More thoughts on Flak. You may think that Flak would be too weak if it does not ignore speed and range. But I think Flak should be rather weak, since Flak alone was seldom the cause of one's demise in WC 2. It's some sort of last line of defense. But primarily it should be the Fighters that keep enemies at bay. If Flak alone can kill fighters or, especially bombers, so easily (target roll 5+), that's not right.
Agreed, but remember that one flak hit is not enough to kill a fighter or bomber. It will just reduce its shields by 10 points, while bombers usually recharge 5 shield points per turn. E.g. if the TCS Concordia would concentrate its 3 flak cannons on a single Grikath, it would take four turns where
every flak has to hit every time to take down one Grikath. If the Grikath moves out of the flak's limited range of just 3 hexes, it can easily recharge its shields before trying another strafing run.
I don't know, but my impression is the flak cannons
are rather weak at this moment - better: they are as weak as I wanted them to be.
Then again, my flak rules are not set in stone, so I sure like to hear (all of) your opinions!
And Flak does have the great advantage that if can fire at a 360° and with the reduced manoeuverability of bombers, it can pretty well block their movement, or force them to take the risk of Flak damage.
Yes, that's actually the primary use I saw for Flak in WCTO: Blocking enemy movement paths, or trying to force them to use alternate routes. If a flak hits you, you won't go down in flames, but there might be situations when a flak marker makes a player think twice.
(When "designing" the WCTO Flak, I also thought about using a damage ratio of 1 point per hit with a refire rate of 10 - but then you'd have to roll a whole lot of dice for every single flak hex. Probably more realistic, but not very funny, especially if there are several ships caught in flak fire simultaneously...)
