am I missing something?
Hence my question above - I've only played a couple of games on an
aprox. 2.5m x 1.5m table and found that the temptation was to wind the
velocity up to get in beam range (we were using 1cm=1MU), only to discover
that you got one or two shots before spending the rest of the game coming
about and pursuing!
> Massed batteries of single-arc, long-ranged weapons (P-torps, Class-3
Though if you loose the ADFC, you loose the whole CE reason for being, yes?
And then it's a CA. Ah, I see in the notes for the Furious mention of a SM
variant which does pretty much as you suggest.
Thanks for your thoughts, Oerjan. I've really got to play more games!!
Regards
OA said:
> > and in Fleet Book Vector you rarely need more than
David B said:
> Seriously? I would have thought the extra movement points
If that extra maneuverability was free, sure, take it--but
it isn't, and the extra MU doesn't matter often enough to make it a good buy.
If you have, say, a Mass120 battleship and are debating whether to get 3xBeam3
or to upgrade your drives to Thrust6, you'll get more benefit from the B3s.
The main thing is to be able to rotate / thrust / rotate,
for which Main Drive 4 is sufficient.
> temptation was to wind the velocity up to get in beam
That doesn't make it tough to keep them in your F arc,
though--unless you're both at fairly low speed when you pass
through each other's lines. Even then, you can usually guarantee you have a
target, although it may not be the target you'd prefer.
> David Billinghurst wrote:
> >and in Fleet Book Vector you rarely need more than
Yes.
> [...] surely being able to trim a couple of MU off the triangle gets
Sure, but getting back to the fight sooner only really matters if your fleet
has been scattered and you need to regroup before the enemy can defeat you in
detail, or if you need to catch the enemy quickly for some
specific reason (eg. before he can attack the convoy/ planet/ whatever
your
fleet is protecting, or if he has longer-ranged weapons than you do so
you need to close the range to shoot back at him, or if *he* has scattered and
*you* are trying to defeat him in detail before he can regroup).
If no such "special conditions" apply, your fleet can afford taking its time
to get back into the fight a lot better than it can afford going into
action without those extra weapons or hull/armour boxes it had to lose
to
get the bigger engines - Laserlight's example of a Vector BB (TMF ~120)
choosing between 3 extra single-arc Class-3 batteries or 2 extra main
drive thrust points is right on target. The key thing here is that each extra
thrust point costs your ship 5% of its total Mass, which is a lot -
increasing the Main Drive rating by a mere 2 Thrust Points can easily cost
the ship one-third of its offensive armament or a quarter of its passive
defences (hull boxes, armour, screens).
(Whether or not *you* can stand playing out the slow chase in another
question entirely, of course - it can easily bore you to tears, or drive
your SO mad since she needs the table too, etc... :-/ )
> Or do most big actions take place at low velocity (by big action I'm
Generally yes, though it depends a lot on your definition of "low velocity".
(Different gaming groups can have very different definitions of
this - eg., for me any Cinematic speeds lower than 20 are "slow" while
"fast" doesn't start until somehwere around 40+ and "too fast" is almost
unheard of; OTOH I've met other Cinematic players who considered speeds above
12 to be "ridiculously fast".)
Regards,
> Oerjan Ariander said:
Hello,
I play FT only in vector, and use one thrust point = 30° degrees per thrust
for human ship, and one thrust = unlimited rotation for advanced drive (
kravak type
)
it's realy equilibrate, whit this rule, the kravak have their main arc, every
time, but the human have the extra arc and are not realy limited by this rule.
I don't see the rule about unlimited rotation where can I find it?
Thanks for this actual playing experience!
The "one point to rotate any amount" rule is on Page 3 of FB1 in the section
labelled "Rotation". The rule is reiterated in FB2, Page 3 in the section
"Revised Vector Movement".
In our group, we play Human-Tech-Only because my young admirals
prefer it (cuts down on the arguments...), so this issue is one of
balance between large/slow and small/fast ships rather than between
races. We've tried it both ways, but no consensus has yet emerged.
Best regards, Robert Bryett rbryett@mail.com
> On 30/12/2005, at 3:15 AM, Franck Gouret wrote:
> I play FT only in vector, and use one thrust point =