Archive through August 15, 2002
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: New Product Development:
Module J3: Back in the Cockpit:
Archive through August 15, 2002
Well, I posted the 08:34 PM post while SPP was posting his.
First, I think I have a pretty good sense of fighter operations, but I have to admit, I spaced on the Starfish, and its possible date of introduction. Of course that's what makes you, SPP, so valuable. SFB is not my job so, while I literally grew up with the SFB rules, I do forget some things.
So maybe there is room for the E-module after all.
Everyone? What say you? Did I give up too easily?
BTW SPP: Why don't you write some CL articles on fighter operations? Or have you and I forgot that too. I'm NOT being sarcastic. I've been enjoying your recent posts.
The problem with the starfish is that if the lyrans were going to use anti-drones, they would have used them on pf's as well, and like SPP said they don't have them till Y180.
Let me see if I can sum this up:
1. There is no Lyran fighter PROBLEM. [emphasis, not yelling]
According to multiple posts on this board, I can clearly say that has been proven. According to my understanding of SVC's 8/14 @ 8:05 PM post, the hypothesis ends there, because with proper tactical play, the Lyrans ARE "getting by just peachy keen with what they have."
2. There IS A DESIRE (not a need) amongst several players (I must admit, myself included) to have a Lyran fighter with more of a Lyran "feel" to it.
This would, almost by definition, involve the elimination of any drone use. Since the Lyrans: a) have no indigenous fighters, and b) use the drone-using fighters provided to them by the Klingons, it is really impossible to accomplish the goal of making the already-existing history comport with the aforementioned desire in any kind of official way.
It may be presumptuous of me to say (and if so, I apologize in advance), but...gentlemen, I think this one's over and done.
[Personally, I have been known to break a few rules, and take a JGP, slap on 6 warp boosted (or, in the future, mega-)Z-D's or Z-DC's, with phaser pods and/or RALADS in place of the drones, and have at it. And yes, it may be worse off without the drones. But, gosh darnit, it FEELS more like a Lyran, and that's what I wanted for fun at the time.]
SVC did mention he liked the phaser pod thing. I think.
Gosh, I still have to try out the E-module. John, lets hash out some ideas. I'll send you something by this weekend. If we can work out the original design for fighters then lets see how it would apply to PFs. OK?
Sorry about being so wishy washy.
I just really fear the following scenario.
Lyran's get their new gadget.
Next week, teh first of what will become a deluge of email floods in, proclaiming that now the Hydrans are useless, what about the Fed P-G pod that was submitted, or the Klingon rapid fire disruptor pod, etc.
A tremendous amount of wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Finally, some changes are made...so after literally days of wasted man hours, that could have gone towards new products, the new system is tested and fielded...leaving us with....
Lyran fighters that pretty much act like they did before.
If there was an unlimited amount of time and money available, I would say go for it-- but the fact is that everything takes from something else-- and I'd really prefer SPP and SVC to spend their limited time on other products.
Wow, what a lot of heat about Lyran fighters recently.
I must admit that drone fighters work very well tactically for the Lyrans - drones are one of the best fighter weapons around because they are long ranged, don't need energy to reload, can require substantial effort to counter, are capable of massive damage and lots of neat abilities are available.
That said, I still feel a bit odd when running drone armed Lyran fighters because drones aren't a Lyran weapon - there isn't a single drone armed Lyran ship. It feels even stranger when in a free campaign, without a drone armed ally to purchase fighters from.
Since there quite clearly won't ever be a Lyran droneless fighter introduced, would it be possible to resolve this oddity by taking the opposite approach - promoting drones from a "foreign" to a "known but rare" technology for the Lyrans by printing a couple of drone armed variants. The scouts come to mind - they are only intended for fleet use, in which their ESGs are of relatively little use. Replacing their ESGs with drone racks would let them contribute firepower or (more importantly) ECM drones to the battle.
Fine.
Remove all drones.
Place under each "wing" a single shot P-3 pod.
End of story.
Being the agreeing type. I whole heartedly agree with Charles Gray.
SVC, any idea when you'll post an update on the submissions sent to you?
Andrew, I think there are two fundamental different ideas flowing through here:
1) Lyran fighters need soemthing, historically, to make them "better".
2) Lyrans need native fighters for free campaigns.
Point two would be great for SSJ, and I fall into the "theres no need for point one" camp. Problem is, I think these two goals have bleed together a lot here.
SVC:
Would there be anything wrong with allowing the Lyrans to have a few drone armed varrients to add some back-up to the idea that their Fighters have drones.
Say some G-rack armed GCVs ( to take advantage of Probe drones ) and CVAs and escorts ( so that fighters don't have to mess with ESGs when their comming and going ), just limited to those few vessels that either need to do away with their ESGs or those that need probe drones.
!?!
Please tell me you are kidding. The Lyrans do not need drone-armed ships to justify having drone-armed Klingon fighters.
What will be next?
The Federation has a few plasma-armed ships, so can they be given a few plasma-armed fighters?
The Gorns use Federation fighters, why not give them a few with drones? And, heck, if you do that why not add a few drone armed Gorn ships?
And the Feds gave the Tholians photons for their ships and fighters, why cannot the Feds transfer plasma technology to the Tholians as well?
Look, I am a drone guy from way back when. I have the kind of mentality that does not balck at launching and controlling massive drone waves (and defending against my opponent's massive drone waves), but the solution to the problem (if there is a problem, which I just have not been convinced of a need to overturn my own tactical doctrine to this point) is not to make the Lyrans a drone race.
And another observation:
Why did the Lyrans invent the Inteceptor and PF technology?
In simple terms because the Klingon Z-YC was not invented until Y183. If the Klingons had developed and mass-deployed the Z-YC in Y170, development and deployment of Interceptors and PFs might have been delayed to Y180, or later.
And one of the reasons the Federation did not develop Interceptors and PFs is because they developed the F-14A in Y177 which led to the F-18B+ in Y180.
And let us not forget the Federation F111 and A20 were also deployed in Y177.
And if the Lyrans have drone fighters, ESG's and drone armed ships-- what do the Kzin get? Saying they don't have as many drone ships as the Kzin do would be dodging the question-- The lyrans would still have the ESG that had been designed to help dealwith drone waves-- and an ability to launch waves of their own.
History is a big part of the game and many reasons for things being they way they are, are rooted in politics and trade negotiations. Not in game rules or pure logic. Each race should have its weak points. Thats part of the GREAT lesson of the game. To play down your weakness and use your strengths.
Dispite my previous wishy washiness I have said all along the Lyran Fighter problem is not really a problem for the game. I look at it this way, The Lyran fighter situation is the way it is because, given the surcomstances of the galactic situation of the time, that's what they were able to pull off. Not perfect but, hey, you take what you can get.
However, I do hear the call for something in free campaigns. That makes good sense. So why couldn't there be a design uniquly Lyran for SSJ. What would they do if they couldn't ally with the Klingons? Where there never any alternate plans on the table? I supose you could strike a deal with the Hydrans. 
Re: Having thought about the E-module more, I think it's a good idea but would only be able to be of real use for a few years befor PFs. I want to work it out but I don't see a great need for it.
Question,
did the Lyrans ever build any heavy fighters as precursers to interceptors? Most likely not ship mounted but planet based.
How about, purely for SSJ or soemthing else out in left field, something that is consistent with the Lyran penchant for ramming. Something like an Energy Lance (or Rake, now that I would think about it a bit more, since the fighter wouldn't want to ram a ship). Installed as a largish pod(or not if there is too much objection to a pod), it uses energy similar to the kind used in ESG's, but does not actually create a sphere or anything similar to it. The fighter passes through the hex of it's target, and in doing so, does a fixed amount to it I was thinking on the order of 8 pts or so). If any strength is left over, it can attack another object. Using similar tactic as the ships, they keep the feel of the Lyrans by using ramming tactics, stay away from drones, and givesthem a unique fighter weapon.
Robert,
Down side is any fighter with a ranged weapon (like a phaser) can enguage them before their ram would be useful. This would also require the fighters to be much faster than all current fighters to be of any offensive use.
SPP has, as they say, shown the light. Without drones the Lyrans are stuck with a fighter that can't fulfill either the offensive or defensive duties required of it.
For any system to replace drones it needs to offer the same flexability and range as drones. Makes it difficult to find a substitute.
If we could take a break from the Lyrans, I would propose a new weapon, the ANTI-SHIP MISSILE (ASM).
This is, basically, a great big anti-drone. Figure to take the ADD table and make range 2 be 2-3 and range 3 be 4-5, double the damage points, it cannot hit a fighter but it would do its nominal damage to a ship. Could be a keen new fighter weapon, carried on the rails that hold drones or D-torps.
Robert Snook:
I question this Lyran "penchant for ramming." The Lyrans have a sysem that can be used for ramming as one of its functions. Its primary design functions are not ramming related, but related to defense, i.e., stopping drones, keeping fighters outside of range three, and blocking hellbores. Ramming is just an incidental side effect, much like sweeping mines.
And technically it is not ramming since there is no contact between the two ships, and it is not really that different from a Kzinti ship getting in your face with its four type-IV drones.
So I just do not buy this whole "penchant for ramming" thing. It ain't so. It is just an overrun with sphere replacing the pointblank launch of drones or suicide shuttles.
SVC:
Uhm, double the damage points? I need a clarification. ADDs auto-kill drones, and roll a die to determine how much damage they do to a fighter/shuttle. Are you saying roll a die and double it, i.e., the weapon does from 2 to 12 points of damage? Or are you saying double the damage an ADD will do if fired INSIDE the shuttle bay, i.e., it will do two points of damage?
I just want to be clear.
'Double the damage points' so that means it would do 1D6*2 damage to a ship?
Considering an ADD does 1D6 damage to a fighter.
And it would be usable by the Gorns/Romulans?
Doesn't D-Plasma only do 10 damage? This would be better then them for the Gorn/Romulans.
Let's make the ASM 2D6 damage. It's possibly better than a plasma-D but has shorter range.
Quote:This is, basically, a great big anti-drone. Figure to take the ADD table and make range 2 be 2-3 and range 3 be 4-5, double the damage points, it cannot hit a fighter but it would do its nominal damage to a ship. Could be a keen new fighter weapon, carried on the rails that hold drones or D-torps.
Damage points: if I recall correctly, an ADD does 1d6 damage to shuttlecraft (and auto-kills a drone). So would the damage from the ASM be 2d6? If so, that's a heck of a punch from something that can't be shot down and cost no power to arm...if it could be mounted on a fighter's drone rails and do that, it probably wouldn't take long for the engineers to fit shipboard ASM racks to do likewise (it would be nasty for overruns). I'm not sure what this would do to the overall game balance....
Er, disregard the damage question (we were typing at the same time).
Oh, yes, sorry, put it on drone racks and plasma racks, of course. And the corresponding drogues, captor mines, and defense satellites.