Archive through May 18, 2005
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board:
New Rules:
Orbital Defense Platforms:
Archive through May 18, 2005
OEW is always an option. I certainly won't lay down a blanket order for EW during EA. The GWS have only one SS so I may not order action from impulse one.
I don't intend to try and drive any G1's away. If we do then more drones will get by. The priority is killing drones.
On impulse 25 or turn 1 the incoming drones will be at R100 (that's the plan as I understand it).
I think it's too early to launch SP's. The reason is that if there are G1's ready to kill SP's then I want them to have to do it in range of the Ph-IV batteries.
I'd also note, unless we are able to totally counter the Klingon drones they may have already won the victory they need. We will be damaged and that will likely draw Star Fleet forces to our system. Which won't really make us any more safe since another attack would be just that much stronger.
So, we need to forget (for the most part) about making the Klingons lose. We need to preserve lives and minmize the impact of the attack on Noumea (Cassadra IV). If an opertunity arives to bloody the Klingons then we'll take it but I don't want this planet devestated. The attack doesn't seem to large so we should, with good fortune and skill, be able to prevent that.
Good hunting, Men! Kill drones.
OOC Loren,
I believe the best way you have of killing drones is Banshee flight. They can get two good shots with their gatlings BUT ONLY IF the G1 isn't crippling them! To avoid this the G1's facing them must be driven off. The best way to do this is the impulse 32 next turn impulse 8 launch of drones and an impulse 25 or 32 intercept of the drone wave as my previous posts.
Capitals for emphasis not shouting. I have much sympathy for you in being in command of a lot of boshie gamers who have a poor understanding of military discipline and protocol (well certainly one gamers but suspect others will volunteer to join my classification
)
SPP,
Thank you for your answers to questions very informative. My comments on putting up with bolshie games seems rather inadequate in your case.
A follow up question when does an SP "remember" a defsats "exposed" status.
For example defsat fires turn 3 insight of ShatterPack's base but SP isn't yet launched. Later that turn the ShP is launched.
If it blossoms turn 3 will it target the defsat?
If it blossoms turn 4 and the defsat hasn't fired on 4 will it target the defsat?
The examples assume the defsat never disappears behind the planet.
Paul Stovell Asked: A follow up question when does an SP "remember" a defsats "exposed" status.
For example defsat fires turn 3 insight of ShatterPack's base but SP isn't yet launched. Later that turn the ShP is launched.
If it blossoms turn 3 will it target the defsat?
If it blossoms turn 4 and the defsat hasn't fired on 4 will it target the defsat?
The examples assume the defsat never disappears behind the planet.
REPLY: It is impossible for the drones from a ballistic scatter pack to target a DefSat. The scatter pack itself does not have a lock-on in the traditional sense (shuttles have no ability to control drones), and shuttles typically cannot target mines at all, and a DefSat is treated as a captor mine [see (R1.15E) which sends you to (M7.4) which includes (M7.44)] for targeting. So the shuttle is not able to lock-onto the DefSat as a release condition, even if the DefSat fired or launched a drone. And Scatter Packs cannot be launched into minefields to randomlly look for mines. So at the point where the Ballistic Shatterpack bursts and tells all of its little angels to go forth and seek their destinies . . . well the DefSat might launch a drone at the same time, but the Shatter Pack cannot target a drone launched at the same point where it breaks (FD7.346). The drones cannot see the DefSat from the previous impulse where it launched a drone (they had not released to seek yet) and the impulse after they launched the type-VIs will already be seeking targets from the previous impulse, so if the Defsat launches then it will not matter to the type-VI drones. By the same token, if the DefSat fires its phaser before the shatter pack releases (the impulse before), the drones did not see it and so will not have lock-on, and if it fires on the same impulse . . . well the drones already have their targets back in the drone release step, so they will not notice the DefSat.
Now, if you are HAVE a lock-on to the DefSat, you CAN launch a scatter pack at it at that point, but you will need to maintain that lock-on until the drones separate from the pack and gain (in the case of type-VIs) their own lock-ons to it.
But by and large, DefSats are immune to attack by shuttles (which includes fighters) (M7.44).
Currently, the drones are still holding off because I do not have Colonel Knight's set up. Taking into account that the fighters (Ghost flight) have been ordered back. I need his Turn #1 so that I do Turn #1.
I can make some assumption that might help some people "role play".
Ghost Flight is hurrying back towards the planet, but at this juncture is not using Erratic maneuvers. One of the fighters (I do not know in which group) is holding his group back because he is carrying two pods (phaser and sensor), and pretty much is annoyed because while the sensor pod lets him SEE like an EWF, it does not give him the extra ECCM that an EWF can have, i.e., he only has two points of ECCM as any other fighter, and will not have more than that unless the EWF comes back and gets within three hexes of him (but if the EWF came back, what is he doing lugging this pod around in any case?), he gets within 15 hexes of the planet so that one of the ground based warning stations can lend him ECCM [the only way most fighters can have more than six ECCM is if a special sensor lends him more than four points, i.e., it is not limited by (J4.94)] giving him eight points, he gets within ten hexes of the planet so that one of the fighter ground bases can lend him four points of ECCM (giving him six points of ECCM).
Somewhere, someone is scrambling to get drones loaded onto a shatterpack/scatterpack. Maybe at both bases.
Somewhere, some GAS shuttles are trying to get into position to use their phasers.
Somewhere, someone is running weapons tests on the phasers of his ground base, whether a big phaser, or a small phaser-3 at a GWS.
The GWS guys are probably still scanning for danger right now (Tac Intell setting, max ECCM even though that will be only six points), but at some point one assumes Lt. Colonel Knight is going to order them to shift to some other function).
Somewhere, someone is dealing with panic-striken civilians.
Somewhere, someone is dealing with the communications traffic going hog wild with all this going on.
Somewhere, someone is running weapons tests on the DefSats.
Maybe someone is trying to get a shuttle to one of the fighter ground bases [there are five, two were at the FGBs to start with, two were at the GWS stations (one each), and one was at the GMG, so far I have been given to understand that the ones at the FGBs have been loaded, the one from the GMG was sent to an FGB to be loaded, but which one I do not know, and I do not really have any idea what is going on with the other two].
The Local forces probably have their trucks moving people like mad.
And probably all of them are imploring Colonel Knight for orders.
I think I can be reasonably certain that the moment the drones appear at range 100 the four phaser-4s will fire (there is no reason to delay them from firing, nothing is going to be at range 75 at the end of the first turn, so there is nothing for the one phaser-1 to fire at. Nothing is going to be within 51 hexes range, so no DefSat can fire (there is no rule that restricts a DefSat phasers to a maximum range of 15 hexes like a Captor mine, and these are not now on automatic . . . although as no one has ORDERED them to be taken over by Local Control I COULD pretend that they are still in automatic Mode). The fighters are falling back, so nothing is going to be within range 15 of their phaser-Gs at the end of Turn #1, nor is anything going to be within 35 hexes for them to launch a drone at it (same applies to the DefSats).
But just what else is going on, I do not know.
I mean, I do not even know if the initial shatter packs have taken off yet. The set up (i.e., time) was intended to allow Loren to have the shuttles up and sitting at what ever distance from the planet he wanted (literally to allow him to have all eight shuttles up if he wanted, although the GAS of course could not be up as Scatter Packs or Shatter Packs). To literally set up the board however he liked. Then let you guys "roleplay" your actions to get to that point. Then I would tell you what happened on Turn #1. Then Loren Would tell me his plans for Turn #2, and if I came to a point in Turn #2 where his plan was going "off the rails", I would stop, ask Loren what he wanted you guys to do then, and let you role play it to that point. Then proceed until we had finished Turn #2, then start again for Turn #3 and so on until the "vignette" ended, and we could all go into analysis (the "bar") and discuss "that incident involving the 429th Battalion". From the standpoint of Federation citizens in a bar (I would, I guess, have to be the visiting Klingon now that the General War is over and we are into the Andromedan War or something like that, but I just happen to have been a staff officer in that sector of space during that period, and know a lot about what the Empire was doing then).
Phoenix is indeed annoyed that he is carrying extra pods. If a G1 gets to close, that sensor pod will be going away.
SPP: I will likely have some time Sunday to finalize the T1 set up. I should also have a fair amount of time over the next week to see this through several turns.
GAS shuttle should be at least rising up out of the atmosphere.
SP are all still on the ground. I may order them up on T1. It depends on the G1's. I don't want them way out and getting killed by G1's.
SPP. I don't understand the "so that one of the ground based warning stations can lend him ECCM [the only way most fighters can have more than six ECCM is if a special sensor lends him more than four points, i.e., it is not limited by (J4.94)]" comment.
Per (J4.91) a Fighter cannot use more than 6 points of ECCM including built-in points, points from EWP, and points received from other units, but not including ECM points from "natural sources."
Andy Palmer:
An Admin Shuttle cannot use any points lent to it by its ship, by the MRS that operated from it ship as part of a fighter squadron, even if the ship is a carrier, by EW pods that it might carry, or from any other source at all, but is a valid as a target for lending from a Special Sensor (G24.217), which rule includes specific mention of lending to a fighter. The reference to other units is lending from an MRS or EWF or the carrier, or excess EW pods. A fighter might, for example, be an F-15D, and choose to carry two EW pods on its pod rails, and six more EW Pods on its drone rails, and then claim that all eight pods are generating ECCM plus the two points of built-in ECCM for a total of 18 points, AND is receiving lent points from an EW fighter . . . Nope. But a special sensor can lend additional points to ONE fighter (just as it can lend points to one PF, or One shuttle, or One other ship, or even to itself if they are ECM points, they could be ECCM points if the scout was also a base).
Special sensors are in excess of normal limits.
SPP. OK - I'm confused. (J4.91) points to (J4.92) for "points received by lending from other units" and (J4.92) specifically mentions loaning by Scout Channels (G24.217) as part of its "scope." So where does it state that (G24.217) loaning by a scout is not limited by the 6 point limit of (J4.91)? Again, I'm not arguing the ruling, just looking for a reference that I must have missed.
(J4.92) RECEIVING LENT EW: While a fighter has some built-in EW points, this is seldom enough to compete in the electronic warfare arena. While a fighter could receive lent EW from a scout under (G24.217), there will be far too many fighters in place for the scout to support each one as an individual. Instead, fighters are grouped into squadrons (J4.46) and the squadron is lent EW as a whole by the rules below.
Andrew:
The above rule says that a fighter can receive lending from a scout, but notes that a scout has to use one sensor per fighter, that scouts do not have enough power or sensors to do that effectively given the numbers of fighters, and then notes in the final sentence:
"Instead, fighters are grouped into squadrons (J4.46) and the squadron is lent EW as a whole by the rules below."
The rules following (J4.92) deal with lending to a squadron, not to the lending by a special sensor to a single fighter.
However, THE RULE I MISSED was (G24.2174) which specifically says about non-fighter shuttles:
"They can receive a maximum of four points of ECM and four of ECCM."
If the non-fighter shuttle can only receive four and four [vice the six and six I thought when reading the top of the rule (G24.217)], then the fighter clearly cannot receive more than that as the wording of this rule is clearly intended to be in sync with (J4.91) and therefore means.
As an added note, and something of a warning (not meant in any ominous sense or any derogatory or other sense, just a "be careful, not all GMs are nice people" sense) to Loren Knight.
Loren has casually mentioned that gathering data is a top priority, and that is why a fighter in Ghost Flight has the sensor pod in addition to a phaser pod.
However, I could have very easily taken Loren at his word, and defined that said fighter was not carrying type-I drones, but was instead carrying EW pods on its type-I drone rails. This would allow the fighter to generate six points of ECCM (two from each pod and its two points of built-in ECCM), and to switch that to ECM later if it needed to, but would have left it only two type-VI drones. But it would have been optimized to use the sensor pod to try to gather intelligence.
Steve Petrick:
please be "nice" to Loren...
We are about to move into combat where "Lorens Head" needs to remain focused on killing drones.
Taking him back to the failed recon mission (and almost as bad... rubbing our noses in the fact that (with the use of the senser pod) we could have had two recon missions running in different directions to gather intelligence is "water over the dam" at this point.
SPP: I'm glad you hadn't done that with the fighter with the sensor pod because my mention on intel was about tactics and I thought I'd clearly stated the loadouts of all fighters.
To confirm my previous orders:
Ghost flight is loaded as: 2 x T1, 2 x TIV, 1 x Phaser pod, and one fighter with one additional pod (Sensor). Top speed should not be critical if Ghost flight stays pleanty ahead of the drones like they are supposed to (and any G1's).
As a player I was a bit surprised by the G1 escorting the drones since this is more a stratigic move that a "start a R30 typical SFB scenario". Totally fair but a surprise. And given the date it's also fitting since few personell have much experience dealing with PFs as they have only come out the year before.
Jeff Wile: The recon could have gone better but it was not a failier. Spotting the G1 was very valuable and kept me from having Ghost flight hammered too. It also showed me an aproximation of wave size. I do think I sent them a bit too far and wish they could get back sooner but getting back is still important. Should there be a second wave they should be around to assist.
Loren:
I guess we will have to agree to disagree on the recon mission.
While killing the 28 drones was a tangible success... it happened after diverting 4 more F-16M's (40% of what we had available at Cassandra IV).
It should also be pointed out that killing the drones was not the Recons mission... identifying drones, getting a "count" and determining if there were follow drone waves were the goals.
it appears to me that we:
1. do not know if there are any more drone waves inbound.
2. now have 6 F-16M's available for defense "on map" of 100 hex range of Cassandra IV, not the 10 that we could have had (in a sense SPP managed with his drone strike strategy to "sucker away" 40% of the available fighter strength using 1/6th of his force. A very successful strategem, in that sense.)
Jeff Wile:
I am not rubbing Loren Knight's nose in anything. While I intend the topic to focus on tactical discussion as things develop, and in the aftermath, before moving on to the next "event" in the life of the battalion, all I intend to do is present situations and act as an "honest broker". Not to change anything just because I want the Klingons to win, or want you guys to win. You win or lose on your own merits. I am not going to cheat any for either side, except and only if it necessary to correct some extreme error, the failure to correct of which would make the situation completely untenable.
I did not, for example, force Richard Sherman to revise one of his reports based on the fact that the Gunboat would know the maximum EW of the fighters, and could easily counter it, so firing into the shift in that case was just flat wrong. But it was also wrong for the Gunboat to have launched drones at the fighters (two type-VI are not going to accomplish anything except to divert two phaser-3 shots) and come closer than range eight. He corrected that error for the second (actually third) shot, which also missed, but obviously the second shot should have connected but for the EW error. But disruptors DO miss, and can miss 'abnormally', i.e., missed consecutive times at range eight with no EW shift. So while a bad thing for the Klingons, it was not a something that required changing. It simply became a chance to note that in that particular set of circumstances, the situation would actually be different.
The use of EW pods is basically the same thing. If Loren Knight really wanted to have the maximum ECCM for his sensor pod, he could have had it. So I noted it, and noted that I was not going to change the situation.
Just like I am not going to jump all over and say "well you have no type-VI drones, because you tried to load type-IV drones which do not fit on those rails. I am not jumping on him about a typo. We all know he means type-VI drones. And in all seriousness if he posts a message that says a "scatter pack" is releasing 12 type-IV drones, we all know he means 12 type-VI drones.
I have absolutely zero interest in jumping on you guys. I want you to be able to have fun and enjoy this, not have me nit-picking over your typing skills or futzing about changing things just to be mean.
Sure, I questioned the use of the EWF on CAP and the "good fortune" that the EWF was on CAP, and have noted why it should not have been, but I did NOT make Loren change it. And, sure, when I told Richard Sherman he could not run and stay in the battle and gave him a quick run off set up just to let him play out that one small encounter, it was my goof for not making clear to him that there literally was no chance based on the actual contact distances that he could out run the PF back to the planet. So Richard assumed the contact distance was he actual set up distances I gave him and jumped on that. But again I decided against making him revise it back and let it stand.
I am not going to change anything the Klingons do outside of normal reactions to the information they have and within their "mission orders" and their 'overall strategic situation'.
Beyond that, if the Operations officer wants to argue with the Battalion Commander, he can try to do so, but if the Battalion Commander tells him to in essence be quiet, and we will talk about my "command perogatives" and "responsibilities as the commander of the battalion" later . . . well that sort of thing happens.
SPP managed nothing of the sort. That was ALL my doing. 
Still, I'd point out that eliminating all drones from direction A was very valuable and as of Turn 1 Annapolis can focus efforts on directions B and F. I think it's possible to save all planetary sides from devestation.
And Jeff, I remind you that we have power generation systems on these bases and those have power conduits that need regular cleaning and that duty often goes to those who call the CO's tactics "sucker". 
Just foolin' around with ya.
Loren:
I think its time that we started killing drones!
Major Wile to Col. Knight: "Orders? Sir!"
Turn 1 EA pending player comments:
All ground units are station as of my original post of Friday, April 22, 2005 - 03:01 am.
All bases, shields up.
All GBDP-4 are fully loaded and ready to fire. Generating 6 ECCM, 1 shields.
GMG: 1 shields, 4/5 transporters. (Will transport 2 BP to each GDS on B and F to prevent simple capture by possible Klingon infiltrators.
GWS A: 1 shields, 1 sensor, 6 ECCM, 6 EW SF#21.
GWS D: 1 shields, 1 sensor, 2 ECCM, 6 EW SF#21.
(I am utilizing power from the grid to perform some of these allocations).
Fighter Bases: 1 shields.
Sorry guys, I'm tired and realizing I'm probably forgetting some stuff. It has been a REALLY long time since I've played the full (G24.0) rules. I'll try to get some reviewing time in tomorrow. My schedule seems to be working against me.
SPP: Let me know if this format is workable or would you like a more SFB like EA form presentation?
Someone remind me to request another squadron, another battion of troops and three more GBDP-4's when this is all over.
Or at least a power station for Dallas.
Heh, maybe the Noumenan Gov. will build us a power station for Dallas on his bill, what with the attack and all.
Remind me to ask...
Loren,
A few things you might wish to add.
You should probably specify what the status of Scatter/shatterpacks are.
I believe..
Two ShP at A
One ShP at D plus one SP loading from imp 16 turn 0 so 1 type-1 drone.
I could be wrong. Easily.
Position of GAS?
It might be an idea to formally state the switching of defsats to "manual" control. This might be a good job to give someone?
A note on your EA ground bases do get some "free" EW so you may have a bit more power to play with than you think. I'll try and check your figures and get back to you later today.
Annapolis has GMG,GWS,FGB-S,GBDP
This gives 26 power.
all shields up costs 4
6 ECCM for GBDP costs 4
6 ECCM for GWS costs 4
special sensor(SS)costs 1
6 for SS costs 6
1 for 5 transporters 1
Total 20
Assumption all phaser capascitors are full, if GBDP fires turn 0 then 2 here.
It might be worth putting GMG's ECCM to 4 or 6 in case it gets a shot with its phaser-1
At Dallas FGB-S,GWS 11 power
Shields costs 2
Special sensor costs 1
6 power to SS costs 6
GWS gets 2 ECCM for free so 2 power remains
Loren:
Have you decided where you want Major Fords troops to be?
If you want them protected from possible Drone attacks (see drone strike, inbound...) they will need to be with various ground bases of the 429th PDU.
If you want them in the civilian Civil Defense shelters, IWT you would need to so state.
I concurr with Paul Stovall's suggestion to designate an officer in charge of the Def Sats... get the status of the Def Sats clarified and the ROE (ie automatic or manual control) defined.