Firing drones from any direction to hit the shield you want

Discuss tactics here.

Moderators: mjwest, Albiegamer

Post Reply
User avatar
Mike
Fleet Captain
Posts: 1674
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 10:58 pm
Location: South Carolina

Firing drones from any direction to hit the shield you want

Post by Mike »

I just want to know if anyone else has actually tried this tactic. If so, what were your results?

Here is the rule:

From (4F5c): "...seeking weapon A is targeted on seeking weapon B... If A and B both reach the target of B on the same subpulse (or if B hits A, which previously impacted and was stopped by a tractor beam), BOTH impact that shield of the target and BOTH cause damage"

Here is the generic form of the tactic:

An enemy ship no phasers that can fire at a drone coming from a particular direction and no tractor beams that can operate. A friendly ship with only one drone launcher (or one remaining that can launch that turn) launches a drone (let's call it Drone-A) from a few hexes away so that it will impact in, say, 2 impulses. Your ship is on the opposite side of the target ship. If you launch drones, the target ship will be able to shoot at them with phasers. On the next impulse, you launch drones targeted on the Drone-A of your friendly ship. Your drones arrive in the target hex in the same sub-pulse as Drone-A. The target ship has no ability to stop them, so they all impact the same shield: the shield that is on the far side facing away from the direction your drones came from.

Note that your ship was able to launch multiple drones and avoid the target ship's ability to shoot at them after impact according to the direction they were coming from. They will impact and explode on a shield on the opposite side of the target ship along with their target, Drone-A.

Granted, this would have to be a rare opportunity. Many factors would have to occur "just right" for this event to take place (speed of target, turn mode of target, whether target has done a HET and wants to risk another, your ships' distances from the target, timing the arrival of the drones, etc.).

I've been pondering a post worthy of this promotion for the past few days and this is it.

Unlikely? Yes.

Possible? Yes.

Has anyone else actually accomplished it or even tried it?
User avatar
Scoutdad
Commodore
Posts: 4751
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 6:27 pm
Location: Middle Tennessee

Post by Scoutdad »

Mike, this was (in a nutshell) the Command Note I had in CL # 38.

Volley Vous: Part Duex.

Yes, I have used it...
Yes, it is a rare occasion wher it comes into play...
Yes, much like Mr. Miyagi's "Crane Technique" - when do right, no can defend.
Commander, Battlegroup Murfreesboro
Department Head, ACTASF
User avatar
Wolverin61
Commander
Posts: 495
Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2008 2:07 am
Location: Mississippi
Contact:

Post by Wolverin61 »

I don't think I've ever even targeted a drone with another drone.
"His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking."
Image
User avatar
junior
Captain
Posts: 803
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 5:14 am

Post by junior »

It was mentioned in another thread a while back.

The primary issue with it as a tactic is how difficult it is to set things up "just right".
User avatar
Scoutdad
Commodore
Posts: 4751
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 6:27 pm
Location: Middle Tennessee

Post by Scoutdad »

Wolverin61 wrote:I don't think I've ever even targeted a drone with another drone.
It's really not all that comon.

In what's probably more than 1000 games, I've had the opportunity to use the tactic a total of two times.
The first was a total surprise and I managed to score 24 points of damage.
The second time, my erstwhile opponent had read the Command Note in CL 38 and as soon as the second drones target was announced, he dropped the tractor holding the first drone. He took 12 points on a down shield, but that's all he took...
Commander, Battlegroup Murfreesboro
Department Head, ACTASF
User avatar
Mike
Fleet Captain
Posts: 1674
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 10:58 pm
Location: South Carolina

Post by Mike »

Yeah, that's about the amount that I thought.
Post Reply