Missile Question

I have a question about missiles. Can misiles stop and turn any amount as
ships can or are they limited to the 2 point turn even if stationary?

> Michael Blair wrote:

We allow the missile to behave like ships as you said. Jon, what do you think?

> I have a question about missiles.

Hmmm... interesting one (not thought about it before). Is it worth losing
one turn's worth of movement/endurance on the missile in order to make a
radical course change? Thoughts, anyone?

> On Fri, 16 May 1997, Ground Zero Games wrote:

Yes, it's really worth it -- in other words, it would give missiles too
much flexibility. Right now, one of the balancing factors against the
devastating punch of a missile is the missile's relative predictability and
lack of maneuverability. I'd hate to see a missile that can stop on a dime,
turn any direction, and accelerate up to max speed, all within two turns.

----------
> From: Ground Zero Games <jon@gzero.dungeon.com>

A player in our group used that tactic to attempt to damage ships that were
following him. He had a cruiser armed with missiles and was being harried by
some smaller more manoeverable ships which he couldn't get out of the 'blind
spot' (he had to keep up his speed as part of the scenario) He launched
missiles and moved them forward ahead of his ships final move position that
turn. On the 2nd turn the missiles did not move but turned nearly 360'. On the
3rd turn they moved to an intercept and attack position on the pursuers. In
this case one of the pursuers were destroyed.

I've only seen this once in any of the games we played, but we thought it was
a valid tactic and games mechanic.

Regards.....

> Jon (GZG) wrote:

Yes. The main defense against missiles for most is to speed up(usually towards
the missile) and veer away. Typically, a missile player might only do a 180
about face if the enemy ships have passed or could pass the missile that turn.
About the only ships I don't have trouble with this is thrust 2 behemoths,
which accounts for very few ships in a game. If the targeted ship has better
than thrust 2 capability, I usually fire missile salvos to account for the
target ship's possible course changes, insuring at least one missile will hit.
This can be a pain when missiles are costly and few in availability.

> Hmmm... interesting one (not thought about it before). Is it worth

If you allow a missile to completely turn around, you could do a "basc
stabbing" manuever if your target overshoots your position. We've allowed it
and it can do some serious damage to an unlucky ship.

                 +++++++++++++++
    +------------+             +----------------+

> At 6:34 PM +0100 5/16/97, Roger Gerrish wrote:

That was me :-) We lost the battle, but I killed a Dilgar cruiser and a
tin can in the process.

When I saw that the FT rules allowed this tactic I was skeptical. Missiles
should start with the same vector the launching unit had. I asked the referee
in the game in question if that interpretation of the rules was valid. He
agreed, and I started lobbing missiles around the corner.

I'm very glad that I started reading Weber <b>after</b> I played this
game. In Honor Harrington's universe, the vector of both the target and the
launching units are factors in the missile's engagment envelope. If I'd read
the books, I'd have assumed that I couldn't hit my targets.

I hate rules lawyering like this. I console myself with the thought that all I
wanted was to accelerate up to a decent vector and rotate ship to launch
missiles back down my flight path. Sadly, missiles can only be launched
straight ahead in Full Thrust. You can usually make a set of rules do what you
want.

> I've only seen this once in any of the games we played, but we thought

Taking the larger perspective, the tactic makes sense in that it simulates
missile tactics that would otherwise require complicated rules.

> Regards.....

> On Fri, 16 May 1997, Ground Zero Games wrote:

> Hmmm... interesting one (not thought about it before). Is it worth

Do missiles really need more flexibility? This amendment would change the
missile threat cone into a cone plus a 42" radius circle.

A 42" radius circle covers my entire gaming table -- almost four times.
As far as I'm concerned, you might as well give them unlimited turning
ability. I couldn't use it anyway.

If it's called for, there might be a more agile variant missile that
would lose some other advantage -- namely high damage.

Another variant that really tracks a chosen target might be nice too.

> If it's called for, there might be a more agile variant missile that

I've done some rules for modular missiles. The rules are posted at: