[Legate Damar]

You have two fleets of ships, like maybe a dozen capships in total on both sides, and they all execute multiple tactical jumps to try to outmaneuver each other, with every ship jumping at least six times or so.

Just wondering if any missions like this exist

[JCDNWarrior]

Not that I'm aware of but it could be interesting - However, as a fighter or bomber, such maneuvers would involve continually dodging multiple huge ships if it's anywhere near the field of engagement of the player. I'd also say that six jumps is a little too much for such ships, I'd wager they could make three jumps if they overstress their reactors. Nonetheless if executed well it could certainly be a very interesting mission.

[Legate Damar]

Well I have a mission sort of like this planned but I was just wondering if anyone had done something similar.

[IronBeer]

Tactical microjumps don't show up very often. The first example I can come up with off the top of my head is Nemesis from Inferno.

There are plenty of cases of warships "landing" close to a target, but that's often less on the "intentional" side.

[headdie]

the first instance of I can think of something in this vein would be the mission in FS:ST when you are trying to recover the escape pods and you get jumped by the Loki's, which withdraw and then return, but it is not something commonly seen and I dont recall multiple capships with multiple jumps involved, probably due to the complexity of the idea to implement

[-Norbert-]

The only instance of a capship making a microjump within the mission area I can remember ended up with the ship blowing up.
I can't remember the name of the campign (or much of anything else, including wether I liked it back in the days - it certainly was before the SCP came along), but it had a Colossus and a few accompanying ships stranded in Shivan space and the Colly's hanger was modifyed to carry two Aeolus instead of strikecraft.

[Polpolion]

Vassago's Dirge has some cool jumps in it. Check out the mission "Arpeggio". It's no massive battle, but it pretty much is just a bunch of ships jumping around trying to either kill or not get killed.

[karajorma]

The only instance of a capship making a microjump within the mission area I can remember ended up with the ship blowing up.
I can't remember the name of the campign (or much of anything else, including wether I liked it back in the days - it certainly was before the SCP came along), but it had a Colossus and a few accompanying ships stranded in Shivan space and the Colly's hanger was modifyed to carry two Aeolus instead of strikecraft.

I learned how to make a ship do a microjump by taking apart Boomerang back in around 2001. That's probably what you are thinking about.

[el_magnifico]

1) Capships take time to recharge their subspace drives (as was mentioned before). 6 times on the same mission would considerably extend the time said mission lasts.

2) GTVA jump drives are supposed to lack in precision. Such maneuvers would be hard and risky to pull off once, let alone 6 times.

3) May be tricky to implement (as was mentioned before).

4) Sounds like it will probably result in a BoE'd mission.

5) Defies Shivan, GTA, PVN, GTVA and NTF tactical doctrine as evidenced by the fact that, in decades of almost constant war, it was never done before. Not even once. Not even against the Sathanas (and the Phoenicia really could have used it.)

But hey! Your mission, your rules.

[NGTM-1R]

1) Capships take time to recharge their subspace drives (as was mentioned before). 6 times on the same mission would considerably extend the time said mission lasts.

2) GTVA jump drives are supposed to lack in precision. Such maneuvers would be hard and risky to pull off once, let alone 6 times.

5) Defies Shivan, GTA, PVN, GTVA and NTF tactical doctrine as evidenced by the fact that, in decades of almost constant war, it was never done before. Not even once. Not even against the Sathanas (and the Phoenicia really could have used it.)

These three things are based on fan inference rather than solid evidence, and as such should be considered suggestions at most. Even the recharge thing is mainly us trying to explain behavior in the missions.

The second is particularly weak, and I don't think there's any real evidence at all for it, it's just become an accepted canard.

[Legate Damar]

The capabilities of the ships in the mission will make sense, don't worry. I just wanted to see if anything like this had been attempted before.

[el_magnifico]

1) Capships take time to recharge their subspace drives (as was mentioned before). 6 times on the same mission would considerably extend the time said mission lasts.

2) GTVA jump drives are supposed to lack in precision. Such maneuvers would be hard and risky to pull off once, let alone 6 times.

5) Defies Shivan, GTA, PVN, GTVA and NTF tactical doctrine as evidenced by the fact that, in decades of almost constant war, it was never done before. Not even once. Not even against the Sathanas (and the Phoenicia really could have used it.)

These three things are based on fan inference rather than solid evidence, and as such should be considered suggestions at most. Even the recharge thing is mainly us trying to explain behavior in the missions.

The second is particularly weak, and I don't think there's any real evidence at all for it, it's just become an accepted canard.

1) Tenderizer (amongst others, but it's the example that first comes to my mind. It's established canon by now).
2 and 5) Yes, these are weaker. And yet I have to cite: The Great Hunt. Bearbaiting. Or that mission where the Psamtik was destroyed. Even High Noon (the Sathanas still had the rear beam, and superior subspace drives. So why didn't it repositioned itself?).

[Beskargam]

I point out that it might not matter? It is his mod.

[el_magnifico]

Nope, you're right. Tenderizer doesn't say a thing about drive recharging, but rather:

The Galatea will jump into Antares, reset its coordinates, then jump to Beta Aquilae.

Strange. I usually have such a strong and reliable memory, even for trivial things.

Also, what Beskargam said.

[NGTM-1R]

1) Tenderizer (amongst others, but it's the example that first comes to my mind. It's established canon by now).
2 and 5) Yes, these are weaker. And yet I have to cite: The Great Hunt. Bearbaiting. Or that mission where the Psamtik was destroyed. Even High Noon (the Sathanas still had the rear beam, and superior subspace drives. So why didn't it repositioned itself?).

King's Gambit. An Orion-class destroyer was able to jump again with remarkable speed. In fact, under the hood in FRED and probably if you were a particularly diligent pilot in the game, you'd realize that the restriction against NTF ships jumping out has to do with distance from the node, not drive recharge.

Great Hunt features a sensor-damping nebula that must be searched, the positions of enemy units are not known, and any number of reasons could be constructed why it would be best done the way it is. Bearbaiting could be down to a host of tactical factors and assumes the GTVA knew things about the Sathanas they might not. The Psamtik's destruction is actually an argument against this as it is stated to have misjumped when its jump is inaccurate. And finally, you're A: assuming the Sathanas has superior drives, which is never stated, and B: assuming things about the way the Shivans think which are never stated.

It's simply an attempt to explain mission behavior by us.

[el_magnifico]

King's Gambit. An Orion-class destroyer was able to jump again with remarkable speed. In fact, under the hood in FRED and probably if you were a particularly diligent pilot in the game, you'd realize that the restriction against NTF ships jumping out has to do with distance from the node, not drive recharge.

Granted.

Great Hunt features a sensor-damping nebula that must be searched, the positions of enemy units are not known, and any number of reasons could be constructed why it would be best done the way it is.

FS1's The Great Hunt. The Galatea jumped too far away from the Lucifer (lack of precision), and didn't repositioned itself to catch up (drive recharging, lack of precision).

Bearbaiting could be down to a host of tactical factors and assumes the GTVA knew things about the Sathanas they might not.

Fair enough.

The Psamtik's destruction is actually an argument against this as it is stated to have misjumped when its jump is inaccurate.

Not sure. Granted.

And finally, you're A: assuming the Sathanas has superior drives, which is never stated

It's stated by Petrarch that the Shivan's possess "advanced subspace technologies" and can use nodes too unstable for the GTVA. Whether the Sathanas uses regular Shivan drives is unknown, but there's no reason to assume otherwise.

and B: assuming things about the way the Shivans think which are never stated.

Well, granted again.

Overall, and considering my memory has betrayed me once already, it seems that you're right. I still think those are the most plausible explanations, and the most widespread ones. But I concede, judging by the current evidence, that it's probably not canon, and that I was wrong.

[mjn.mixael]

Well... regardless of whether or not that many quick, successive jumps is canon or not (may not even matter for a non FS mod).. I'm not really convinced that a mission designed with so many capships warping around would be anything more than severely annoying.

On paper (or in text on a forum), it seems like the kind of mission gimmick that I would even question some of the HLP FREDing greats on if they said they were going to incorporate it seriously. I just sounds too much like BoE justification.. and it would require some pretty intricate FREDing to pull off without ship collisions and insta-deaths.

[Mongoose]

That being said, it'd be perfect for a gag campaign mission.

[aeon48m]

That being said, it'd be perfect for a gag campaign mission.

You just gave me a very good idea...

[Legate Damar]

Well a gag version would be like one ship jumps in behind another, the first one jumps and appears behind the second, the second then jumps behind the first again, etc. That's not what I'm planning to do.