Battle Summaries:
Over the last week, I taught SITS to a new player. We decided to try a few battles, both of which were intended to try various ways of using units which were close to one another, but not so close as to combine active defenses.

Battle 1:
Tiger BC (opponent) vs. Broadsword CA and Star Knight CA
Setup:
The forces began at opposite ends of a single map sheet. Closing velocities were high, on the order of 8 hexes per turn. The broadsword was about five levels above the other two ships. The two heavy cruisers were about 10 hexes apart. All ships began fresh, with full ammunition.
Course of battle:
Both forces continued to close, with the Broadsword turning nose down to present its wedge, the SK turning to present broadside, and the Tiger turning its broadside to the Broadsword. The wedge of the Broadsword only barely stopped the four missiles fired by the Tiger’s chase armament, so I decided to turn broadside and at least shoot back. Within another two turns, the Broadsword had taken several major hits and blew up. The SK was untouched at this point and not a single round had hit the Tiger. The next turn saw the SK blow by the Tiger at close range, including an energy exchange at the limit of their laser range, which had only small amounts of damage inflicted. The close range missile fire during that pass, however, did major damage to the SK and light damage to the Tiger. The SK also thrusted sharply down during this turn. Since the Tiger was pointing up out of the plane of the map and the two ships were now spreading apart rapidly, it we concluded that the SK would most likely be able to disengage.
Results:
The tactics used here were not exactly subtle; both sides went for a rather direct approach, though the Manties tried to get a simultaneous pass at close range by both CA’s on the BC. That was thwarted when one of the CA’s didn’t survive the closing maneuver. This suggests that this type of tactic will not allow a force of heavy cruisers to take on a BC, essentially because the CA’s defenses can be swamped and they are vulnerable to catastrophic hits due to their lower scale. If the SK and Broadsword had been close enough to one another to combine their active defenses and link their fire, the results would likely have been different; while that would do nothing about the beefiness advantage of the Tiger, it would give the Manties better CM/PD , equal volley weight, and better MQL.


Battle 2:
Conqueror and Bastogne (Opponent) vs. Apollo and Havoc
Setup:
Again, the engagement was along the long axis of a single map sheet. Initial vectors were 3,1 in the directions along the axis of the map for the PRN ships and 3,2 along the axial directions for the RMN units. The PN units were spread farther apart at the beginning of the fight, something on the order of a 14 hexes along the short edge of the map, whereas the RMN units were about 8 hexes apart. All units were pointed along the axis of the map. The Apollo was five above the plane, while the Bastogne was on the plane, the Conqueror was one below the plane, and the Havoc was one above the plane.

Course of Battle:
Both sides chose to concentrate fire on the opposing destroyer in an effort to knock out as many missile tubes as possible quickly. The first turn resulted in an ineffective exchange of long-range fire as the ships changed vectors slightly, with the Havenites accelerating toward the center of the map. Turn two saw more effective fire, with some damage being done. Turn three resulted in the destruction of the Bastogne after a high penetration roll resulted in a failed SI roll and a funny hit to the Havoc destroying most of its after chase armament. On the fourth turn, the two forces passed at energy range, but the only shot which would have been possible, between the Havoc and Conqueror, was blocked by the Havoc’s wedge. However, the close range missile volleys scored a bunch of hull and SI hits on the Havoc, blowing that up too. The Conqueror took light damage during this turn, and the turn ended with the Apollo and Conqueror broadside to broadside at range 6. Due to only light damage on the Conqueror, and the Apollo being completely fresh, aside from expended ammunition, the match was called as a draw.



Future battles:
I’m still interested in trying to use maneuver to enable lighter ships to take on heavier ones. However, I’m starting to feel that the game continues the books’ combat environment’s emphasis on weight of fire over maneuver, which kind of makes sense, but is inconsistent with what I’ve been reading on the boards here about multi-axis attacking patterns. My next scenario, I think, will be with a pair of manty BC’s vs. a trio of Havenite BC’s, or something similar; the BC’s have heavier core armor and larger scale relative to CAs, and so should be more immune to deeply penetrating SI hits. We’ll see, though.

How do other players successfully execute multi-axis attacks?

I've only managed to pull off one successful multi-axis maneuver, and I failed to consider 3D, otherwise it would have been light-years more effective.

Star-Knight vs. 2 x Swords, and the Swords stayed in complete concert until they entered the close-range band. This allowed them to absorb any fire the generally toothless SK could throw their way, and they managed to do some damage to the SK on the approach. At close range, the Swords split so that their endpoints would bracket the SK's EoT marker with a late salvo coming in from a third cardinal direction. Unfortunately, I forgot to make the maneuver 3D, so the SK was able to avoid taking a shot up the throat/kilt while ripping into one of the Swords with energy fire.

Anyways - that sort of multi-axis thing is hard to pull off, but I'd think it even harder to do it with two ships starting separate from one another. Either you spend some time collecting them and matching their vectors or you exquisitely plan their vectors such that they converge on where you think your opponent will be, which, if he has any desire to avoid a three-way at awkward angles, won't be where he'll end up.

As far as smaller units using maneuver against a larger one... As you've mentioned, DDs and CLs just don't have the durability for that sort of punishing approach - a DD might be able to fend off CL missiles, but that's iffy and mostly contingent on the CL being an Apollo or Brilliance. Two hits to their SI chart, and they pretty much evaporate. For sure, CLs can't handle CA missiles.

I think the most "balanced" set-up I can put together (keeping in mind I only have Shipbook #1) would be two Mars-B's trying to take on a Reliant. The Mars-B's, if together, probably have an advantage in everything except staying power - they'll flush their magazines awful fast, and the Reliant can soak a lot of their damage. If the Mars-B's start apart, then it'll be a question of herding. One of them needs to herd the Reliant into the other Mars-B by threatening close-engagement. The Peeps are going to get hurt real bad because they can't pool defenses, but they should be about even if the Reliant's commander doesn't decide to just eat one of them in a hurry and snap up the other for dessert. Of note, however, is that I doubt a Mars-B's mid or late-range salvos are going to get through the Reliant's OMGWTFBBQ defenses, meaning the Peeps with their limited ammo would do best taking their licks as they close and only opening fire once they enter 10-hexes of range... (ouch)

I'm going to have to try that scenario at some point...

Anyways - those are my thoughts on the matter.

-----

EDIT:
Nevermind about that 2x Mars-B vs. Reliant. The Reliant eats the Mars-B's, whether together or separate. The only way I could conceivably see the Mars-B's coming out on top is if the battle starts with the two Peeps in close-range with linked salvos and defenses and stays there.

At middling and long range, the Reliant's ECM and ADs consider even a 22-count salvo to be so much popcorn. In return, the Manty can launch just as many missiles back at the Mars-B's, and with a better MQL vs weaker ECM. While the combined ADs of both Mars-Bs is pretty ferocious, they're also much weaker, and scale (plus a weaker sidewall) means that anything that hits is going to put on a lot of hurt. Also - as previously stated, the Mars-B's don't have the staying power for a missile match.

And then I tried close-range.

The Reliant almost doubles the Mars-B's energy armament, and the disparities in damage and sidewall strength mean that the BC will rip apart the Peep CAs while taking some grievous, but mostly superficial, damage in return. Plus, there's no way both Peep cruisers will make it through the Reliant's missile envelope into energy range.

You're much better sticking with DD/CL engagements if you want to try scale disparities even though the tin-cans last all of five seconds once the SI track is hit.

~ Teddy

The one thing I have noticed on multi-vector fights is that if the person being multi-vectored keeps everything concentrated and uses link defenses and salvos they have a good chance at defeating one of the forces in detail. And yes the rules do favor weight of fire verses quality of defense (which the books do as well).

In reference to the statement about if all ships have the same thrust a multi-vector attack will not happen because the other guy can maneuver away, all I can do is refer you to some of Paul Anderson's stories where he mentions that space battles occur by mutual consent. Both sides have got to want the piece of vacuum they are fighting for otherwise no battle. This does not mean that the reasons are necessarily of OR logical ones (refer to the Sollies in Mission of Honor) just that both sides have to have reasons.

Keep in mind that at this point in time (Shipbook 1) the Manties have early tech missile boxes.

You could pit a Peep BC against a few CA's with boxes to even the opening salvo.

Keep in mind that the missile pod missiles are massive birds. They're capship weapons (punch 16), and if one or two get through they WILL give core hits to even a Sultan without too much difficulty. If the Sultans get one down the throat, then she's going to have a nice collection of core hits that'll seriously impair her combat ability.

Just perusing through the rules listing for towed pods C8.1, while it would allow an initial heavy throw weight (with a +MQL shift no doubt) both within the setting pertaining to perhaps the larger of the heavier cruisers versus a Sultan or even a Tiger (if you have Shipbook 3) it would even the playing field in my opinion. There are however a good deal of disadvantages to towing pods with a CA tonnage, it would depend on the situation. Soft kills on the pods, penalties to FCON etc would mean that a 2-3 CA ship detail with pods might be able to engage a Sultan or a Tiger however they will take a beating.

More interestingly however, C2.17 references rules C3.2 concerning the defender gets to choose which missiles to kill. I'm assuming the defender gets to choose to kill the capital ship missiles with Active defenses if they would desire. While that would leave a heavier amount of standard CA missiles incoming, I tend to believe it would still be of some value to attempt to 'swamp' the BC at range before soft kills on the towed pods knocks the CA's out of a fighting chance. At least at distance they could 'attempt' to break for it if it the engagement does not go favorably.

Perhaps three CA's with two DD escorts in formation versus a BC?

If you have shipbook two another good battle would be two CA's versus a Silesia class BC as the tech is a bit lower and more geared towards a better fight.