I'll throw in my.02 in the matter. I'm a big fan of the SML system. I
think that you can really kick butt with them. However the majority of my
games we don't see speeds above 20 really, unless you're running away. This is
precisely why SML's kick butt so well. Part of the reason was that we played
fix map ( we really didn't have much area to play on...)
as such you had to keep your fleet in the boundries. With an SML fleet you
really need to max out the number of missles you can launch. I feel
that 2 salvo's is enough... they usually never get out more then that. In the
archives I posted my JFK class free cal tex missle cruiser.... "Kicks ass
man...". Anyway, I found that making missle boats worked pretty well.... that
is assuming that your opponents fly slow and don't do the adfc tricks.
If you keep the speeds low... my opponents solution was to still stick with
the big SDN's ( actually I don't think he every used anything
smaller then a light cruiser... ). Tack on armor, 6+pds/ship, some
class-1's, and 1+ adfc per ship. Keep the formation tight so that you
can overlap adfc coverage on your leading ships. Lead with one or two ships
and make sure that your formation is tight enough that all of the other
pds fire can cover those two ships. Put on class-3 beams for your
ranged fire... And like me... you'll discover that if your opponent sucks it
up... he'll really nuter your salvos crunch potential... usually what I
started to find was that my weak hulled missle boats would empty their racks
and at best I'd have 1 possibly 2 destroyed enemy ships... I would
have little to no fire power against a lot o'beam armed ships chugging in on
me... usually it'd be messey or I'd flee. The weak hulled ships tend
to take thresholds easily and go boom or are forced to stick around to go
boom. I didn't play around much with adding fighters to the mix. However I'd
suspect that if he sucked up the fighter attacks for your 1st 2 rounds (or
possibly 3 rounds) of sml fire... he could then clean them
up really fast. Then what... you've got maybe a handful of wimpy beams against
a lot of fire power...
If your opponent goes the speed route. and sticks to 24+ speeds (I play
cinematic... I assume vector would be similar... maybe a lower speed the
effects start to enter into play?), you'll find that you start missing a
lot.. his ships just arn't there...... and you're not in range or weapons arc
a lot to do the shooting at him.... kinda sucks sitting there at range 60"
trying to figure out when his ships are going to buzz by close
enough to the 24-30" point to make smling effective.... usually they
buzz around and you might tag one or 2 of them.... Usually you do diddly and
he mopps you up. ( last 2 games of SML fleet against buzzers in my new
Condo... aka no space limits anymore... showed this to me...)
Torps guys:: Okay I visited this a lot and still go back and forth with this
issue a lot. Torps are really cool... but the range sucks... you need to be a
good die roller if you're engaging your enemy at range > 18". I found that I
couldn't hit very well beyond that range ( okay so I'm a mediocer
die roller). Inside 18" you're nasty. If your opponent is a number
cruncher, he'll be loaded with class-2 beams... and he'll mostly be
history if you're doing screens. However, if your opponent builds ships
similar to yours, but gives them a thrust advantage and class-3/4
beams... well it starts to get a little interesting. I had one game
where my thrust-2 BB's with pulse torps were getting scratched to death
by the class-3/4 beam dd/cruiser fleet of my opponent... he only had
thrust - 4, but most of the passes I was around 20" or so... I never got
a shot off in my sweet spot (< 18"). Any opponent that got within 18" or so
usually got anhilated by the massive torp fire. Mixed fleets with
better thrust then I and class-3 beams/ftr's tended to do fairly well
against the torp fleets. I ended up designing torps ships with
thrust-4,avg hull, screen-1, high levels of armor, 4+pds/each, 2
class-2's, (eventially 1 adfc... when my opponents started smling...)
and
as many 3 arc torps as I could. I stuck with mass 100+. They were
pretty bad ass... however you just don't have the range... I can't count
the number of times I'd get whittled down by long range beam fire that I
really couldn't awnser too very effectively. I tried go to screen-2....
but being that defensive you don't have enough massed torp firepower....
you open yourself up to him doing the close and use his more massive firepower
against you. Either way, I ended up mixing and matching.
Class-3 beams with Torps are even switches. I went to 2-3 torps / large
ship, 2-3 class-3 beams, and then put in a couple o'class-2 beams if
possible and voila... serious balanced fleets... not quite as overwhelming as
before but pretty nasty. ( I like big ships... they don't take those annoying
thresholds as offen as the small crunchies...
)
Anyway, try opposing him with a thrust advantage and class-3/4 beams...
ditch the class-2 beams... they get you to close to within his crunch
zone. Depending upon his pdaf coverage... try fighters... if he's smart
and does the adfc and tight formations... the fighters won't really do much
for the mass... just snip and buzz at speed.
Chuck
I agree that SMLs work very well, in the first strike of the UBW/NAC
battle my 8 SML salvos got 2 ships, with beam power 1 Ship has been heavy
damaged, 4 have been destroyed, 2 have surendered, 1 has light damaged, 1 has
no life support, and the UBW forces have no taken no damage, not even one
point.
The
bad news is that while the fleet battle has been going on 3 assault transports
have off loaded all of the cargo.
-Stephen
How to kill a (fill in the blank) fleet:
Whatever you do, do a lot of it. Don't take a couple of beams and a couple of
SMR's and a few torps and a needle and so forth. Salvo missiles, for example,
work best when you can say "Light cruiser #1 launches missiles. End points are
here, here, here, here, and here. Next cruiser..." Fighters are the same way,
although missiles and fighters can complement each other. The key (IMHO) is to
bear in mind that your weapons are most effective at different ranges, and if
you have a mix of weapons, that implies that you
are doomed to having some of your weapons at inefficient ranges. For
example, torpedoes are best at close range, where you can hit (unless you're
Indy, in which case, why did you take torps anyway?). The benefit of a class 3
beam is that you can chip away at your opponent from long range.
If
you put them both on one ship, you have to decide if you're gong to waste
your beams' range advantage, or if you're going to roll low-odds torp
shots. Or go for the middle and enjoy the worst of both worlds.
Remember, battleships evolved from "lots of guns, all sizes" to "all big
guns."
> At 01:20 AM 2/7/99 -0500, you wrote:
Fighters
> are the same way, although missiles and fighters can complement each
Exactly which is why I builf missle boats that did one thing and had one
armament OK 2 if I increased them to 30 tons and added a fighter bay:)
But I think they are defeatable with area point defense and a well rounded
fleet
Laserlight:
***
Remember, battleships evolved from "lots of guns, all sizes" to "all big
guns."
***
And of course, this was the ideal that never really happened. A reduction of
the variety of guns was necessary for efficient storage and transport of
shells, but even the paradigm, the Dreadnought, had some mix including small
QF's that could transverse fast enough to tag torpedo boats that would leak
through the TBD's.
Later, the battlewagons would fairly bristle with anti-aircraft weopens,
including those capable of double-duty, not unlike FT's C/1 batteries.
In FT, the granularity of the ship system design may preclude such quibbles.
I'm not certain, though.
To cgray:
Two points: 1) We'd STILL like to see your designs and those of your
opponents, along with OoB, so we can better judge your comments.
2) If your reply is less than half the size of your quote, you should
definitely consider snipping, paraphrasing, and condensing. I've been called
on this one, and have been working hard to keep missives small. Many of us
have hard drives
way-too-small not to.
The_Beast
> The key (IMHO) is to bear in mind that your weapons are most effective
I....like them. They make pretty lights in the sky.
See the pretty lights? Pretty. Pretty.
8-}
I especially like the whooooshing sound they make as they go past
my targets (and y'all thought there weren't no sound in space - hah!)
Mk
> Two points:
OK how would you like them (I didnt get subscribed to the list until yesterday
so I must have missed that request) I use the FTFV v0.4 spreadsheet to do them
well heres a rundown I hope this makes sense if not I cans end the spread
sheet
Mass 20 hull integrity 2 Thrust Factor 1 FTL (yes) 2 points of armor 1 Class 1
beam 1 SML 2 SMR(ER) 1 Fire Control
and thats it for the 20 tonner
Mass 30 hull integrity 2 Thrust Factor 1 FTL (yes) 1 SML 2 SMR(ER) 1 Fire
Control 1 fighter bay with 6 fighters
thats the 30 tonner
> 2) If your reply is less than half the size of your quote, you should
MY apologies I will try to do much better
On Sun, 7 Feb 1999, Mountain climbing isn't about being on the summit,
> but about being in the mountains wrote:
> > For
having made my "GZGPedia NOW!" link button, which mountain-boy here so
thoroughly trashed (you're a marked man, kochte!) i was considering making
an accompanying "See Mk miss with p-torps NOW!" button, but i couldn't
get
the picture of the p-torp quite right. expect it real soon now.
Tom
Mountain climbing isn't about being on the summit, but about being in
> the mountains wrote:
...Snip...JTL
> I....like them. They make pretty lights in the sky.
And it would seem the true cause of the problem has shown its ugly head. The
torps are designed to make contact with the
target, go boom and make pretty lights. You need to move your
remote mikes closer the the launching ship so you get the
'whooooshing' followed by the boom and the pretty lights. :-)
Bye for now,
> Mass 20
No maneuverability, no fighter defense, no power once it has shot its load.
Also your notation is a bit off. SMRs are single shot Salvo Missle systems and
have a launcher built in. You probably mean a magazine of 2 ER SM reloads.
> Mass 30
There is an error in this one, all the systems come up to Mass 31 (I tried it
on V.4 of the FTFB spread sheet plus V.3 and V.2 and all came up with Mass
31).
Plus make sure you add the cost of fighters to the ships, in your 1500 pt
Battle #3, 14 Mass 31 ships (114 points each) is 1596 points then add another
252 for the 14 fighter groups (18 each), for a total of 1848 points. No wonder
this battle was easy.
> From the battle reports, these were the only custom ships, all others
Your ships don't take into consideration any campaign problems like resupply
and more than 1 wave of attackers. Once the SMs are launched, these ships can
not maneuver and can not defend themselves. All the opponent has to do is
survive the first couple of turns and these ships are toast.
But how to survive those turns with all the SM fire?. If our opponents still
use FB ships, they should speed up and use more escorting ships. The capitals
are needed for long range firepower and staying power, but smaller ships would
soak up some of the salvos or dive right into the your
formation. A few good escort cruisers like the Beijing/B escort variant
(lots of PDFs and a ADFC) would increase the survivability of the capitals
too. The extremely low thrust of these ships also would allow other fleets to
keep out of range until a better opportunity presented itself and then attack.
> >There is an error in this one, all the systems come up to Mass
Ooops, I see that I kept the single Class 1 battery from the 20 tonner so that
was the extra point of mass. Now this is even more of a single pass ship that
has nothing left after the SMs are launched. Survive that and they can't fight
back.
> On Mon, 8 Feb 1999, Jared E Noble wrote:
[snip]
> No, it really is Mass 30 (also with FTFB SDS v04)
The Fleet Book construction rules (pag 10) state that you round 0.5+ UP
and
0.4999- DOWN, even for thrust. The exception for Thrust ratings is to
give a minimum value of 1.
So, using your example, this is what I come up with:
Mass 30 = 30 pts hull integrity 2 (weak) = 30 * 20% = 6 MASS, 12 pts Thrust
Factor 1 = 30 * 5% = 1.5 MASS (round UP) = 2 MASS, 4 pts FTL (yes) = 30 * 10%
= 3 MASS, 6 pts 1 SML = 3 MASS, 9 pts 2 ER Salvo Magazine = 6 MASS, 18 pts 1
Fire Control = 1 MASS, 4 pts 1 fighter bay (empty) = 9 MASS, 27 pts
Adding together, we get
MASS Pts Description
- 30 Basic Hull Cost
6 12 WEAK Hull
2 4 Thrust 1
3 6 FTL
3 9 SML
6 18 2 ER (3 Std) Salvo Magazine
1 4 Fire Control
9 27 Fighter Bay (empty)
-- ---
30 110
So, your first figure is correct. I don't know where you were going with the
5% *rounded down* example... <g>
> Mass 30
> There is an error in this one, all the systems come up to Mass 31 (I
No, it really is Mass 30 (also with FTFB SDS v04) Mass 30 (30) 6 (12) hull
integrity 2 2 ( 4) Thrust Factor 1 3 ( 6) FTL (yes) 3 ( 9) 1 SML 6 (18) 2
SMR(ER) 1 ( 4) 1 Fire Control 9 (27) 1 fighter bay with 6 fighters
-------------------------------
Mass 30 Cost 110 + fighters
Or if you want to be a cheese-meister
Mass 29 (29) 6 (12) hull integrity 2 1 ( 2) *Thrust Factor 1
(all the rest the same - you shave 1 Mass and 3 pts off.)
*Techincally the 5% (round down) drive requirement means a mass 1 drive fits
the bill. I normally don't try to do this, but the 'Solve for Mass' page is
often
(but not always) more efficient than doing things by hand - Try it and
see!
> Plus make sure you add the cost of fighters to the ships, in your 1500
This is a problem. The first time through building my spreadsheet, I got bit
by this. I was considering standard fighters as free, with the cost
differential for advanced fighter types added to this base. It seems may
people are caught by this upon first transition to the FB.
> On Mon, 8 Feb 1999, -MWS- wrote:
[snip]
> So, your first figure is correct. I don't know where you were going
Please never mind. It's Monday, and the cerebral [START] button is still stuck
in the OFF position....
[sigh]
-MWS- <Hauptman@concentric.net> on 02/08/99 11:27:09 AM
Please respond to gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
cc: (bcc: Jared E Noble/AAI/ARCO)
Subject: RE: Small ships and SMLS & Killing Torp armed fleets.....
> Or if you want to be a cheese-meister
<snip your correct example of Mass 30 design same as mine>
> So, your first figure is correct. I don't know where you were going
What I mean is just this - Thrust 1 takes 5% of the Ship's mass
so Mass 29 *.05 = 1.45 which rounds down to 1, so you can build the same ship
at Mass 29.
> There is an error in this one, all the systems come up to Mass 31 (I
I tired again Mass 30 again so....Im not sure
> This is a problem. The first time through building my spreadsheet, I
AHA I see now the problem:)
OK but I have to agree with the first comments about more escorts because I
think it would be true (and in fact tried to convey that to my opponents but
the like BIG ships)
as you saw from the third battle even the other two actually they were loaded
with BIG ships and IMO not enough escorts I think that if they would have had
a couple of escort cruisers and some small fast escorts they would have ate me
for lunch but I wanteed some more opinions on it:)
Now this is even more of a single pass
> ship that has nothing left after the SMs are launched. Survive that
I agree here too:) except that you can reload the fighters for more strikes
> cgray wrote:
> > Now this is even more of a single pass
Provided 1) that the fighters survive to do a second strike - again good
PDS suites and ADFC tends to put some doubt on this point, not to mention
a squadron or two of enemy interceptor fighters - and 2) that you adopt
some house rules for re-loading fighters (...there are at least three
different ones in the FT FAQ, IIRC) :-/
Later,
> I....like them. They make pretty lights in the sky.
Tom...I'm still waiting... ;-)
Mk
> On Thu, 11 Feb 1999, that travesty of a man, kochte, wrote:
> >> I....like them. They make pretty lights in the sky.
patience! bloody hell, it's like i didn't have a degree to do or something.
anyway:
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~univ0938/gzg/misc.html
all i need now is something to link it to - is there an AAR where indy's
artistic torpedo skills are displayed?
oh, and you also get a bonus button in this package. i thought it was about
time we had this particular one in the flesh, so to speak...
Tom
> Tom...I'm still waiting... ;-)
Oh, come now, my man! Priorities! :-)
> anyway:
Woo!!!
> all i need now is something to link it to - is there an AAR where
Should be somewhere. I don't have any webbed in; all my webspace is being
taken up by other FT stuff and Adventure Stories (tm).
> oh, and you also get a bonus button in this package. i thought it was
Yep, like the bonus button. :-)
Mk