Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	Archive through February 12, 2009	25		02/13 02:53pm
	Archive through March 18, 2011	25		03/20 04:42am
	Archive through February 20, 2015	25		02/21 02:46am

Mike Bennett:

The rule is that player-controlled DefSats are treated as command-controlled captor mines, and reading through those rules, command-controlled captor mines use the same control channels as drones. So the new arrangement I suggested with more ground bases.

Of course, now that I think about it, a phaser ground base only has three control channels in SFB, which means five could only fire 15 sats at once, leaving 9 inactive until the eight-impulse period allowed them to be activated . . . hmm.

Okay. Planet Monstrosity gets 24 DefSats, 1 phaser-4/hellbore ground base, and 7 photon/phaser-1 ground bases. Still 550 points, now enough control channels for simultaneous command control of all the sats.

So . . . control limits don't stop me. Nothing stops me! I AM INVINCIBLE!

Ahem.

The practical solution is to yell "shenanigans" at anyone who tries to deploy more than (five, or three times the number of defense battalions, whichever is greater) DefSats. Unless they have a really good excuse.

By Jon Berry (Laz_Longsmith) on Friday, February 20, 2015 - 09:17 pm: Edit

The solution to this conundrum is already a scenario.

Divert an asteroid to strike the planet. Wait 6-12 months.

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Friday, February 20, 2015 - 09:42 pm: Edit

(M5.26) allows the ground base to control more DefSats since the control is only needed for the impulse of firing then wait 1/4 turn and control a different DefSat. Thus the single ground base could control 12 DefSats over the course of a turn. And if (M5.28) applies to player controlled DefSats, all the DefSats not controlled on a given impulse will automatically fire as provided by (R15.D1-3).

By Mark Steven Hoyle (Markshoyle) on Friday, February 20, 2015 - 09:47 pm: Edit

What kind of drone based carrier sdrn could you get for 550 pts.

SPP should use this for the next opponent for the CL Sdrn.

By Michael Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Saturday, February 21, 2015 - 02:46 am: Edit

Or devastate the entire planet with long range fire (I THINK photons and such auto hit) until they surrender from range 16 or so...

YEAH the bases survive, but the place is trashed and they are now protecting rubble.

By Randy Blair (Randyblair) on Saturday, February 21, 2015 - 03:22 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

"Or devastate the entire planet with long range fire"

---

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandor) on Saturday, February 21, 2015 - 04:51 pm: Edit

Uhmm Plasma R at say range 15 are 35 damg are enveloping for 70 each. Kill the planet.

By Randy Blair (Randyblair) on Saturday, February 21, 2015 - 05:03 pm: Edit

The Ph3s on the DefSats would take care of those.

By Michael Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Sunday, February 22, 2015 - 12:20 am: Edit

And the atmosphere adds 5 to the range...

By Douglas Lampert (Dlampert) on Sunday, February 22, 2015 - 01:30 am: Edit

And at 15 range you're an exploding ball of plasma, the DefSats can engage at 15.

I'm away from my rules, but is that 15 from the satellite or 15 from the controller, because to be 15 from the satellites it may well need to be 19 from the planet (16 from a radius 3 orbiting satellite).

Still close enough to do lots of general damage to the planet, but it will take awhile.

By Steven E. Ehrbar (See) on Sunday, February 22, 2015 - 11:04 am: Edit

Range 15 from the satellite.

Anyway, if general devastation damage is worth victory points (which per P2.525 would be limited to 200 points/hexside in value), yeah, the opposing force parks out where they can only be hit at all by the ground bases while shooting at the planet, and slowly accumulates them.

By Eddie Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Sunday, February 22, 2015 - 05:26 pm: Edit

At 19 from the planet 1 to 3 satellite's will engage if you use the proper procedure for setting them up. All 15 will never get a shot at the same time. Also with electronic warfare and a scout or ECM drone or MRS the sats will do no damage. They will reveal their location and possible be hit with return fire. Since the defender is making this a game of slow down and attrition. the attacker can do the same. Approach slowly with full Ew and erratic. Have one ship launch a drone on a ballistic course toward the planet, when a Sat fires lock on and fire. It will take a while, but the attacker can control range and be patient. Boring yes, but that is how sieges work. As long as there is no time limit or reinforcements you cant come out and prevent me from controlling what happens, so goes invincibility.

By Douglas Lampert (Dlampert) on Sunday, February 22, 2015 - 05:54 pm: Edit

One drone coming on ballistic. I have a bunch of small ground bases for control (last posted design I see has 24 DefSats, 1 phaser-4/hellbore ground base, and 7 photon/phaser-1 ground bases).

8 Small ground bases means 4 facing your oncoming drone, they kill it with their own Ph-3 batteries.

You send enough ballistic drones to overwhelm 4 ground bases, I need to have a DEFSAT on the far side of the planet, at range 22-23 from your ships and about to enter the planet's shadow, take a shot to kill a drone.

2/3rds of your 550 point fleet now get a shot at long range and an ECM penalty (you are using erratic maneuvers to avoid the ground bases killing you). You may actually do some damage.

But you only get one shot as the planet will break your lockon next turn even if you could have made the roll to retain.

Now: How many drones and racks do you have on your 550 points of ships? How many points of drones did you just expend to get one (bad and inadequate to kill it) shot at one cheap DEFSAT.

I think the defender is actually winning this exchange.

By Eddie Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Sunday, February 22, 2015 - 06:58 pm: Edit

If you think so fine.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandor) on Sunday, February 22, 2015 - 10:42 pm: Edit

The only test of tactic is on the MAP. Do wonder the cost for all that a 550 force. 4 we and 1 ke to kill. So 5 enveloping R torps. Cloak and recharge i think that will devastate the planet eventually. Static defense is bad since all those points spent there means i can attack elsewhere with my 550 points.

By Randy Blair (Randyblair) on Sunday, February 22, 2015 - 11:47 pm: Edit

Ground bases can't be targeted beyond range 5.

By Steven E. Ehrbar (See) on Monday, February 23, 2015 - 12:05 am: Edit

Hmm.

Note that (P2.713) says a ballistic seeking weapon must be fired from a maximum range of 4 to hit a small ground base, and "Submunitions from a ballistic MW drone cannot target a ground base."

Since the DefSats are under command control (thus the worries over having enough bases; on automatic, base control channels are not an issue), they only fire if the defender chooses to fire. So, the drone force fires a drone on ballistic from far enough the DefSats can't cook the ship, and the defender ignores it until it's range 8 from the planet. At which point it either activates as a Tame Boar and acquires one of the bases, or it doesn't and can be completely ignored.

And if it's just one drone, as Douglas Lampert points out, the ground bases just destroy it themselves. So you're going to need waves of type-III drones. Sixteen phaser-3s (on the facing four ground bases) will auto-kill eight drones (and can on average clear more). So, at least nine-a-wave is the minimum to actually provoke using a DefSat to prevent a hit on a shield, ten's going to be better.

So a wave of ten Limited Availability drones to provoke one long-range shot at a DefSat. Hmm. Even Kzintis dragging along ships with proportional reloads in cargo are not going to manage to actually reduce the defenses with this approach, with anything resembling a 550 BPV budget. But a victory on points might be achievable.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, February 23, 2015 - 03:10 pm: Edit

Steven E. Ehrbar:

Drones launched on Tame Boar or Wild Boar targeting cannot hit a ground base (R1.14C2). Submunitions released by a multi-warhead drone that itself was launched from beyond five hexes range cannot target a small ground base [(R1.14C2) again].

A ship cannot fire on a small ground base unless it is within five hexes (true) range of that small ground base.

A scatter-pack shuttle or a multi-warhead drone cannot target its submunitions on a small ground base unless it is releasing those submunitions from four (4) hexes true range (which means the multi-warhead drone or scatter-pack cannot be launched from any range greater than five hexes as any other seeking weapon, and must move at least once to reach four hexes before the submunitions are released).

The Borak Star League forms a partial exception. This is because their "hunter-killers" operate as remotely controlled fighters and can be flown to the target as fighters, and then transferred to their final target guidance as suicide shuttles (only necessary to do so to get through the atmosphere, as if they continued to operate as fighters they would need to fly through the atmosphere, descending, to reach their targets). Note that other remote controlled fighters present similar opportunities, i.e., a squadron of Z-YCs could be remotely flown to Range 4 and then launch all of their drones under (P2.713) to hit a ground target. Plasma fighters could do the same thing.

By Steven E. Ehrbar (See) on Monday, February 23, 2015 - 05:01 pm: Edit

Steve Petrick:

Actually . . . looking at the interactions, I think the Boars actually can manage it. Unless there's a specific prohibition on Tame/Wild Boars that isn't showing up in either my (ancient) copy of (R1.14C2) or the website errata?

What I got wrong is that it won't lock-on at 8 hexes from the planet, because the ground bases aren't yet a valid target at that range because of (R1.14C2). Instead, the Type-III will continue on its ballistic course to five hexes from the planet, the range at which the base can be targeted by a seeking weapon under (R1.14C2), and then under (FD5.252) it'll lock on to one, as a valid target in its FA arc within eight hexes.

By Randy Blair (Randyblair) on Monday, February 23, 2015 - 05:18 pm: Edit

P2.713 is the controlling rule.

---

Quote:

(P2.713) Seeking weapons can be fired at a ground base using ballistic targeting (F4.0), but only from a range of 4 hexes or less. Weapons fired in this manner cannot be distracted by ECM or WW. Weapons fired ballistically at ground targets do explode on impact. Weapons cannot be fired for ballistic bombardment under passive fire control (D19.0) as target tracking is inadequate. Submunitions from a ballistic MW drone cannot target a ground base.

---

By Eddie Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Monday, February 23, 2015 - 06:02 pm: Edit

Gentlemen the purpose of the drone was not to hit a target, but to provoke a response from a Sat to reveal its position. All tactics will depend on a player controlled defender or none player as each will set up different possible defender responses to attacks. In the case of a none player Sats will respond differently than a player controlled giving the attacker different choices. Like someone above said put it on a map. We have played campaigns were players have been allowed to use just the situation you have mentioned. Each time it has been tried if there is no mobile defense or time limits or some type of reinforcement the planet has fallen. Dumb Sats don't have the ability to distinguish a drone target. Is it passing through or what. Remember no tactic defensive or offensive is perfect, it has to be flexible. Setting still with Def Sats give you no flexibility, you have to respond to a mobile force that can dictate where and when it will attack. Again it also depends on what the mission is. If I have to capture the planet then I have to penetrate the defenses. In a case like that I would not arrive with 550 points, Normally to successfully invade any location you look to have about 2.5 times the defending force. If I need to destroy the planets usefulness then I bombard the planet from outside your range.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, February 23, 2015 - 06:08 pm: Edit

Steven E. Ehrbar:

Rule (R1.14C2) specifically states that ". . . or targeted by seeking weapons, not even type-III drones using (FD5.25) . . ." Rule (FD5.25) is the umbrella rule covering both tame and wild boar targeting. A type-III (whether a standard type-III or an extended range type-IIIXX) launched from beyond five hexes true range cannot target a small or medium ground base, even if you tell it to go active at five hexes range, it will not target a small or medium ground base because the rules for small and medium ground bases specifically state that a seeking weapon using wild or tame boar (FD5.25) cannot target a ground base if it was launched from a range greater than five hexes true range.

Sorry, but that is the rule. Long range drone bombardment cannot be used against small or medium ground bases [size class 4 or larger ground bases, yes, but not small or medium ground bases covered by (R1.14)]. Whether a type-I, -II, -IV, or -V launched from 35 hexes (the type-II or -V would have to be fitted with extended range to do this, and type-I or type-IV that are slow speed would also need extended range), not even if they were all equipped with ATG, not even if some other ship were at five hexes range and guidance was transferred to that ship after launch. And a type-III, whether just a standard type-III on "tame boar" or an extend range type-IIIXX on "wild boar," cannot target a small or medium ground base, unless it is LAUNCHED at five hexes true range or less.

By Steven E. Ehrbar (See) on Monday, February 23, 2015 - 06:16 pm: Edit

Randy Blair:

But the Type-IIIs in this case aren't fired "at a ground base using ballistic targeting", they're fired on a ballistic course at nothing. Then they acquire a target and act under non-ballistic targeting.

By Steven E. Ehrbar (See) on Monday, February 23, 2015 - 06:18 pm: Edit

Steve Petrick:

Ahah. Okay, my ancient copy of Advanced Missions {does not mention} "not even type-III drones using (FD5.25)". That was the problem. So that kills that tactic.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, February 23, 2015 - 06:18 pm: Edit

It happens.

By Steven E. Ehrbar (See) on Monday, February 23, 2015 - 06:25 pm: Edit

Eddie Crutchfield:

Yes, if you go outside the context of the scenario proposed (player-controlled defensive force, equal-BPV fight, Standard Victory Conditions), things are different. That's a tautology.