Capital Combat

[RainerPrem]

I will repeat...there is no problem in the universe that cannot be solved with a sufficient number of tomahawks.

Here is a hypothetical situation:

You have gone to war with a fleet. You have taken the big boys out with Tomahawk barrages, as recommended. Now you notice that your own Carrier (and its meticulously tuned Fighter compliment) were on the trajectory of one Bomber's Tomahawks.

As result, the Carrier is not there. Please advice on the optimal firing solution of additional Toms that will remedy the unexpected absence of the Carrier.

Oh yes, the extra Tomahawk clips were stored in that Carrier too ...

Sounds like a real experience ...

That's the reason why I do most things with exactly one ship and nothing more.

cu
Rainer

[Timsup2nothin]

I will repeat...there is no problem in the universe that cannot be solved with a sufficient number of tomahawks.

Here is a hypothetical situation:

You have gone to war with a fleet. You have taken the big boys out with Tomahawk barrages, as recommended. Now you notice that your own Carrier (and its meticulously tuned Fighter compliment) were on the trajectory of one Bomber's Tomahawks.

As result, the Carrier is not there. Please advice on the optimal firing solution of additional Toms that will remedy the unexpected absence of the Carrier.

Oh yes, the extra Tomahawk clips were stored in that Carrier too ...

Sounds like a real experience ...

That's the reason why I do most things with exactly one ship and nothing more.

cu
Rainer

Bingo.

Carrier? What carrier? I had a carrier?

[RAVEN.myst]

I will repeat...there is no problem in the universe that cannot be solved with a sufficient number of tomahawks.

Here is a hypothetical situation:

You have gone to war with a fleet. You have taken the big boys out with Tomahawk barrages, as recommended. Now you notice that your own Carrier (and its meticulously tuned Fighter compliment) were on the trajectory of one Bomber's Tomahawks.

As result, the Carrier is not there. Please advice on the optimal firing solution of additional Toms that will remedy the unexpected absence of the Carrier.

Oh yes, the extra Tomahawk clips were stored in that Carrier too ...

Sounds like a real experience ...

That's the reason why I do most things with exactly one ship and nothing more.

cu
Rainer

Bingo.

Carrier? What carrier? I had a carrier?

Outta sight - outta mind, huh?
I don't have a drinking problem: I can get the glass to my mouth and swallow the contents just fine, I get drunk, I fall over, I forget - what problem?

[jlehtone]

Sounds like a real experience ...

That's the reason why I do most things with exactly one ship and nothing more.

Real? The official term is: Simulation. Lieutenant Gorman can testify how beneficial sufficient simulated drops are ...

I did conduct five simulations of the same mission. On one the Carrier was impaled by the Tomahawks of its own Bombers.

On another the Carrier did withdraw, half-dead, when a Skirnir did sneak into the sector. Some of the fighters had to be sacrificed, for there was no way to dock them before the jump. One of the Nova Raiders kept of fighting valiantly against 20:1 odds long after all its comerades had left/fallen. My personal ship sustained substantial damage as well. (Leaving the battlefield before your troops is a big no-no in this War.)

Three simulations did end when my ship was shot down. I tend to place my observation site up front and due to my rather hands-on control of the fleet, I end up a sitting duck and the preferred target.

Nevertheless, I had the chance to observe that the "Fleet Command" doctrine prefers to attack a Yokohama with Bombers ... in melee. Personally, I prefer 40 klicks distance to point blank, when distributing those Tomahawks. (Symmetrically, I prefer the distance when the Claymores barrage my ship.)

I have also concluded that Dolphin Superfreighter XL, while spacious and lacking any distracting armament of its own, is not optimal supply barge type for the Bombers. It slows down the Bomber formation whent the battery transfers to next firing position.



I have seen plenty of "one ship and nothing more" action. It is time for different challenges.

[RAVEN.myst]

...doctrine...

EVE player?

Continued happy hunting!

[jlehtone]

EVE player?

Never. I've heard that they are social creatures.


Of the two non-lethal simulation runs one left the fleet without a Carrier. Buying a new one requires some work. The other has half of a Carrier. Less work to set up (the fighters) but the repair ...
Suboption (2a): pay to SY and be done with it.
Suboption (2b): let the PHQ do the work and save some credits.

[RAVEN.myst]

EVE player?

Never. I've heard that they are social creatures.

LOL! Well, I certainly am not - at least, not online...

The reason I asked is because the term "doctrine" is used to describe various corps'/alliances' military policies (correctly for once - in stark contrast to their completely inaccurate usage of the term "logistics"...)