But why. They we can beat those.That's difficult with an active sensor ship keeping them painted.
I guess they want the Sarthes to fight first.
But why. They we can beat those.That's difficult with an active sensor ship keeping them painted.
I guess they want the Sarthes to fight first.
But why. They we can beat those.
They don't have many good options though. Hoping we have a hot blooded commander who will send our fleet elements chasing the Sarthes deep into the LeG missile envelope is a far more favorable engagement than engaging the entire fleet. Sure, it relies on us making a mistake, but they don't have many good options that don't rely on us making a mistake.As a reason, trying to pull an opponent who has demonstrated ability to dictate range out of position is pretty silly too…
I prefer my “who can understand the alien mind of the Xenos?” logic to explain the bad decisions the AI makes
The Gard have a firing range of about 48 million km. The Lot-et-Garonne a range of 235 million km or so.Is it worth letting the gunships slip forwards a little? With a view to trying to tempt the Sarthes AMM-PD escorts into firing upon them while remaining out of range of the Lot-er-Garonnes?
What have we got to lose by trying to encourage the mistake though?The Gard have a firing range of about 48 million km. The Lot-et-Garonne a range of 235 million km or so.
So we would need to wait until the seperation between the two enemy task forces approached 200 million km.
I was intending to Fighter-strike them once they got close enough anyway.What have we got to lose by trying to encourage the mistake though?
I remember a quote I read from a game developer:As a reason, trying to pull an opponent who has demonstrated ability to dictate range out of position is pretty silly too…
I prefer my “who can understand the alien mind of the Xenos?” logic to explain the bad decisions the AI makes
My thinking was not to “not fighter strike” the Sarthes, it was if the Sarthes keep pulling ahead of the L-e-Gs, kite the AMM-PD and then launch the missiles at their advance party!I was intending to Fighter-strike them once they got close enough anyway.
An attempt to draw the Sarthes about 200 million km away from the Lot-et-Garonne would mean giving up or deferring the opportunity for that strike.
We could give it a try.My thinking was not to “not fighter strike” the Sarthes, it was if the Sarthes keep pulling ahead of the L-e-Gs, kite the AMM-PD and then launch the missiles at their advance party!
This assumes that the seven Lot-et-Garonnes that we see are the only ones that exist.The gunships can control the range, so they can be safely moved forwards so long as they maintain a 250Mkm distance from the Lot-et-Garonnes.
You mean Aegis cruiser? The SPY radar equivalent should work great if the game allows such integrationWe really need a fast AWACS cruiser to keep pace with the gunships!
We really do.We really need a fast AWACS cruiser to keep pace with the gunships!
Might the Modron fleet have, too?We really do.
This war came at a very awkward time. Another ten years to prepare, and our Navy would have looked VERY different.
Might the Modron fleet have, too?
Doctrine pivot? I thiguht we still had a gunship doctrine.
What's a base strike doctrine and how does it differ from a gunship doctrine?Well, the main change is really about shields and making the gunship fleet more capable of dealing with missile attacks. So in a sense it didn't change. And in a sense, it did. We had a base strike doctrine before, and parts of the fleet are still based on that doctrine.
These terms are borrowed from the HOI series of games. To gain a real, if basic, knowledge of naval doctrine start hereWhat's a base strike doctrine and how does it differ from a gunship doctrine?
Base Strike Doctrike is typically Carrier based. An alternative is Gunship Doctrine, or Jeune Ecole or some other raiding Doctrine.What's a base strike doctrine and how does it differ from a gunship doctrine?