Hi!


I had been considering the disparity between what is generally considered as a valid choice of fleet when looking at Alpha Octant (and possibly Omega, but I'm less sure on that one) races and what under current rules said races can actually field.

FOr example, there is nothing to stop a Federation player from taking nothing but taking NCAs to fill up his/her command rating allocation, while a Magellanic player must take smaller size class ships to get more cruisers on the table.

Now, it is true that the Magellanic rules suit the economics of the Cloud, as the races didn't have the resources to splash out on cruiser hulls, but the Alphas didn't have a free ride in contrast. Not only would it be historically inaccurate to have nothing but top-line cruisers filling out the fleets, the Alphas had a lot more fleets to manage than the Magellanics did and therefore needed to spread the larger hulls around!

So, I propose an optional rule (for now, at least) which would do something to address this.

There are two options I have cooked up:

*DEPLOYMENTS: Commodores and Admirals aboard command vessels of the various Galactic Powers may have often savoured the prospect of filling out the fleets under their command with cruiser-sized hull types, but no race could escape the logistical realities which hampered such ambitions.

In addition to the flagship, a size class 3 ship can be added to a fleet for every third size class 4 unit taken. Additonal size class 2 units can be added for every third size class 3 unit taken. The fleet taken must still abide by the Command Rating limitations of the fleet flagship. The additional scout does not count towards this limit.

Thus, with a command value of 9, a fleet can consist of a size 2 or 3 class flagship, three size class 4 units, a size class 3 unit, three more size class 4 units, an additional size class 3 unit and another size class 4 ship. Also, the fleet can take a scout, but regardless of hull size it does not count when working out how many ships of a certain hull size one can take.

*Same as above, but dropping the ratio from 3:1 to 2:1, reflecting the greater amount of larger hulls floating around the Octant. (DNs would still be 3:1 though, as they are rarer)

In this case, the same command value of 9 allows a fleet to consist of a size 2 or 3 class flagship, two size class 4 units, a size class 3 unit, two more size class 4 units, an additonal size class 3 unit, another 2 class 4 ships and an extra size class 3 ship. Plus the Scout, of course. (in this case, a Command rating of 10 would have allowed for another Size Class 2 ship to be taken - but on the other hand, you won't be able to sneak a DN into a CC-led fleet!)


I like the second option better, as the Alphas (and Omegas?) have more cruisers than the Magellanics, but stops players from cheesing out their fleet options!


So, what do you think?


(Now, this rule would affect F&E and FC as well, so should I re-post it in the boards for those two games?)


Gary

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 01:25 am: Edit

Here's a simpler idea.

Set the BPV.
Then get the other player to pick 1, 2 or 3 ships whose BPV may be in total no more than 33% of the BPV of the fleet and whose number ( that is the number of ships) is as follows.
below 500 BPV => 1 ship
500-1000 BPV => 2 ships
100 or more BPV => 3 ships

So once the other player throws in a CLa+ or an FFG, you're stuck with them but you get to alocate commander's option items and the like and the slected ships must be legal (he can't pick a monitor if you're having deep space fleet engagement) and he can't pick a vessel that requires other vessels and the vessels must be of your race and you get to dicide refits.
This way you can have uber-ships in your fleet but you'll also have one or two oddballs and trying to protect them becomes a task in itself.

By Lee Winstead (Gonzo) on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 07:07 am: Edit

In F&E it's not so much of an issue, because the reasons such a deployment wouldn't take place (the need of the ships elsewhere) is built into the game. While I don't really see the need for such a rule, I would say I like Michael's suggestion a bit better.

By Gary Bear (Gunner) on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 08:39 am: Edit

The Campaign Designer's Handbook had a "Flexible Command Point" system that did a good job of limiting these things.

I don't remember the exact rules, but the Command Ship's COMMAND RATING was multiplied by some number (x5?).

Each ship class cost a variable number of points. Smaller ships cost less than larger ships.

Each extra ship of the same type cost one more point. (So, if your first ship cost 6 points adding a 2nd ship of the same type would be 7 points. 8 for the third. etc.) This encouraged a diverse fleet.

Having a "Leader" for a full group of 1 Leader + 2 Qualified Followers provided a point back.

I've really liked they way that system worked out.

If you wanted bigger/smaller fleets, you always just adjusted the multiplier for the Flagship.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 11:26 am: Edit

If you really want to go for "realistic" F&E type fleets, they tend to follow a certain set of rules.

Fleets of 8 or more + command ship generally look like...
1) Command ship - this is ALWAYS at least a CC in any significant battle. Usually a DN or BT.

2) BattleGroup - 3 CW/CL-hulls and 3 DW/DD/FF hulls. Often, one or more of these hulls will be scouts,
especially in Maximum death fleets. Occasions when there is no battlegroup are rare and these are:-
2a) All Carrier fleet. Usually Zin. Rarely Hydran. Pretty much never for anyone else.
2b) SuperMax fleet. Usually Hydran (all cruiser). Occasionally a Lyran/Klingon fleet full of battlecruisers/DNs (upgraded version of 4a). However, the coalition tends to avoid this due to a lack of attrition in the fleet (Hydran death fleets take damage on fighters).

3) Free Scout - pretty much always present. Usually at least a CWS. Where DNs are involved, they will be scout tugs or heavy cruiser-based scouts.

4) Variable element. This can take a variety of forms, and fills out the remaining command slots
4a) Maximum death - add battlecruisers, possibly even extra DNs, Drone cruisers, extra heavy scouts, special attack forces, maulers. These extreme lines are generally only seen attacking starbases or the like. The principle is that you accept a big ship going down, but the enemy only gets one, and you are bringing in a lot of firepower.
4b) Carrier bunch - add 1-2 carriers+escorts depending on command slots. If only one carrier, fill out with some independent fighter squadrons. Most of the time, these will be at least CVL quality- CVEs are rarely seen in fleet battles (too vulnerable). This fleet option aims to limit the number of valuable targets that the enemy gets to shoot at.
4c) Attritional fleet - fill out remaining slots with a mixture of CWs, DDs, DWs, CLs, DWs and FFs (leaning towards CWs) usually with at least one squadron of fighters from a supporting carrier that is out of the battleforce.
5) Drone ships are always in attendance for (4a) type fleets, and often in attendance for 4b. One FCR and/or CVE fighters are usually around to give fighter replacements for heavier carriers in 4b.

These are the most effective options for "campaign" type fleets.

Now, if you are going for a smaller fleet (~6-8 ships), then things change. You will still usually have a CC or CA command ship. The scout is rarely more than a frigate or DWS, but you can occasionally get a drone cruiser scout (which may also be the command ship). The remaining ships will be CWs, CLs, DDs, or FFs (mostly FFs). Occasionally, another CA may be involved. Auxiliary and escort carriers can also be present. If you are Zin, a CVL can crop up.

Smaller still squadrons (2-4) usually have a frigate scout, and a couple more frigates. Very occasionally, they may have a SC3 ship. These are generally province holding squadrons. Although this is not well represented in F&E, these sqadrons are the most likely kind of fleet to be defending freighter convoys as these are what is splatted about all over the map. Anything bigger tends to loiter in justa few locations.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 11:45 am: Edit

So, in F&E, the biggest concentration of CWs tend to occur in attritional fleets. These will look like (e.g. Klingon/lyran)

BC(command - even attritional fleets usually get a CR10 vessel, certainly by Y172 or so - often they will have admirals to boot).

[CWL 2CW DWL 2DW] (battlegroup - 5 slots)
CWS (scout- free)
DWS (extra scout - 1 slot).
Independent fighter squadron (1 slot - from klingon F5Vs)
2D5 D5L (3 slots).

These fleets can be dangerous in their own right, with plenty of DSR (37 above).

By Gary Bear (Gunner) on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 11:53 am: Edit

---

Quote:

4a) Maximum death - add battlecruisers, possibly even extra DNs, Drone cruisers, extra heavy scouts, special attack forces, maulers.

---

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 12:20 pm: Edit

Fair point about the F&E situation - the game itself would act against putting one's eggs in a single basket.

Perhaps the 2:1 restriction would apply if one was putting together a Local/Guard force of ships, or a smaller patrol of regular navy vessels, but larger fleets would more likely be 1:1 between size 3 and 4 hulls.

For fleets which are supposed to rep the heavy attrition forces mentioned, one could just not use the optional rule at all - but unless you're playing out a F&E scenario and basing the fleets which fight in SFB on the forces assembled in that game it might be wise to agree this beforehand.

Although the larger hulled fleet would run into the BPV wall sooner than a more diverse opponent...


Gary

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 12:26 pm: Edit

I know.

But in F&E, those restrictions are lost, and are correctly removed because the player is making all the strategic decisions. As we are talking of changing things here, I'm merely saying what happens. Attacking a starbase and especially defending key starbases, maximum death battlelines in F&E are quite common (20-30% of the time in attack, 50%+ when defending).

The SFB restriction should be lifted for the really key battles, and any SB assault is a key battle.

The Zin capital only has one SB. However, the Zin will have 1/2 DN, 2DNLs, 2CCs+, 2CDs+, and other key ships in the hex. Given that the capital SB (and shipyard) is VITAL, you can bet your bottom dollar that a lot of those assets will be going into the battleline to maximise coalition casulaties. If the coalition is picking off those admittedly important ships, at least it is not blowing up your last line of defence.

Often, the same principle applies for key sector starbases. If you are ever going to pull all your best assets into one place, that's the time to do it.

By Gary Bear (Gunner) on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 02:40 pm: Edit

But, in F&E, the ships in the hex are not necessarily operating together. So the SFB limits (in S8.0) are not preventing that.

The battleline put up in F&E better corresponds to the SFB tactical fleet, but even it may really be the aggregate result of several seperate smaller battles that are occuring within the space of the hex.

By Ken Humpherys (Pmthecat) on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 06:43 pm: Edit

Yes but a perfectly legal Lyran supermaxed fleet is 1 DN, 1 BCH, 8 BC, 1 CWS and 3 flotillas of PF's. (The DN and BCH are both PF Tenders) Some think that the SR with PF pod is better than the BCH as it gives more Scout Channels. Also All BC will have repair. This means that you can repair all 18 PFs at the same time if needed.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 06:34 am: Edit

Gary

That's the point. The ships ARE operating together. I'm not saying this will happen, but if an opponent has removed the PDU's off Kzintai, and I only have a SB left as defences, I *will* have at least those assets in the hex, and the opponent is likely to see a line something like:-

DN (ADM) command
TGC-Troop pods (with Marine major general)
DNL
DNL
CC
CC
CC
CD
CD
[CVS-MEC-FKE]
LAV (no official escorts)
SB.

Scout:- TGT-scout pods.
Supporting Drone ships:- LAD, SAD, SAD.

The only way the Zin will be holding back is that they will probably have a battletug in hand and in the hex - unwilling to risk it on the line as they have very few CR10 hulls. Even then, It will probably have been in the line in place of a CC while the capital still has PDUs.

I have fought with Fed/Zin ships over the Marquis SB and fielded the following line.

DN (fed-ADM)
DNL
DNL
MSC (Zin)
[CVS-Zin(prime T)-MEC-FKE]
[CVS-Fed(prime T), SWAC, DE(Prime T), FFE]
CC (zin)
CF (Fed)
CFF (Fed - MMG)
SB.

Fed SC in scout box.
NCD DF drone support.

This was facing.
DN (ADM-lyran-command)
BC (prime)
BC (prime)
TGC-BPBP
CWS
36 independent fighters (18 F&E fighter factors)
[D5L 2D5 DW DWS DD] battlegroup
D6S - scout
3D6D - drones.

As the fight wore on, the Federation even introduced an unescorted! CVL into the line (taking the F&E formation bonus from the DN as it was more valuable). This didn't just happen over 1 F&E round. These kind of lines stayed there as ships were crippled/destroyed and replaced which the best of what was left over a protracted battle for the SB (which eventually went down).

And that was just a sector SB.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 06:40 am: Edit

duplicate post deleted

By Gary Bear (Gunner) on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 08:04 am: Edit

No, F&E is an abstract, so your battline may or may not be "operating together". Each round of battle may actually be only some of the battleine from each side fighting in the F&E hex.

Some of that is represented by the BIR. A low BIR may represent, at times, that the ships are individually patrolling/probing each other.

By Troy J. Latta (Saaur) on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 08:39 am: Edit

Feh. Why bother with the SB? If the PDUs are gone all he has to do is direct on the planet to devastate it and then disengage.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 09:12 am: Edit

Gary

I disagree. I really think the ships are actually fighting each other, not some weird subset of that fleet. Sure, as in any SFB fight, there will be times when the fleet may be split up over a number of hexes, but the basic fight is as F&E depicts.

But I also note that there is an "abstract" bunch of people in F&E who think that it has no realation to SFB. If so, I think, what's the point in connecting the two games at all? Why have the same command ratings assigned to the same ship in both games? I'm willing to acknowledge that an F&E round may just about be a series of engagements over a few weeks, but to say that the fleets used in F&E arn't indicative of what would be in SFB is decidedly weird.

Troy.

At that stage of the attack, the planet is not what matters. Sure, the Zin would hate to have their capital devastated, but they still have other sources of income. What they do not have elsewhere is ths shipyard, and that's partly what the SB represents, although in F&E the coalition has to take the capital hex entire to actually destroy the shipyard. Hence, losing the SB means that the Zin will still want to fight for the shipyard, but have no base to support them when doing so, which will probably leave them to be chased off quite easily.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 10:15 am: Edit

Gary.

I also note that the F&E rules book specifically says that you can use SFB to resolve F&E battlerounds.

By Gary Bear (Gunner) on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 10:58 am: Edit

---

Quote:

I disagree. I really think the ships are actually fighting each other, not some weird subset of that fleet.

---

---

Quote:

But I also note that there is an "abstract" bunch of people in F&E who think that it has no realation to SFB.

---

---

Quote:

Why have the same command ratings assigned to the same ship in both games?

---

---

Quote:

to say that the fleets used in F&E arn't indicative of what would be in SFB is decidedly weird.

---

---

Quote:

I also note that the F&E rules book specifically says that you can use SFB to resolve F&E battlerounds.

---

By Dale McKee (Brigman) on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 02:06 pm: Edit

Guys,

Fleet size is really a matter of time, taste and flexibility. In the good old days, we used F&E command ratings, and fought some huge battles. That was great when I was in college and we could leave the board set up in the living room for like, three days in a row.

Nowadays, most of my SFB gaming is done on SFBOL, but even so, I find huge battles tedious. What Jeremy Gray and I use for our own version of the "Admiral's Game" is the Flexible Command Rating System from the campaign designer's handbook. We use a multiplier of "4" instead of "5" to keep the battles a little smaller. They're still plenty big for us.

One thing we did to accomadate this was downscale the bases. You can't really attack a (defended) Starbase with a 7-ship fleet. So in the order of battle we just bumped the SBs down to BATs, the BATS down to BS.

So far it's been a lot of fun. You get the big ships, you get the carrier groups, but you also have incentive to include frigates and destroyers into the mix, because a mixed fleet is more efficient in the FCR system.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, July 02, 2006 - 01:58 am: Edit

A few years ago, I was involved in a campaign where we tried to create an economic reason to build (and use) the smaller ships.

We used a mulitplier to the BPV to get the cost of actually building the ship.
IIRC, it was something like this:

Move Cost	ship	multiplier	typical BPV	cost
1/3	FF	50%	76	$38
1/2	DD	70%	100	$70
2/3	NCL	80%	120	$96
1	CA	100%	135	$135
1 1/2	DN	150%	220	$330
2	BB	200%	350	$700

That B-10 is going to cost you as much as 5 CAs.
Can you afford to build it?
Can you afford NOT to build it?

1 CA, or 4 FFs?

2 CAs or 3 CWs? Same price.

As long as nobody got a huge economic advantage, fleets tended to be small, especially since if one side built a DN, the other players all HAD to have one too.

By Troy J. Latta (Saaur) on Monday, July 03, 2006 - 08:02 am: Edit

Aren't there 3/4 move ships too?

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, July 06, 2006 - 01:22 pm: Edit

and a few 1/4 as well...