I was re-reading the More Thrust book and I came up
with a few questions about MT heavy missiles.
When I was looking at the prices, my initial reaction was that MT heavy
missiles are too costly. 2 mass, 6 points for a one shot weapon that can be
shot down seemed a bit pricy. I started doing some comparisons, and they're
not too bad. Figure that 3 MT heavy missiles have a mass and cost the same as
a fighter group. The fighters have more flexibility as far as movement, and a
bit more combat duration, but the MT heavy missiles are harder to shoot down
and do a lot of damage.
Here's my question....
A fighter group is hit on a 4,5,6 with PDS, and a 5,6
with Class-1 beams.
A heavy missile is hit on a 6 with PDS, but there is
no note in FB1 as to how Class-1 beams would fair
against MT heavy misses.
I was thinking that if you follow the trend of PDS and
Class-1 beams against fighters, Class-1 beams are less
effective by 1. So, my conclusion is that the Class-1
effectiveness against heavy missiles would also be
reduced by 1, which would mean that Class-1 beams
cannot fire on MT heavy missiles in a defensive mode (no way to roll a 7 on a
six sided dice.....at least not any of MY six sided dice).
Can anyone tell me if this is a correct extrapolation?
BTW, I have realized that this is my next tactic against the giant customized
Sa'Vasku monolith ships.
3 MT heavy missiles are the same cost and mass as a fighter group, but it
would need three times the PDS to target all three MT heavy missiles.
I am thinking of converting my carriers (4 fighter groups each) into MT heavy
missile platforms (12 MT heavy missiles for same cost and mass as the 4
fighter groups). The enemy ship would need 12 PDS instead of 4 to target all
the MT heavy missiles. Plus the MT heavy missiles are less likely to be hit
(although the ones that are hit are TOTALLY destroyed, vs fighters which lose
a bit of combat effectiveness, but usually have a few fighters remaining to
press on the attack.)
If my conjecture above about Class-1 beams not able to
be used against MT heavy missiles, then they are a great concept for swarming
the Sa'Vasku mother ships.
A combination of normal MT heavy missiles (2d6 damage) and EMP MT heavy
missiles (threshold rolls against all systems) could potentially ruin
someone's day!!
Can someone let me know if my assumptions about
Class-1 beams vs. MT heavy missiles are correct, and
if so, has anyone tried this tactic?
A few words of warning from a non expert.
1. MT missiles aren't as fearsome as they look because they have to be placed
so that they can see the target from their forward arc (not just get within
3").
2. Secondly, speed and maneuver can make hitting with the lions share of the
missiles difficult (though I've been hit with quite a few).
3. The Savasku in customized form can put out a TON of fighter squadrons which
are still pretty good at shooting down missiles. Even if they can't split
fire, they can pretty much
kill 1 missile/round/squadron (and they have
as many rounds to do it as you leave the missiles in flight).
4. The Savasku, if they put all their power into movement, can move VERY VERY
fast and I think they have gravitic movement (which would mean they could move
in any direction). So, hitting them with ordinance is even more difficult.
5. MT missiles, unless they're fired within one's turn movement, can be seen
coming, so the Savasku player can know he needs to move erratically to avoid
them.
6. If you do this, I'd advise you to have a lot more than 12 missiles. I have
missile cruisers with something like 15 missiles apiece, and if you're trying
this against a Savasku my advice is to take a LOT of missiles.
Ok, now the experts can critique my critique.
> --- Shawn M Mininger <smininger@yahoo.com> wrote:
...
> BTW, I have realized that this is my next tactic
...
> I am thinking of converting my carriers (4 fighter
Good point, although I thought that MT heavy missiles only need to be within 6
inches of the target? I don't remember them needing to be in front arc either,
although that's probably just my bad memory.
Heh heh well, I was talking about 12 per ship, we
usually play 3000-5000pt battles so I could take 5-10
missile carriers with 12 missiles a piece....that would be a lot of missiles!!
> --- David Griffin <carbon_dragon@yahoo.com> wrote:
Any comments on Class-1 beams vs MT heavy missiles?
> --- David Griffin <carbon_dragon@yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- Shawn M Mininger <smininger@yahoo.com> wrote:
We're getting into the fuzzy world of different books covering different
systems. Back when MT missiles were invented it was 6" (same as fighters).
When vector movement came along (which my group plays) Salvo missiles and
fighters got cut down to 3" because it's harder to maneuver with vector
movement. So, our group plays 3" for MT missiles too (Perhaps someone from GZG
could comment). MT missiles aren't covered in the Fleet book except for their
cost to place on a ship.
I think you'll find the missiles move cinematically, turning up to 2 points in
the middle of their move, and have to be able to see the enemy out of their
Full Thrust V.1 forward arc (that was when there were 4 arcs rather than 6). I
don't have the book with me at the moment so I can't check to be sure.
There are always a few house rules you have to come up with for MT missiles
since there isn't really enough information in the book to tell you what to
do. You don't know how type 1 beams work against them, whether fighters can
shoot them down, whether a fighter stands a chance of being blown up when it
is doing so, and so on. Hopefully this will be resolved in Fleet Book 3 (but
it should have REALLY have been in Fleet Book 2!).
> Heh heh well, I was talking about 12 per ship, we
With the Savasku, I'd not tell him what I'm doing (Savasku deserve what they
get) and I might just launch the whole crowd and then ftl out. That way you'll
preserve your fleet and may even get him.
Frankly the Savasku are so powerful (especially in customized form) that
you're probably playing the Kobiashi Maru scenario every time, so try it and
let us all know how it goes. Should surprise him anyway.
Here's another tactic I've thought of (but haven't tried). Create corvettes
with one 4 point weapons
package (plenty on the net -- the strikeboat). Then
make only 1 in 6 this ship. Make all the rest empty corvettes (banzai jammers
maybe 9 points each). You should be able to come up with a LOT of corvettes.
With 5000 points, that's 61 squadrons with 1 strikeboat and 5 BZ's. That's 370
corvettes.
Then see if he can destroy all of them before you show up at his door and hit
him with a load of submunition packages or needle beams or whatever. Probably
still won't work, but it's just something I toy with in my darker moments.
A variant thought I've had is to adopt a different strategy vs. fighter
defense for the strikeboat squadrons. One thought I've had is to be satisfied
with fewer BZs in order to equip them with a PDS (because a strikeboat with a
PDS goes up in price by 3 points). The advantage is that they'll destroy some
fighters while they're dying.
Another variant I've thought of was each squadron having a PDS corvette with
something like 2 pds's and an ADFC. This really cuts down on the numbers.
You're down to 47 squadrons (283 boats), but those 47 squadrons can fire off
94 pds's per round. In this variant, there's one normal strikeboat, one PDS
strikeboat and 4 BZs.
Once you've done this and are looking for a little harmless fun, try
forgetting the weapons and going with only PDS strikeboats. That's something
like 138 PDS strikeboats for 276 PDS's per round. Remember PDSs can be fired
as anti ship weapons, you just have to get close. Granted they're not the best
way to do damage, but hey, they'll toast the fighters and some ought to
survive.
Oh well. Sorry to introduce such cheesy concepts. They're just speculations
anyway.
Does anyone else than me get irritated by Shawn's constant "heh heh heh"? To
me it looks like a transcript of someone panting over the
telephone :-(
> Shawn M Mininger wrote:
> I was re-reading the More Thrust book and I came up
Incorrect. An MT missile is hit on a 6 with an *PDAF* or *ADAF*, neither of
which exist in FBx.
> but there is no note in FB1 as to how Class-1 beams would fair
If you read the FB1 "Point Defence Systems" and "Class-1 Beam Batteries
as Point-Defence" sections carefully, you'll find that they both only
say "missile". Not "missile (MT type)" or "salvo missile", only
"missile" - because "missile" refers to *all* types of missiles, ie.
currently both the FB1 Salvo Missiles *and* the MT-style "capital"
missiles.
MT missiles are however individual targets, so a single PDS (or B1)
can't kill more than 1 MT missile per turn (ie., any re-rolls or PDS
rolls of "6" only score overkills). This means that a single PDS (or
Interceptor fighter) kills 1 MT missile on a roll of 4, 5 or 6, while a B1
battery (or Standard fighter) kills 1 MT missile on a roll of 5 or
6.
Sounds like high interception rates? If you use Cinematic movement for
your ships and the missile movement rules from MT, it is - because in
this case the missiles' hit rate is going to be pretty low if your opponent
knows what he is doing.
If OTOH you use Vector movement for your ships but don't change the missile
movement, or you use Cinematic but change the MT missile
movement to something more fighter-ish (several such conversions are
available around the net), they balance fairly closely against SMRs. The SMRs
get slightly more damage through for the same Mass of missiles which hit the
target, but the MT missiles tend to score more hits (and have longer range,
and aren't fooled by BJs, etc.). (In fact, with the
fighter-ish MT-missiles-in-FB conversions I've seen and tested the MT
missile hit rates have been so high that the MT missiles completely outclass
SMRs!)
Regards,
[quoted original message omitted]
> Does anyone else than me get irritated by Shawn's constant "heh heh
Yes. But IIRC he's a Marine, so what can you expect? <vbg>
On Mon, 21 May 2001 13:26:55 -0700 (PDT) Shawn M Mininger
> <smininger@yahoo.com> writes:
I have Full Thrust Fleet Book: Volume 1 in front of me -
FT2:
Page 7;
Class-1 Beam batteries as point-defence
"...Class-1 beams may act as secondary point-defence systems against
both
fighters or missiles...rolls of 1-4 are misses, while 5 or 6 each kill
ONE missile or fighter; 6 allows a reroll, as usual..."
That's how Class-1's take down MT missiles...
<snip>
G'day,
> 1. MT missiles aren't as fearsome as they look
I may be suffering from "home rules" problem here, but since FB we've never
required MT missiles to have their target in the forward arc.
Just a thought
Beth
> At 10:29 22/05/01 +1000, darling, gorgeous, pregnant wife wrote:
Yep, House rules. SM don't have a arc restriction, their missiles too, so
it follows............. :)
> --- Derek Fulton <derekfulton@bigpond.com> wrote:
...
> Yep, House rules. SM don't have a arc restriction,
Well, I'm half right. The exact words are (More Thrust page 3)
"After all missile movement is completed, play proceeds as normal with all
ships moving in accordance with their orders; any ships that finish their
movement within 6" of an active missile (and NOT in the Missile's REAR arc)
may be attacked by that missile during the firing phase of the turn.
That means not the old REAR arc (25% of the whole 360 degree circle around the
missile).
Now we say 3" because all the other 6" types of things (missiles and fighters)
are now 3" IF you are using vector movement, which we are.
I can see nowhere where these rules are overriden in the later books. If you
do, let me know where.
> --- Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@juno.com> wrote:
...
> I have Full Thrust Fleet Book: Volume 1 in front of
There is a precedent for MT missiles being harder to kill then salvo missiles
(and the real rule if it exists isn't easy to see from the book), However,
even if you use the above as your guide, a reroll hardly makes since since a
salvo missile is a single unit, not a salvo, so what would a reroll allow you
do
do -- kill the missile more than once?
Note in page 2 of More Thrust it says that it takes a 6 to kill a MT missile
from a PDAF or ADAF.
> At 06:15 21/05/01 -0700, you wrote:
I opted for a 5 or 6 to kill a MT missile, for those interested my house
rules can be found at;
On Mon, 21 May 2001 18:08:20 -0700 (PDT) David Griffin
> <carbon_dragon@yahoo.com> writes:
Except that FB1 divides it up into 60 degree arcs; Yes, you can keep the old
Arcs which I would consider for MT missiles in this case (provide you own PSB
as needed) for simplicity sake. 310 degrees is one heck of an acquisition
area...
> Now we say 3" because all the other 6"
Depends if you use 90 or 60 degree arcs I guess but "explicitly"
over-written? NTIK (sorry, 'Not That I Know'.)
On Mon, 21 May 2001 18:15:18 -0700 (PDT) David Griffin
> <carbon_dragon@yahoo.com> writes:
<snip>
> That's how Class-1's take down MT missiles...
Ah, YMMV. Agreed that the implication is most likely SM's but the
interpretation without MT at hand (my was on the shelf) is not so clear.
Yes, the re-roll is wasted but so is the re-roll if you 'kill' more
fighters or SM's then are attacking (not all groups are 6 strong in post PDS
fire attacks or after interception in a game.) "Wasting" PDs 'kills'
is 'historical' in the sense of WW2 AA defense - several ships usually
claimed the same kill in a fleet defense action. I doubt that will change with
the technology <grin>.
On Tue, 22 May 2001 11:27:34 +1000 Derek Fulton
<derekfulton@bigpond.com> writes: <snip>
> I opted for a 5 or 6 to kill a MT missile, for those interested my
Okay, I like that too.
When I get all the 'alien' (beads plus) ships built I hope to run a
FT/FB1 (but if I break down and get FB2 I could use _those_ weapons for
some of my alien races... No, no, get Thee behind me...) scenario using
all non-human fleets... Maybe at the local con in November. If I do, I
will write an AAR but the designs will be based on the files I loaded before
to the Yahoo groups. Do we have a "files" section for this list for uploading
things?
> --- Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@juno.com> wrote:
...
> >"After all missile movement is completed, play
270 degrees and I agree. (75% of 360 = 270). And the only reason I'm keeping
the old arcs here is that there is no later rule to decide what that 270
degrees converts into. Is there a GZG ruling on this, say a convention ruling?
GZG really should elaborate since it's a sort of gaping hole in the rules.
They left MT missiles in the ship building rules so they must mean us to use
them. Why not disambiguate the rules and tell us what their cinematic movement
and acquisition arcs convert into for Fleet Book 1?
> On 21-May-01 at 18:11, Oerjan Ohlson (oerjan.ohlson@telia.com) wrote:
You are not the only one. I would normally ignore it but I am starting to
wince every time I see one of his posts. The sad thing is the rest of the
posts are fine, it's just that one bit.
> On 21-May-01 at 21:15, David Griffin (carbon_dragon@yahoo.com) wrote:
Kind of like the re-roll you get when there is only
1 fighter left in the squadron?
> --- Roger Books <books@mail.state.fl.us> wrote:
...However, even if you use the above
> > as your guide, a reroll hardly makes since
In that case, a re-roll is valid MOST of the time
(at least SOME of the time). In the case of an MT missile, it's true NONE of
the time.
Ok, that's hardly proof I admit. At best it's a weak indicator that they
weren't thinking of MT missiles when they were talking about missiles (and
remember the FB1 was in the process of introducing salvo missiles).
A variety of intepretations are possible and are probably equally likely.
Here's what I'd like to know from GZG:
1. What's the roll for a PDS to destroy a MT missile?
2. How many MT missiles can 1 pds destroy?
3. What's the roll of a fighter to destroy a MT missile?
4. Does the fighter risk being destroyed by the explosion as he does under
salvo missiles?
5. Can a fighter squadron split their fire among different MT missiles?
6. Does the movement of MT missiles (cinematic, 1 turn up to 2 points in the
middle) still apply in fleet book 1?
7. Does the acquisition arc of anything but the old rear arc still apply in
fleet book 1?
8. Can a type 1 beam fire at a MT missile? If so, what does it need to hit and
destroy the missile?
That will do for a start. Yes our group has come up with it's own set of
answers, but I suspect that our answers are different from other groups.
I think our answers are 1. Same as salvo missile, but ignore rerolls 2. 1 3.
Same as salvo missile, ignore rerolls 4. no 5. no 6. yes 7. yes 8. yes, same
as salvo missile, but ignore rerolls
There are a couple of our group members on this list, maybe one of them will
correct me, but I think this is what we do. It would be nice to know if we're
doing it right.
Ummm, fellows......I do read this mailing list.
> --- Roger Books <books@mail.state.fl.us> wrote:
[quoted original message omitted]
That's just Schoon for you - walked right off a USMC recruiting poster -
or an Imperial Marine recruiting poster.
> ------------ Original Message -----------
On Tue, 22 May 2001 07:18:39 -0700 (PDT) Shawn M Mininger
> <smininger@yahoo.com> writes:
Well, I figured that. <grin> Else you wouldn't have had that discussion about
monster Savau... I can never spell that word.....
Maybe they meant to let you know but in a 'gentle teasing way'? I just made a
fool of myself over on the 6mm list apparently because I failed to understand
UK humor (But then I never understood Benny Hill so it figures.)
I doubt it was meant as an insult - more like when you are trying to get
someone to see his 'personal equipment' is showing (happened to a adult
neighbor when he was growing up as a jack Mormon in Utah. In his high school
classroom. It's a long story (lots of background detail that as a young
California teenager I had to have spelled out to me...) but funny
to listen to first hand - his friends got in trouble trying to signal
him he was 'out' after using the restroom and finally his (female) teacher had
to verbally tell him to put it back where it belonged...
I figure it's a just a writing mannerism you have. Fer sure.
Or maybe it's a verbal 'emoticon'? Sorta' like my 8^)
Could be worse, a loved one in the family picks her nose when she gets
nervous - and she's an adult.
FWIW, it doesn't bother me... bother me... bother me. <grin>
Seriously, don't take it to heart but if it did upset you it might be
good netettitque to write a calm non-flaming e-mail to the person(s)
directly saying "Ouch, that hurt" and asking them to next time bring to your
attention personally first?
On Tue, 22 May 2001 04:40:47 -0700 (PDT) David Griffin
> <carbon_dragon@yahoo.com> writes:
> Except that FB1 divides it up into 60 degree arcs;
Duh! 360-60 = 300 (new arcs) and 360-90 = 270 (old Arcs) but how hod I
get 310???
Maybe I'm catching my father's Alzheimers?
G'day David,
Well this is about as far from officialdom as possible so I'm not saying
you're wrong and we're right, juts this is the way we do it....
> 1. What's the roll for a PDS to destroy a MT
We said 5 or 6 because otherwise we felt it was too easy to take them down
(I'm pretty sure Oerjan disagrees with this if I remember correctly).
> 2. How many MT missiles can 1 pds destroy?
Just the one at a time.
> 3. What's the roll of a fighter to destroy a
5 or 6 for fighters to take down the missile (with each fighter in the
squadran getting a shot)
> 4. Does the fighter risk being destroyed by
Yep... need a 6 though
> 5. Can a fighter squadron split their fire
Actually I can't remember how we play that at all!
> 6. Does the movement of MT missiles (cinematic,
We don't use it. We move fighters like missiles and give them 3 CEF, but
don't have to expend CEF to attack.
> 7. Does the acquisition arc of anything but the
I would've said FB1 rear arc if I had to argue it, but I was thinking about
this yesterday and can't think of a time in our games when any missile has
actually been put in against any target outside the front 180 degrees.
> 8. Can a type 1 beam fire at a MT missile? If so,
We let them take down a missile on a 6.
As an optional extra we also let people use SMs as an anti-MT missile
defense. Just declare that that's what mode they're on and place them as
normal...when SM phase comes they attack the nearest MT-missile. Roll a
D6-1 for number of the salvo's missiles on target. If any hit roll a D6
and add the number of missiles left from the salvo, if the total is greater
than 6 they bring down the MT missile.
Cheers
Beth
[quoted original message omitted]
G'day,
> We don't use it. We move fighters
Ahh yeah;)
<blush>
Thanks
Beth
From: "Shawn M Mininger" <smininger@yahoo.com>
> A heavy missile is hit on a 6 with PDS, but there is
I prefer using all the fighter rules for MT missiles - ie