Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	Archive through April 21, 2010	25		04/21 04:03pm
	Archive through December 27, 2013	25		12/27 01:59pm
	Archive through April 08, 2015	25		04/08 02:17pm
	Archive through March 02, 2016	25		03/02 10:00am
	Archive through March 03, 2020	25		03/04 07:41pm
	Archive through December 13, 2020	25		12/25 12:51pm
	Archive through March 03, 2022	25		03/05 01:00pm
	Archive through March 16, 2022	25		05/23 11:36am
	Archive through July 24, 2023	25		08/05 11:54am
	Archive through September 17, 2023	25		09/23 02:21pm
	Archive through October 08, 2024	25		08/02 08:59pm
	Archive through August 05, 2025	25		08/06 05:41pm
	Archive through August 17, 2025	25		08/24 07:15pm
	Archive through September 30, 2025	25		10/01 11:19am
	Archive through November 16, 2025	25		02/13 02:27am
	Archive through March 05, 2026	25		05/04 01:39am
	Archive through May 10, 2026	25		05/17 12:45pm
	Archive through June 06, 2026	25		06/11 06:12pm

Alan, a "Hail Mary" tactic is simply one that would not be used regularly. I wasn't meaning to belittle the tactic, rather to point out that it wouldn't be an early choice. I even came up with a scenario in which its use would be warranted.

By John Christiansen (Roscoehatfield) on Sunday, June 07, 2026 - 12:43 am: Edit

Greg, (G10.3), (G10.321), and (G10.322) could benefit from rewrites.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandar) on Sunday, June 07, 2026 - 03:56 pm: Edit

8 WB is a bit light.

The Tholians are paying 690 BPV for a 2 strand buzzsaw with asteroids at WS=2. 2 minefield packages cost 50 each. (100 BPV) 800 BPV for the web alone. A BATS is 200BPV, HPM 57BPV and a PFM is 12BPV. PF flotilla 4 Ar-PW 152BPV, Ar-L 50BPV and scout 50BPV. This brings You to 1,221 BPV. With no other defending ships.

The wedding cake can save you 200bpv or so from cheaper web setup.

A Seltorian Battle group of 3CL and 3DD 666BPV. 9 WEB breakers. HC costs 142BPV 426BPV for 3. 1,092 BPV 15 Web Breakers. Leaving points for a scout and COs.

The Buzzsaw will put the PF-Pinwheel deep in the web. The Wedding cake must have at least 1 in-between the second and outer web.

Onion Peeling to take out the PF-pinwheel a must do in the wedding cake. The Pinwheel cannot move just rotate.

Higher BPVs would hurt the Seltorians as their CR is at best an 8.

But would even 15 be enough? In the home galaxy they had Battle wagons with 14 Web breakers... OUCH

By John Christiansen (Roscoehatfield) on Thursday, June 11, 2026 - 02:59 pm: Edit

Gregory, the Selt DNL, a medium hull with 3 booms, has a CR of 9.

The 8 WBs are to weaken the web to allow ships in the web the possibility of proceeding. They only need to weaken a web strand to a maximum strength of 31.

The WBs of a BW are mostly divided left and right.

A heavy cruiser is a CA, not an HC. Let's not be confusing.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandar) on Thursday, June 11, 2026 - 06:12 pm: Edit

sorry about the CA HC stuff. Other games and work

I was pointing out that the cost of said defense. If playing an even BPV battle. The attacking force would be much stronger.

I am more interested in can the web be weakened enough for ships to pass thru without breakdown and damage. How long will it take and how much damage can be inflicted on the attacker before this happens. Would the 15 web breakers be enough.

It would not be hard for the BW to fire one side tac or turn to get the other seven in arc in a turn. There is of course no BW in this galaxy.

The DNL does indeed have a CR of 9 and can be built in the milky way.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, June 12, 2026 - 07:40 pm: Edit

Gregory, I think you put way to much emphasis on "... playing an even BPV battle", at least as things currently stand. For one thing, I think the BPV system is "broken" as regards Tholian bases. There are several problems with it but in my opinion the worst, by far, is that the BPV cost of pre-existing web does not change with the year of the scenario. As the Y160 and Y175 improvements go into effect, any given Tholian defense becomes a lot stronger, but is not any more expensive. That's why I have previously proposed that the (G10.82) COST rules be changed so that the BPV cost to buy web increases when the Y160 improvements go into effect, and again when the Y175 improvements go into effect. I don't think that's the only problem with the web BPV costs, but as stated I think it's very much the worst.

More generally, while BPV-based battles are fine for a stand-alone scenario with no past and no future. They aren't really very relevant for strategic campaigns. I will talk about this a bit more in a later post (maybe tomorrow).

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Sunday, June 14, 2026 - 01:43 am: Edit

OK, why do I think that examining BPV-based battles isn't really particularly relevant for strategic campaigns? Because when an attacker assaults a fixed position, the attacker is not looking for a "fair fight". The attacker will instead hit the fixed position with however much force he thinks is necessary, while considering the position's strategic importance and what other threats he has to deal with.

In SFB terms, if a particularly important base (for any empire) needs to be destroyed, and the total defensive strength amounts to 1000 BPV, the enemy is not going to bring a 1000 BPV force to attack it. That's a consideration for a stand-alone scenario, not a battle that is part of a strategic campaign. If the attacker has the resources available, he will hit that base with a 1500 BPV force, or more if he can afford it. Of course, the attacker may have other battles to fight, which will limit how many resources he has available to commit to that base's destruction. But if the target base is really important to the overall outcome of the war, the attacker will hit it with enough to ensure success, even if that means shortchanging other, lower priority battles. And if the attacker simply doesn't have the resources to attack the base with anything better than a 50/50 chance of success, maybe it's better to screen the base to prevent it from performing its logistical functions, rather than launch an "iffy" attack that might devastate the attacking forces while failing to take the base.

This isn't to say that BPV considerations per se are unimportant in strategic campaigns. Let's suppose our hypothetical campaign uses BPV (as opposed to EP/XTP, or some "home brew" method) for determining purchase costs of forces. The total cost of the forces necessary to take out a given base (and defenders) is absolutely a consideration - just not on the basis of forces for an individual battle. Especially against the Tholians, any non-Andromedan attacker is likely to have to engage in several "waves" to take down a well defended base. The total cost of all those waves is the relevant factor, rather than the cost of one wave.

More later.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandar) on Sunday, June 14, 2026 - 11:39 am: Edit

I agree that in a campaign format. The attacker will be bringing overwhelming force to attack that Thoilian base. The Tholians will need to defend that base with a strong enough force to hold the base until a relief force can be mobilized.

This leaves us with how strong a force cam be brought to bear on the base and to defend the base. The Tholians have a huge advantage.

In F&E as well as SFB. There are command limits. That is why in F&E it takes multiple rounds of combat to take down bases and planets. This is I believe the situation You are trying to set up.

As the Tholians all I need to do is leave enough defensive forces to defend the base against a full fleet. Multiple rounds will still take out the base unless a relief force can be brought in from outside. Or the attacker did not bring enough force even for multiple assaults.

This whole discussion has started with what is better a Buzzsaw are Wedding cake defense.

In this case it becomes which web defensive can bleed the attacker more before the base drops,