The Compleat Battleship

[robject]

We should compare our systems, Mike. I bet they are pretty close.

Weren't you involved in that thread too?

 

[HG_B]

In a way it is. Like I said, the rules are an abstraction; change the rules, change the ships, change the OTU. It is what it is.

Umm, no. Ship design system isn't tied to space being 2D. Try again. Also, the OTU isn't designed around ships being in 2D space. Have ZERO idea how you came to these conclusions.

 

[HG_B]

So it is flatland - if you want game that realistically models vector movement in 3d and includes weapon ranges etc. HG isn't it.

A single fighter being able to immobilize an entire fleat has ZIP to do with vector movement. :rofl:

 

[mike wightman]

Umm, no. Ship design system isn't tied to space being 2D. Try again. Also, the OTU isn't designed around ships being in 2D space. Have ZERO idea how you came to these conclusions.

Jump maps are 2d.

HG is an abstraction of space combat - the rules are the rules regardless of real world physics.

 

[mike wightman]

A single fighter being able to immobilize an entire fleat has ZIP to do with vector movement. :rofl:

The rules don't say the entire fleet is imobilized, just that they can't fire on the reserve.

Not very realistic but them's the rules

HG could do with the addition of better movement rules and weapon ranges but that produces a very different game.

Is the added complexity worth it? (IMHO yes )

 

[mike wightman]

We should compare our systems, Mike. I bet they are pretty close.

Probably nearly the same since we bounced ideas off each other

 

[HG_B]

The rules don't say the entire fleet is imobilized, just that they can't fire on the reserve.

Not very realistic but them's the rules

End result is similar. I had forgotten out these rules as I dumped them as soon as I read them when HG came out.

 

[aramis]

The rules don't say the entire fleet is imobilized, just that they can't fire on the reserve.

Not very realistic but them's the rules

HG could do with the addition of better movement rules and weapon ranges but that produces a very different game.

Is the added complexity worth it? (IMHO yes )

Not really worth it, unless using big ships; Mayday has rules for use with HG in later printings.
0-5 hex=short range, 6-15 long range, 16+ out of range 1G=1 hex per turn accell.

 

[McPerth]

A single fighter being able to immobilize an entire fleat has ZIP to do with vector movement. :rofl:

You can just allow a breackthrough if the holding line is too weak (more or less like the overrun rules many wargames have).

Let's add to rules, as an example:

'if you have a 3 to 1 ratio in battle line, extra ships may breackthrough and fire the reserve. The ships making the breackthrough must be the ones with more agility of the fleet'

or something like this.

Also, ratio can be of ships, tonnage, batteries, points given by ship class (1 BB=5, one CA/BR=3, 1 CL=2, 1 escort=1, 10 fighters=1, etc...), or anyway you like.

This way a single fighter won't stop a 20 CAs fleet from attacking the reserve, nor will a single escort.

Also, the most likely ships to be able to breack to the reserve are fighters, something (IMO) not far from what could be in reality. Also guives an advantage to BBs over BRs that can help explaining its continued existence

As example of this rule, imagine a transport comboy escorted by 2 DD atacked by 2 Azhanti class CA. Of course the DDs try to hold the enemy while the transports are held in reserve. As the 2 CAs are worth 6 points and the 2 DDs are worth 2 (3 to 1), the CAs can hold them while the fighters (80 per CA, for a total of 160 IIRC) charge to wreak havock among the transports...

PS all numbers (ratios, class points, etc) are just taken from my hat without real pondering, just as examples. If somwhat like this rule is taken seriously, they should be tested and agreed.

 

[mike wightman]

How about it requires 10 of the next lowest size code ships active to prevent a breakthrough, 100 if 2 size codes different, 1000 if 3.

 

[Matt123]

I think that was the point. HG isn't realistic because it ignores the realities of movement in space.

Unless both sides cooperates by coming to a dead stop relative to each other, two fleets moving towards one another will interpenetrate and then start to separate. Anything in the reserve at first approach will eventually come into range of the enemy front line.

Most fleet actions (not all, but I would say most) do involve the two fleets contesting a fixed point in space, be it the main world or the GG. The defending fleet is fixed (unless it sallies forth, closes from long to short?) and the attacking fleet is closing cautiously to contest the objective.

Flying past the objective at high speed may have tactical benefits, but the defense gets to fire at you, just as much as you get to fire at the defense. And its easy enough to houseule that scenario.

The other scenario, quite valid in HG, is the fleets in deep space meeting on a parallel course. But I don't know why you would want fleets to do that. Customs, anti-piracy, pirates, etc yes & the vector combat system covers that nicely. But fleets on the whole will combat around the Main or GG.

 

[Matt123]

A single fighter being able to immobilize an entire fleet ...

The only case where this will happen is when you have incapacitated everything except for the last fighter. Bad luck on the dice, but it sounds you fired everything, turn over.

If your opponents starts a turn with a sole fighter in the front line, it will be near automatically toasted. Following which every ship on your side, including those that fired on the foolish fighter, gets to then shoot up the reserve - in the same turn.

Now if you have a fleet incapable of inflicting 9 criticals (just one hit by a missile-9 HE) on a sole fighter, I think you deserve to be held off by it.