Hello folks,
This is my first post here and I hope that my relative novice status doesn't
offend in a asking a fairly straightforward question. I've found the posts
here remarkably useful and germain--bravo! I scanned the archive
looking for a answer to the following query and was unable to find one.
I only recently picked up fleet book 1 and overall have found the rules quite
flexible and well written. My one concern is with the design rules with regard
to B1's. It seems to me that a ship designed with a massive
compliment of B1's could simply "put the pedal to the metal" and scoot to
range 12 by turn 3 of 4 and smoke the other fleet with a huge quantity of
beam fire. They are very cheap and small-- a massive amount of fire
power could be brought to bear such a design philosophy. Enough room left over
for rather big engines to get into business range. Maybe I'm off-base
with this but I would appreciate any feedback on this. I'm really hoping that
some goofball has actually tried this and been handed their head.
Kindest Personal Regards,
First off, welcome to the list Galen!
> I only recently picked up fleet book 1 and overall have found the rules
I think that you'll find that it's much harder than you'd think to stay
within that 0-12 MU envelope for long enough for your "pin cushion" to
do enough damage. You'll also be taking damage (and possibly thresholds) until
you get there.
If you had an REALLY maneuverable ship, then you'd be right. However, since
your drive's limitations will rear their ugly head, you'll find that a "range
mix" will serve you in good stead.
Experiment with two cruisers (one FB and one of your design) using cinematic
movement and I think you'll see what I mean.
> --- Galen Thies <fldmrshl@hotmail.com> wrote:
> with regard to B1's. It seems to me that a ship
..
> Kindest Personal Regards,
Galen, A good comment, and the only problem with the concept is the question:
Can you really expect to maneuver within 12 MU (inches) for a a period of time
necessary to disable your enemy? Most games are a series of passes and the
majority of the time ships are outside 12 MU.
Bye fro now,
> Galen Thies wrote:
Welcome, Galen,
> I only recently picked up fleet book 1 and overall have found the
If you consider said 'goofball' to be John Leary, then yes. ;-)
(although I didn't exactly 'hand him his head'). John and I ran against each
other in a PBeM game to illustrate a portion of this argument, er, I mean,
discussion. We each used a 220 Mass vessel. I used a modified 'Komarov'
(replace fighter
bay with another Class-4 battery - forward facing, of course :), and he
had
the mid-range porcupine: 220 Mass SDN bristling with Class-2s.
In the end I took him. This was partly because as soon as he started taking
threshold checks (I was sniping at him from long range as he closed, so got in
enough damage to push him over early) he started losing systems very
fast (when you have 20-odd weapons on board vs someone with far fewer,
YOU are going to lose more weapons faster than your opponent in the same
time frame!). And as a result of this (call it a 'feature' ;-), he was
unable to REPAIR his damaged weapons before I was able to repair mine
(I lost a Class-4 or two during the exchange, but was able to get them
back up and firing long before he got an equivalent number of Class-2s
back in service).
Now, yes, overall the Class-2 batts are more cost effective and
efficient than most anything else, but they aren't the end-all
be-all ship weapon. Get in a few games and you'll realize this. ;-)
Mk
The real trick is controlling the range if a more long range ship can keep the
range open then beam 1ers is only a target. A large amout depends on speed,
movement system, and the players. My group plays on an open map using
cinamatic movment. We use sensors to detect such cheese balls and then it is
all maneuver and tactics. One other little trick is using fighters and holding
them for his close beam run then if he uses beams on the fighters it is that
much less on your ship lives to contiue to snipe as he turns around.
[quoted original message omitted]
> --- Indy <kochte@stsci.edu> wrote:
...
> I'm really hoping that
...
> Mk
Goofball online!
The really critical problem for this combat was the loss of 2 of the 3 Fire
Controls as I reached the most effective range. (I.E. 12 MU) The ship was a
fast (thrust 6) and used Pulse Torps, beam 2s and 1s, and 2 screens. My ISP
decided to go belly up at a critical time and the game was finished by another
person, who had the unpleasent task of cleaning up the mess that I had left
behind.
The game really proved two things: 1) That the points system works. 2) He who
has the hot dice wins.
It is no dishonor to be defeated by one of the list 'Old Pros', like Mk.
In the works of Rocky: 'I coulda been a contenda.'
:-)
Bye for now,
I'll have the address for you tomorrow; I've just realised I haven't finished
fixing links after my webpage move.
Neath Southern Skies -http://home.pacific.net.au/~southernskies/
[Pirates] Dame Captain Washalot
[NPJB] Absorbent Sponge Sheesh'Ka'Baab
[MKW2] Admiral Peter Rollins - Task Force Zulu-Beta
> -----Original Message-----
> John Leary wrote:
These were also factors in the ultimate outcome of the game. Although I don't
recall the loss of 2 firecons being critical, since there was only one target
(me!:^).
> The game really proved two things:
#2. See also Aaron Teske.
> It is no dishonor to be defeated by one of the
If you want, next time I'll take a p-torp armed ship. ;-)
Mk
> --- Indy <kochte@stsci.edu> wrote:
...
> These were also factors in the ultimate outcome of
XXX
VERY critical indeed! At the closest range
I could only fire Pulse torps OR beams. This
was a reduction of 50% to my firepower. JTL
XXX
...
> If you want, next time I'll take a p-torp armed
XXX
;-)
Bye for now,
> John Leary wrote:
Were we using that rule still?? I don't remember; I thought
we were using the 'p-torps don't need a dedicated firecon' ruling.
> XXX
What, you think I'm going to miss with each and EVERY one of the
p-torps?? I'll hit! I'll just hit you with one or two for one or
two points damage...
Mk
Got it:
http://home1.pacific.net.au/~southernskies/webgames/guns1/
Unfortunately, I haven't fixed the links, so you need to manually switch
between pages in the directory. The files are:
index.htm info.htm turn0.htm turn1.htm
... =>
turn13.htm
using the above base address.
Neath Southern Skies -http://home.pacific.net.au/~southernskies/
[Pirates] Dame Captain Washalot
[NPJB] Absorbent Sponge Sheesh'Ka'Baab
[MKW2] Admiral Peter Rollins - Task Force Zulu-Beta
> -----Original Message-----
> Galen Thies wrote:
> I only recently picked up fleet book 1 and overall have found the
<chuckle> This sounds almost exactly like Brendan Pratt describing why
he thinks the FB2 Phalons are too powerful :-7
What usually happens in this situation when I play, is that the enemy fleet
spends turns 2 and 3 (well, on my (large) table it is more like
turns 3 and 4) pouring long-range fire into the close-range sluggers.
Unless *both* fleets want to close to point-blank range (on turn 4-5)
and one side doesn't have a very large advantage in maneuverability (able to
use at least 2 more thrust points for turning), the fleets usually don't get
this close (ie., the fleet which wants to keep the
range open usually succeeds unless massively out-engined).
The enemy's early long-range salvoes aren't as powerful individually as
the sluggers' point-blank ones, but they have a good chance of knocking
some of the sluggers' weapons out (by threshold checks or outright ship
kills) before the sluggers can reply in kind - which means that the
sluggers usually don't outgun the enemy once they finally do get to shoot back
(or if they do have more dice left, their hulls are in much worse conditions
so they die faster than the enemy anyway).
> They are very cheap and small-- a massive amount of fire power
IMO you're off-base with this <g> Several others have voiced the same
worries, but, well... I've been collecting FB ship designs ever since
FB1 was published (last count was 1063 legal non-SV ships from around
60 players, but I have a bunch of designs I haven't had time to check
if they're legal yet); only about 40 of those are armed with B1s only -
and the biggest of those ships is TMF22 (IIRC, could be 24 as well. I
don't have the archive handy right now :-( ), so they use B1s simply
because they can't easily fit any bigger weapons. Not even the worst
local min-maxers use B1s as their majority weapon :-/
Regards,
> Brendan Robertson wrote:
> Got it:
Hm... the /turn9.htm file seems to be the intro blurb to the battle,
not the turn report? (Not that it matters *that* much - it's just
annoying that I couldn't add the complete battle to my collection of
"record all shots fired" battles :-/ )
Fascinating to see how the Trial by Combat managed to lose in spite of
spending most of the time in the Sovremenny's rear 180 (the Sov had the vast
majority of its weapons covering the forward 180 arc whereas the TbC had quite
a lot firing rearwards as well) <g>
The damage inflicted seems to have been below average, but by about as much on
both sides.
I found the speeds *extremely* slow - not very surprising of course,
since the TbC wanted to stay close to the Sov, and the Sov didn't want to move
fast since moving fast would've guaranteed the TbC a permanent
position in the Sov's (A) arc :-/
Regards,
> Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
Yeah, MD 2 really is a handicap. :-/ But IIRC part of the challenge
involved using an FB1 ship, or that is, an FB1 ship with C4s (B4s is
the new terminology, eh? ;-). I don't remember the full details on
how it all came about.
Mk
I'm going to reconstruct the turn 9 report. With only 2 ships & having a solid
damage history for both, it should only take 15 mins once I get around to it.
Neath Southern Skies -http://home.pacific.net.au/~southernskies/
[Pirates] Dame Captain Washalot
[NPJB] Absorbent Sponge Sheesh'Ka'Baab
[MKW2] Admiral Peter Rollins - Task Force Zulu-Beta
> -----Original Message-----
It was part of the discussion of shortrange vs longrange firepower and the
best use of weapon mass.
JL was advocating lots of C1 & C2 beams due their damage/mass efficiency
&
the rest of us were advocating a balance of ranged weapons was of more use,
allowing you to reach out and touch someone ;-)
In the end you challenged each other and I volunteered to run a fast game.
Extremely fast for a webgame too, as we ran 4 turns on the first day alone.
Neath Southern Skies -http://home.pacific.net.au/~southernskies/
[Pirates] Dame Captain Washalot
[NPJB] Absorbent Sponge Sheesh'Ka'Baab
[MKW2] Admiral Peter Rollins - Task Force Zulu-Beta
> -----Original Message-----
> Robertson, Brendan wrote:
> I'm going to reconstruct the turn 9 report. With only 2 ships &
Thanks :-)
> Indy wrote:
> Yeah, MD 2 really is a handicap. :-/ But IIRC part of the challenge
It is somewhat more convenient than talking about "Class-Xs" and hope
that everyone knows that you're talking about class-X *beams* rather
than class-X K-guns or PBLs <shrug>
Later,
Following up my own post here...
> I wrote:
> I've been collecting FB ship designs ever since
I don't have the archive handy right now :-( ), so they use B1s >simply
because they can't easily fit any bigger weapons.
I didn't remember correctly; the B1s are even less popular than I
remembered :-/
The "about 40" small ships I remembered were in fact only 21 (TMF 22 and
smaller). (What I remembered were the 45 ships of TMF 24 or less which use
*50% or more* of their weapon Mass used for B1s. Examples of such ships are
the FB1 Minerva, Ibiza and Novgorod frigates.)
There are also a bunch of larger ships where B1s make up all of their
anti-ship weaponry: carriers, freighters, area-defence ships and fast
scouts (with Enhanced or Superior sensors and a single B1 for
self-defence). In these cases the anti-ship weaponry is only a small
fraction of their actual *payload*, though - none of these ships is
able to shoot up enemy ships very much, and most of them want to stay
as far away from the enemy as possible :-/
Later,