Re the discussion by Phillip Pournelle and Mikko Kurki-Suoni on suicical
tactics in non campaign games of Full Thrust:
I've always found it interesting when someone who's losing the game decides to
ram you with a ship that's almost dead. I could understand such a tactic if it
was aimed at delaying my ships until the rest of the ships got off the board,
but aside from that I've always thought of it as entirely unrealistic (unless
you're playing an unusual race) and 'bad form'.
Looking at it from the background of the FT universe, the only countries
likely to ram were those noted for using 'kamikaze' tactics - which I
guess brings it down to some Islamic Fundametalist nations and the Japanese
(this
is a comment only on historical tactical doctrine - not a shot at any of
these nations). Even then probably the best way of mimicking this sort of
tactic is to use torpedo fighters and say they are suicide bombers and just
replace them each game at no cost. I can't really see a ship doing it without
a very good reason.
Interestingly enough, in a recent post someone mentioned heroic ships (Mark
Seifert in the Starblazers, I think). I find that fascinating, because one of
the options mentioned is ramming. I suppose it is always possible to designate
one ship as heroic on each side which would mean that it could ram if it was
on it's last legs. If that was the case though, I'd argue it would probably be
a small ship (escort probably), as it would be less likely to occur with a
large ship unless there were extraordinary circumstances. Another interesting
thing if you are using optional morale rating would be the fact that a ship
could be heroic independent of morale rating. After all, just because you're
green doesn't mean you can't be gung
ho...
Regards,
> Re the discussion by Phillip Pournelle and Mikko Kurki-Suoni on
I don't see where there's a big deal with this Ramming stuff. I feel that the
rules given in FT cover the situation quite well. You can announce an attempt
at a ram, but it's *no* guarantee you'll *do* it! You still need to roll a '6'
just to make the attempt.
And that's just the *attempt*. You have to *still* roll to see if the target
successfully evaded the ram or not.
You might give a 'heroic' ship a bonus (say, +1?) to the ram attempt. It
says in the rules that some races (eg, Narns vs Centauri ;-) and/or
certain specific scenarios MAY allow for an increased *chance* (emphasis
mine)- there's nothing in it about automatic ramming. You need to
succeed with two die rolls. And in the past year, I've only seen *2*
successful
ram attempts. And those were by lancer-sized Narns against a stationary
Centauri base! (I think 3 tried, 1 missed the attempt roll) Every other ram
attempt I've seen come down the line has missed. And I haven't seen all that
many to begin with.
And finally...as with any other rule, the ramming rule can be just simply
ignored altogether. Don't like it? Don't use it! :-)
Mk
> On Mon, 7 Apr 1997, A stalwart bastion of bachelorism wrote:
> I don't see where there's a big deal with this Ramming stuff.
Really, there isn't. I think we were mostly interested in prolonging combat
longer than a real captain would. E.g. your battleship is reduced
to 5 hits. Do you disengage or stick around trying to inflict maximum damage
in final blaze of glory?
The fleet morale rules cure most of this but IMHO it still remains an
interesting dilemma.
Why do real people not always finish off cripples? Either they can't catch it,
or they don't want risk further damage to themselves. The first is easy, but
in FT the second option is a bit problematic: Anyone trying
to get away will expose their unarmed rear. Shooting someone up the
tailpipe is a no-risk proposition in FT.
What does this lead to? Big ships will find it hard to disengage.
Consequently, they probably won't even try. From the dynamic fleet composition
viewpoint, slow capitals become a losing proposition since they can't really
get away from a losing fight.
This may or may not be the effect you want in your games.
> You might give a 'heroic' ship a bonus (say, +1?) to the ram attempt.
It
> says in the rules that some races (eg, Narns vs Centauri ;-) and/or
Two tried and two were successful. Remember this one, Robin? Adam Delafield
was in command of the Centauri base station, Brushari.
Ship Name: ZAHNAY
Ship Class: Narn Lancer - Destroyed
Commanded by: davisje@smsun100.crd.ge.com
Target #: 8
Location: 64.5,54.75
Velocity: 27
Heading: 1
Movement Plot: 0+4
Mass: 6 Thrust Rating: 8 Jump Engines: No
Damage Points: (3) -135
Internal Configuration/Status:
Sub-Munitions Pack (F) -
Sub-Munitions Pack (F) -
Sub-Munitions Pack (F) -
PDAF
Fire Control
Thrust Engine Damage Control
Damage Points Sustained: 138 pts from Brushari on Turn 6 due to ram
Ship Name: CHOTHU
Ship Class: Narn Lancer - Destroyed
Commanded by: rkp@mail.nerc-oxford.ac.uk
Target #: 10
Location: 64.25,55.25
Velocity: 28
Heading: 1
Movement Plot: 0+5
Mass: 6 Thrust Rating: 8 Jump Engines: No
Damage Points: (3) -66
Internal Configuration/Status:
Sub-Munitions Pack (F) -
Sub-Munitions Pack (F) -
Sub-Munitions Pack (F) -
PDAF
Fire Control
Thrust Engine Damage Control
Damage Points Sustained: 69 pts from Brushari on Turn 6 due to ram
> I don't see where there's a big deal with this Ramming stuff.
Gotcha
> Why do real people not always finish off cripples? Either they can't
Good arguement for rear-firing weapons. ;-)
Mk
> You might give a 'heroic' ship a bonus (say, +1?) to the ram attempt.
It
> says in the rules that some races (eg, Narns vs Centauri ;-) and/or
snip
> Damage Points Sustained:
I certainly do! I recall Adam sending signals along the lines of "Nyah! You
won't scratch my paint with those lancers!" I also remember the shock and
confusion on our own side when our lancers began their accelleration spiral,
and your persuading Indy that as Narns, we were more likely to ram than
captains belonging to "lesser species" with silly haircuts. An excellent game.
That reminds me, I keep forgetting to comment on Allan's Age of Iridium
write-up- also most enjoyable.
Cheers,
I think the ramming rules are great.
It's the FTL rules that are scary. Ship only has one point of damage left? Why
not fly into the enemy fleet and FTL away, killing them all?
I know this forces you to spread out your fleet but with a six inch explosion
radius that's quite difficult. Actually after the recent missile discussion,
I'd be interested to hear whether anyone had created a fleet of minimum mass
FTL boats that try suicide FTL attacks? I bet it would work, more's the pity.
> You might give a 'heroic' ship a bonus (say, +1?) to the ram attempt.
It
> says in the rules that some races (eg, Narns vs Centauri ;-) and/or
Thanks for the verification/clarification, Jon. ;-)
Mk
> On Mon, 7 Apr 1997, Joachim Heck - SunSoft wrote:
> I know this forces you to spread out your fleet but with a six inch
Offhand, I'd say missiles are both cheaper and more effective, unless you can
catch multiple foes in one blast.
A minimum ship would be about Mass 2, FTL, Thrust 8, nothing for 10 pts. It
causes average damage of 2.08 pts. It's less maneuverable than a missile, and
it can be shot down before it's a threat.
It could work, if you allow unlimited entry speeds.
In a campaign, it's a dumb idea...
Alternative ramming rules
If a ship commander wishes to ram an enemy vessel he must first evacuate his
crew. To do this he must spend one turn during which he can make no manouvres
and cannot fire any weaponry ( shields and reflex fields may be left engaged)
Thereafter he may apply thrust only to change velocity *or* heading and not
both and may not fire any weaponry. If he does this he may automatically
attempt to ram.
FTL exit within 6 of other ships should be resolved as ramming (on a failed
attempt roll then roll a d6 and on a 6 the crew will offer to surrender the
vessel instead.
> At 09:04 PM 4/7/97 +0100, Craig Mitchell wrote:
> If a ship commander wishes to ram an enemy vessel he must first
Tell this to the ill fated crew of PT109...
> Why do real people not always finish off cripples? Either they can't
> catch it, or they don't want risk further damage to themselves. The
Good arguement for rear-firing weapons. ;-)
Or more effective mines
Everybody into the Airlock!!! Ok, Lt. Smith, Space them! :-)
Brian Bell pdga6560@csi.com
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pdga6560/fthome.html
Includes the Full Thrust Ship Registry Is your ship design here?