> I have seriously been considering making FT my next little splurge.
I predict you'll have your stern kicked for the first few games, just like
everyone else has. So start small and keep track of what
happens, then write up After-Action Reports and ask the List what you
should've done.
I'll go ahead and give you my advice now: a) rolling enough sixes will cover a
multitude of sins. b) you should have a plan, so your opponent will have
something to ignore c) don't lead with your small ships, they go *pop* too
easy. Small ships are good as distractions, or for cleaning up cripples. d)
know what range you want to stay at. Some weapons are best close up (eg
torps), some have a range advantage but can't compete close up
(B3, B4).
e) concentrate your fire. Doing half a threshold on each of six ships
does nothing for you--instead, put three thresholds on a single ship.
G'day,
> So what does everyone think? Will I make an OK spacer?
If I do, you will;)
As with most gaming stuff (especially GZG) the fun is in the playing not the
winning - and if you find out you lose because you roll 1s the "1s r us"
club is still taking members;)
I heartily recommend FT!! It's one of my favourite games, I still enjoy it
more than ground stuff, but I think that's a personal preference thing -
people tend to get all technical on me when we get to the ground, but in space
there just seems to be less blasted acronyms to keep track of!;)
Oerjan, want to comment?
Oerjan is the list's resident speed freak. His ships routinely travel at
speeds over 30. Thus, you will likely encounter the
list-speak term "Oerjan Speed".
He could probably give you some tips on how to use the tactic effectivly in
FT.
---
Brian Bell bbell1@insight.rr.com ICQ: 12848051 AIM: Rlyehable YIM: Rlyehable
The Full Thrust Ship Registry:
http://www.ftsr.org
---
[quoted original message omitted]
> Brian Bell wrote:
> Oerjan, want to comment?
I know that the other Brian B. didn't ask for high-speed tactics, but I
can comment anyway <g>
> Oerjan is the list's resident speed freak.
I can give tips on how to use the boom-and-zoom tactic effectively in
Cinematic. Beth is the resident Vector speed freak :-)
Unfortunately high speeds only work if you have a large enough gaming table
(or use the "moving table" option described on p.28 in the FT2 rules) -
you usually need a table big enough to zoom out of your enemy's (effective)
weapon range before you turn around for the next attack run. Having decent
maneuverability (ability to execute 3-pt or (preferrably) tighter turns)
helps a lot, of course :-)
The opposite to "boom-and-zoom" is "turn-and-burn", aka "the circle of
death". This typically occurs when thrust-4 fleets are trying to get
into each others' rear arcs. This is the kind of battle Alan designed the
BORON ships for.
As for Tom's lament about not knowing where your own fleet will end up in
Cinematic, it is quite simple once you've recognised the pattern:
Draw a straigth line from where the ship is prior to movment, set at an angle
A to the ship's facing. The angle A depends on how tight a turn the
ship makes. The ship will end movement at some point along this line -
increasing the velocity will place it further away, slowing down will put it
closer, but it will always end up somewhere along this line.
Turn Angle A: Distance/speed: Ship's new facing:
1-pt 15 degrees 0.97 30 degrees
2-pt 45 degrees 0.97 60 degrees
3-pt 60 degrees 0.86 90 degrees
4-pt 90 degrees 0.86 120 degrees
5-pt 105 degrees 0.71 150 degrees
6-pt 135 degrees 0.71 180 degrees
...etc.
The "Distance/speed" column multiplied by the ship's speed (after
applying
thrust for accel/decel) shows how far away from the starting point along
the straight line the ship will end up. Of course I don't try to calculate
"speed*0.71" etc exactly in my head, but thinking "just under the ship's
speed" or "just under 3/4 the ship's speed" still gives you a decent
idea of where you'll end up and which way you'll be pointing.
Later,
G'day,
> Beth is the resident Vector speed freak :-)
I wouldn't have gone that far,;)
> Unfortunately high speeds only work if you have a large
This is just as true for vector. We always use floating maps, otherwise high
speed vector is even more of a "single pass and you're off" than usual in most
vector games.
Tactics/speeds will depend on which vector (FB1 or FB2) you're using
though. FB1 vector allows you to play at 6x thrust with confidence, but FB2
vector
reins you in to about 4x thrust. And I'm speaking as the FSE here -
manoeuvrability isn't as crucial for bringing weapons to bear in vector as
cinematic, but its still damn handy to have! This is especially true for "boom
and zoom", and especially when using FSE ships. With a little practice
you can learn to slide on by dodging most/all of the opponents "long
range"
shots, getting in two rounds of "combined fire" (SMs/fighters/beams)
before speeding up and off again. This can work even better if you have large
enough fleets for "wings" of cruisers to do this a step ahead of the main body
of BBs and up. Even having a pack of CTs with submunition packs etc do this a
turn or so before the rest gets into range can give the opponent enough of a
bloody nose to take their eye off the ball as the rest of you main fleet comes
in.
Sliding by also seems to work better than just ploughing through the middle
for the FSE (due to weaker hull grades), but the plough is OK for "tougher"
nations.
There's less chance for a return run in vector than cinematic (firstly because
it tends to be bloodier in a faster time so you don't need another pass), but
if you play floating map it is possible and can be useful to keep
in the back of your mind - especially if you've got high thrust ships
(which can slow and turn in a reasonable amount of time) or scenery you can
slingshot around.
Hope that helps
And please pay attention to all those who will now rectify any "bum steers"
I've just given you;) If there's one thing I've learnt about FT, there's so
many ways this game
can end up being played (with/without core rules etc etc etc) that what
we think is normal is totally foreign to others!!
Beth said:
> There's less chance for a return run in vector than cinematic
Right. Generally when A and B meet, it's bloody enough that one side or the
other is going to take a very dim view of renewed contact (Note: my point of
view may be influenced by my ship designs). If A and B are about the same
thrust capacity and were on opposing courses, it's very tough to turn around
and catch an opponent who has decided to quit the field. However, there's no
law that says both sides have
to enter from opposite table edges--so try one side coming on at
clockface 10, heading for 4, and the other side coming on at clockface 8 o
clock, headed for 3. Or just keep your velocity down.
> Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
> Tactics/speeds will depend on which vector (FB1 or FB2) you're using
I'd like to see your reasoning on this. The only changes to vector was
limiting the amout of thrust in pushes.
> manoeuvrability isn't as crucial for bringing weapons to bear in
before
> speeding up and off again. This can work even better if you have large
...
> And please pay attention to all those who will now rectify any "bum
And here's a perfect example:) Whereas Beth plays high G with detached squads
of ships we play with lower thrust and tightly grouped formations.
The system I employ is to have all the ships possible within 6" of each other.
This alloys for an "area defence net" where all the PDS are dispersed in the
fleet so every ship can support any of the ships in the fleet. It makes the
fleet easier to hit with mass salvos but makes the defence net more resiliant
and allows for a greater total PDS defence.
Instead of a thrust 6 SD I run thrust 2 with extra hull and defences. I'm not
a biggest fan of salvo missiles and prefer to stick with fighters and MT
missiles as standoff weapons and your basic beam and pulse torpedo main
armourment.
My standard design specs 20% hull 10% armour, thurst 4. The weapons load
depends on the mission of the class design.
I haven't had a chance to play against other people except those in my own
group here so I can't say how this strategy would work against anyone else,
especially Beth, the experience I've had is that breaking up your fleet leads
to desaster and having high thrust capital ships waste too much space in drive
and don't have the needed "punch" when they hit combat.
> At 08:08 5/11/01 -0800, Jaime Tiampo wrote:
> The system I employ is to have all the ships possible within 6" of each
Networking the point defenses is STILL crucial in our games. Beth doesn't
believe in spreading out her SMs, they arrive in tightly bunched groups. Of
course I return the favour with waves of MT missiles (launched from modified
DDs) capable picking out the target and not just attacking the nearest.
But then you meeting the Phalons:)
> At 03:52 6/11/01 +1100, I wrote:
> But then you meeting the Phalons :)
Sorry.. meet...
> At 08:08 5/11/01 -0800, Jaime Tiampo wrote:
you're
> using though.
I believe it may be like this.
Under FB1 a MD6 ship could expend all it's thrust on burns and rotations
and then a further half of the MD rating on pushes..
Under FB2 pushes are now restricted to 1 point of thrust per turn from any one
set of thrusters (bow, port, starboard and aft) and the thrust points for
pushes come from the main drive along with the burns and rotations. There
isn't an exclusive pool just for pushes, this makes a big difference on a
ship's ability to maneuver.
G'day,
> I'd like to see your reasoning on this.
Depends on whether you allowed the MD-Turn-Push-as-much-as-possible
manoeuvre or not. We thought it was fine and so I regularly went high as I
knew I could come down fast. However, others on the list thought of it as the
"cheese manoeuvre" and lobbied hard against it. Now that the changes to vector
in FB2 have made it impossible I have to fly a bit slower to have the same
degree of control.
Cheers
> Derek Fulton wrote:
> >I'd like to see your reasoning on this. The only changes to vector
Oh right... I forgot there was two pools. We always played where they came out
of the same pool as our house rule.
> Derek Fulton wrote:
So far I haven't seen a big problem with the phalons, but then all I've
seen is stock ships. I find the PDS/fighters enough to deal with most of
the plasma bolt problem.
In message <3BE7624F.68D3F52A@spikyfishthing.com>
> Jaime Tiampo <fugu@spikyfishthing.com> wrote:
> Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
[snip]
> Jaime
Actually, I think the change was rather more than just that:
FB1: The available thrust for main drive and manouvres were treated
seperately, so, for example, a MD4 ship could accellerate by 4,
_as_well_as_ performing a facing change to any heading _and_ applying a
1 point thruster push.
FB2: All accelleration and manouvres are 'paid for' by the ships thrust
rating, thus an MD4 ship could turn to a new facing, apply a 2-point
main drive burn, and then change facing again.
Quite a big change I think!