What Paul mentions was a big consideration for me in choosing to run before crippling too many ships: When you cripple on the opposing player turn, there is no retrograde movement to get you back to repair before the next opposing player turn, so anything I cripple on CT2 doesn't defend the Capital (or anything else) on CT3, or fight on AT2, for that matter.

I was doubtful of the value of a weakened SB1304, too; while perhaps it keeps a few ships out of the Capital on CT3, it can't seriously be defended (because any reserves there or in the Capital can be pinned, and reaction isn't possible from 1304 to 1401.) So, I guess you get to burn the fighters again, but taking cripples in order to get the opportunity to burn fighters seems like an odd choice, and especially on CT2-3, the Coalition has a lot more EPs to spare for repairs.

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Friday, February 25, 2022 - 06:27 pm: Edit

Currently awaiting a few SM and reserve choices before AT2, but AT2 econ should be ready this weekend when those occur.

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Saturday, February 26, 2022 - 05:14 pm: Edit

The lack of TBS strategic movement North (only three ships) makes it tempting for the Kzinti to forego a little bit of PDU production to make more ships, but probably AT2 is not the time to commit to something like that.

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Monday, February 28, 2022 - 12:13 pm: Edit

On AT2, the Coalition having seven reserve markers is pretty oppressive, since that many ships can fight the entire Kzinti fleet. But there was one target out of range of the reserves (which are in 1307 so that they can hit 1401 next turn if unused) so the Kzinti pile on to it.

It remains to be seen how far they will go; this may be a matter of burning Alliance Turn fighters, or it may be an attempt to clear 1001.

By Sam Benner (Nucaranlaeg) on Monday, February 28, 2022 - 11:41 pm: Edit

The Coalition should only have 4 Reserve markers. The SR and Home fleet reserve markers are not released, and neither is one of the Lyran markers.

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Tuesday, March 01, 2022 - 12:55 am: Edit

Huh.

Good thing that was irrelevant.

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Monday, March 07, 2022 - 12:48 pm: Edit

No cats were harmed in the making of...Of wow. The feline death rate in this game is pretty high. AT2 saw 10 dead hulls, 7 of the Lyran, and a whole mess of crippled ships leaking oxygen into space.

I'm not sure all this was worth it, but at least the Lyrans are slowed down getting significant forces to 1401 on CT3 (they can and probably will designate a supply tug in 1002 to provide supply - Trent kept the BT in that fleet entirely out of combat to make sure it was operational - but most of the battlegroup ships are crippled.)

And my commitment to myself in this game was to burn the majority of the Kzinti fighters -every turn- including every Alliance turn, without fail. And I certainly did that, although the Coalition avoids a lot of damage by trading odd-numbered cripples for even-numbered cripples.

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Monday, March 07, 2022 - 02:02 pm: Edit

Peter:

1802 has a SB as well, per the balance options at teh beginning. For various reasons I would have liked to do repairs at 1704 but getting the cripples there would have resulted in Klingons reacting on the poor little guys.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Monday, March 07, 2022 - 03:34 pm: Edit

Oh, ok. There is an extra SB in 1802. Check.

That is a weird balance option--I can't imagine it'll be harder to kill 2SBs in that province than one, as the Kzinti will need to defend them both. Interesting!

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Monday, March 07, 2022 - 04:52 pm: Edit

That though occurred to me as well. But I thought it would be interesting to have a starbase with "protected until turn 7" written on it, rather than a SB that would have to be defended on (for instance) CT2 along with two other SBs an the Capital.

In retrospect there are better things I could have gone for, but it's consistent with the plan of fighting like crazy to keep the Feds and Kzinti connected.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Monday, March 07, 2022 - 05:17 pm: Edit

Chance of 1 SB surviving in the Marquis province will be very dependant on what else is going on?

If the Feds are attacked, there probably isn't many Coalition forces spare?

if they are not attacked - 10 Kzinti ships on each SB and 2 Reserves in the Barony with 10 ships each, might still be enough to stop 1 dying?

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Monday, March 07, 2022 - 06:57 pm: Edit

It's not like the Lyrans have anything else to do on T7...

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Thursday, March 10, 2022 - 02:18 am: Edit

Well, I thought about this a lot, because at some point I decided to try as part of the BP's a Starbase set up on a planet as a way to further slow down the offensive.

And I decided the Hydrans were too isolated and too likely to get it sniped while they were pinned away from it. And the Feds... which planet? Maybe 2306? I couldn't find one that made sense.

So I settled on the Kzinti, and decided to put it in the Marquis area, so that I could defend it (in part) with Feds.

Probably there are better balance options, but it made sense to me at the time. And it probably helps 2204 survive longer, and perhaps permanently?

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Friday, March 11, 2022 - 12:59 pm: Edit

Oh, and one other thing:

On 1802, the new SB is a COMCON transfer point the minimum 4 hexes (2 turns) from 2204. Which means the Kzinti are taking delivery AT2 for use AT3.

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Sunday, March 13, 2022 - 01:02 pm: Edit

[Removed.]

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Sunday, March 13, 2022 - 09:27 pm: Edit

The Klingons belatedly realized that they should have started a B10 this turn. They downshift a D5 to E4 per "you can always sub an FF" and roll a (4) to start the build instead of not doing so.

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Monday, March 14, 2022 - 01:23 pm: Edit

So neither of us realized that - probably - there was a huge goofy mistake made by Coalition in R1 over the capital in directing PDUs for 30 at Viesalm rather than just dropping the damage (which would have resulted in 2 live PDU but no 24 dead homeless fighters swinging).

Complicating matters: In the subsequent fight over the same planet, the Alliance got an autokill; so this ends up being a big deal (although it doesn't affect the other systems because they have both been exclusively Klingons so far.)

We may redo Viesalm from the dropped damage, or something. We've had a pretty lax attitude to letting people get back and fix simple mistakes like this when it doesn't cost a lot of time. I mean, I think it's a mistake? 18 minus points vs. 2 EW and 6 Compot on the next round feels like a thing.

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Monday, March 14, 2022 - 11:46 pm: Edit

As long as you are both enjoying the game and arrive at what you think is fair, go for it. For me at least, I am pretty much always OK with correcting mistakes my opponent may have made, since usually that means when *I* make a mistake there is a good chance I am allowed to fix it. And we all make mistakes sometimes...

--Mike

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Tuesday, March 15, 2022 - 04:39 pm: Edit

Well, cooler heads indicate that maybe the right thing was done in the first place:

The Kzinti have a fair number of free fighters which could go land on the denuded PDUs. So the real choice for the Coalition is between the involuntary minus points (because the Alliance carriers are all full at the beginning of round 1 and the fighters die before they can be transferred to another system - specifically Vronkett - where 17 carrier fighters were taken as damage simultaneously with the Mauling of the PDUs) and facing 2 full strength PDUs in round 2 (with fighters replenished between rounds from who knows where).

I guess it's a choice between 10 damage (taken on fighters) lost to directing and dealing with an extra 2 EW 18 COMPOT in another round over Viesalm.

Interesting, but nontrivial that the Coalition didn't do the right thing all along.

By Alan De Salvio (Alandwork) on Wednesday, March 16, 2022 - 04:57 pm: Edit

Taking four PDUs off in one round will require a yo-yo turn where you consume the minus 24. Most folks don't like eating damage on the yo-yo turn, and so they PDU plink. Plinking gives the Kzinti the odious choice - take the remaining damage on now loose PDU fighters or cripple something permanently (or take it on more valuable (mobile) fighters).

It is really up to the Kzinti - do they fight approach battle(s) to free up fighter space? Is this a light raid, a heavy raid, or a conquest attack? Because you burn fighters like crazy against a light raid, and probably a heavy raid. But be careful, because burning too many fighters can turn a raid into a capture. The Kzinti need fighters to maintain compot against a heavy raid or conquest attack - and they shouldn't be directing very often or at all in those cases.

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Wednesday, March 16, 2022 - 07:09 pm: Edit

Interesting.

So with the exception of a couple of rounds in 1001 when the Kzinti needed to push the Lyrans off the planet (in order to pursue rather than be pursued) I have directed a Coalition ship every combat round in which actual battle lines were present.

I've taken the position in this game that reducing Coalition pincount and especially preying on specialty ships is the priority, and accepting a certain "degree of difficulty" in the defense as a result is acceptable. So far - aided by dice which have been mostly favorable if not too drastically so - this has been okay. It appears the shipyard will make it to CT4 unblemished (so I can have 20 PDU if I desperately want them)...

By Alan De Salvio (Alandwork) on Thursday, March 17, 2022 - 06:41 pm: Edit

The decision to direct or not direct is one of the best parts of this game - I do not mean to imply there is a perfect answer. But I will tell you each time I do as the Alliance it is a careful choice.

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Friday, March 18, 2022 - 12:06 am: Edit

>> The decision to direct or not direct is one of the best parts of this game - I do not mean to imply there is a perfect answer.

It is particularly interesting that here we are 35 years later and different experienced players still appear to follow differing strategies in this regard!

--Mike

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Friday, March 18, 2022 - 03:33 am: Edit

Alan and Mike

Correct

Although depends which rules packs your playing with.

The basic game rule of "Never Direct (unless there is a good reason to do so" gets modified in the expansions with the '"Always Direct (unless there is a good reason not to do so)".



As long as you remember which rule applies, it's pretty easy

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Friday, March 18, 2022 - 02:45 pm: Edit

It looks like the Alliance will (assuming that the Coalition leaves without actually capturing the capital, as it appears all but certain will be the case) have a choice between Kzinti repairs and Kzinti PDUs next turn.

One or the other, or maybe a little of both (although that seems obviously wrong.)