Archive through April 06, 2011
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: The Omega Sector:
Omega General Discussions:
Archive through April 06, 2011
Mike wrote:
>>My problem with the Alunda is that they're very, very fragile with the Warp (Any) given that there weaponry makes you want to come in. Once they start going into power hits it all starts to whirlpool very fast.>>
That hasn't been my experience, at least in single ship duels. The Alunda does a lot of damage very consistently at R4--more than most other Omega races (except, say, the Drex), and on an alpha exchange, the Alunda is generally doing more damage than its opponent, and thus doing more internals, and coming out ahead on the exchange. Later in the game things can get dicey based on seeking weapons or whatever, but between the hard hits the Alunda can hand out and their exceptional repair abilities, they do fine, in terms of taking damage.
>>- I cannot be concur with your appraisal of the Maesron .. up to the TM comment.>>
I'm not sure I understand what this means.
>> TMs are significantly harder to hurt and more likely to hit than an Alpha drone.>>
Sure. But there aren't many of them. Certainly not in single ship duels. And in squadron/fleet actions, there are still relatively few of these in play. And while each one individually can be hard to deal with, they don't actually have that much of an effect on a given game--they suck up some phasers or tractors, and that's it. The amount of pages of rules that go into making them ready to launch just aren't worth it.
>>- From a tourney perspective, we ended up banning the Trobrin from our local battles off of the original tourney cruiser for them. I haven't seen the updated one on SFBOL. They are a solid race that would be awesome if they just had a little more power ... which the TC gave them.>>
The current playtest TC is pretty solid, but is based on a 2/3 move CL/CW kinda hull, so it still has the impressive weapon suite and armor, but an otherwise fragile hull. It seems pretty reasonable, if strong.
Peter,
> You have a sub optimal comparison. Move the BBs out to R15, and it gets significantly worse.
My point is not the Alunda should try to dance at range, but that they can do OK. If the disruptor opponent turns off, they can give about what they got. Note that at range 16-21, the comparison is pretty close, and if you throw in an EW shift, BBs come out ahead.
>>I do agree the PW without the WT is a pretty wimpy weapon, though, especially since the Omega MRB cut in half their effectiveness versus plasma.>>
>Huh. I'm not even sure I know what this means--
Yes, the Omega MRB clarified that they don't get double damage, despite the fact that plasma torpedoes are unshielded.
Mike,
>>My problem with the Alunda is that they're very, very fragile with the Warp (Any) given that there weaponry makes you want to come in. Once they start going into power hits it all starts to whirlpool very fast.>>
It seems that way but only because the Alunda always wants more power, so any power hits hurt. It doesn't actually lose power faster until you get deep into the DAC.
OTOH, its weapon suite is terrifyingly resistant to damage. You could totally gut an Alunda ship that is coming in, but short of getting to the "ANY WEAPON" column, it will still be able to give its full alpha strike.
>>I cannot be concur with your appraisal of the Maesron>>
TMs can be tough to deal with, and I like the design concept of fewer, nastier drones. However, my points are
a) You don't have enough of them to base your strategy around. They are an extra goody, not a primary part of your attack.
b) The price for upgrades is out of line with the effectiveness. A Maesron CA could easily spend 20% of its BPV on missile upgrades, but it will not be 20% more effective.
Andy wrote:
>>My point is not the Alunda should try to dance at range, but that they can do OK.>>
Oh, sure. I'm just looking at them as a whole, and concluding that:
A) They are relatively weak at ranges 8+ relative to a lot of other Omega empires.
B) The Plasma Whips aren't that hot to begin with.
And as a result:
C) Giving the Alunda Whip Torps as a reasonable, if modest, longer range weapon doesn't seem like that big of an issue.
I mean, yeah, they are good at close range too, but a lot of the time, the PWs are going to be just as effective (if not more so) in close, and not cost power.
>>Yes, the Omega MRB clarified that they don't get double damage, despite the fact that plasma torpedoes are unshielded.>>
Ah, fair.
Maybe I'm missing something, but (OR9.R1) in my copy of the OMRB says that the Whipcrack Torpedo refit costs 2 BPV per plasma whip. Was that a change from the original rule?
Huh. Yeah, that isn't in Omega 4(3? Wherever the WT is originally published).
It is in the Omega errata file, if that helps. (There are separate errata files for the OMRB and Omega #5, too.)
Hmm. I just went looking through the Omega Errata File and didn't see the 2 BPV surcharge for WTs (in the OFP.7 section, at least). Any ideas where it is found?
The Alunda R-section errata spills over pages 17-18, look for (OR09.R1).
Wow, you're right. I had some hazy memory that a refit cost was considered when the OMRB came out, but after reading (OFP7.1) I figured it had stayed a no cost option. Looking at the rules again, it appears that (OFP7.0) and (OFP7.1) contradict each other, and neither mentions the cost of the refit. It is only mentioned in (OR9.R1).
The MSC in the OMRB has separate entries for the Alunda ships with and without the refit, too. (A refitted Pursuer is listed as PRw, for example.)
Huh. Well, there you go then. Whipcrack Torps cost 2 points per Plasma Whip. And apparently, Alunda ships never have to pay for life support.
Those are both fairly important additions that are easily missed.
Peter,
My exposure to the Alunda is somewhat different from yours. I've principally flown them squadron on squadron, mostly Alpha vs. Omega. In general, I play keep away till after the turn break to halve the turn one power in the BBs or take a poor shot.
The combination of fewer, but more powerful batteries and the fact that they stay armed longer than most ships accentuates the problem that they are power hungry and initially fairly light on it to begin with.
If you can get him to blow his batteries poorly, they become very power hungry to make a solid shot and while I cede that they don't actually take power hits any worse, I feel every one more.
As for the TMs, I put them in the exact same role as drones. They might force maneuver, but only if they're en masse or you have an opponent who's skittish about them. More often, they provide some accounting that needs to be taken into account of by both parties and reduce the margin of error on the part of your opponent. In duels, they reduce the one-turn firepower of my opponent. In large fleets, they can be terrifying - especially to a separated opponent.
In neither case, drones or TMs does the advantage of the upgrades justify the cost. Make a 20 BPV scatterpack ... it dies (almost) just as quick as a 4 BPV one. The options, however, do put some people into total histerics just guessing what COULD be out there.
I would disagree that drone upgrades are not worth it. For 12 BPV, you can upgrade 2 B-racks from slow to fast drones. If you have type-IVs in your racks, this could cost as little as 6 BPV. Included in the upgrade price is up to 4 SPs (assuming double reloads and 4 shuttles). You could also have armor on some of them at no extra cost. There's a world of difference in effectiveness.
Let's compare two type-1F drones to a comparable TM. We won't even talk about things like a type-IV drone with 1/2 armor space.
| Cost | 2x1F | 1xTM |
| speed 32 | +2 BPV | +2 BPV* |
| warhead 24 | included | +2 BPV |
| armor 8 | included | included |
| total | +2 BPV | +4 BPV |
| Features |
| power req'd to tractor | 2** | 2 |
| Can use in SP | yes | no |
| max targets | 2 | 1 |
| WH arming delay | 0 | 4 imp |
| reloads | 2 | 1 |
| reload during scenario | yes | no |
| launches before reloading | 6 | 6 |
| per turn launch rate (2 racks) | once | once |
| HW penalty for firing at | 4 ECM | none |
*propulsion-36 minus 4 payload spaces
**requires two separate tractor beams to get both
For twice the BPV, you get an inferior weapon.
Mike wrote:
>>My exposure to the Alunda is somewhat different from yours. I've principally flown them squadron on squadron, mostly Alpha vs. Omega. In general, I play keep away till after the turn break to halve the turn one power in the BBs or take a poor shot.>>
Huh. I can't imagine that that would work that well (i.e. playing keep away in an Alunda), unless I am misunderstanding you--they have questionable long range firepower, but are fantastic at R7 or closer. I mean, yeah, doing a turn 1 corner dodge kinda deal is totally reasonable to fill up capacitors is good (although even that has a lot of diminishing returns), but playing to aggressively get to R4 or so for your first shot is totally worth it if you can get it, or R7 if you can't.
>>The combination of fewer, but more powerful batteries and the fact that they stay armed longer than most ships accentuates the problem that they are power hungry and initially fairly light on it to begin with.>>
I dunno--with a CA (10xBBs), you start with 10 in the capacitor. If you dilly-dally around on T1 and shove as much power into the capacitor as you can on T1 without fighting (i.e. corner dodge on a closed map if you have one, or just stay out range 12 or so on an open map), you can start turn 2 with, like, 14 or so capacitor power (34 power; turn on shields for 2, hold an ARF for 2, have a shuttle for 1; move speed 13/14 for maximum speed on T2, 16 power in capacitors. Start T2 with 13 power. Maybe use a couple battery power to make it 14.) On T2 you can move reasonably fast when you expect to be fighting and have 20-22 power in the capacitor (3 to turn on ship, 1 for shuttle, 2 for ARF, 8 into capacitor for 21-22 total, 20 for movement). With 8xBBs to fire at R4, getting 5x4 point bolts and 3x1 point bolts is completely viable for a speedy CA, which is going to do a lot of damage (~50) off a middly armed cruiser. You are likely going to get a reasonable edge on internals vs a comparable opponent. With a lot of repair capacity and no need to really arm the BBs significantly on the next turn if you want to maneuver for position and set up for a good close range strike on the N+2 turn.
I mean, yeah, Alunda Ships can always use more power than they have, but they seem to be pretty solid, power wise.
>>If you can get him to blow his batteries poorly, they become very power hungry to make a solid shot and while I cede that they don't actually take power hits any worse, I feel every one more.>>
Oh, sure. But how do you get someone to blow their batteries poorly? If you are at close range, I guess you could try and tractor them, but tractor ranges seem like a bad place to be vs an Alunda. I mean, yeah, I agree that the batteries are very important for shoring up the BB strikes and the like, and losing batteries is very problematic for their ships. But on the up side, a cruiser with 6 healing capacity can fix a battery and 4 hull to protect it in one turn.
Mike wrote:
>>My exposure to the Alunda is somewhat different from yours. I've principally flown them squadron on squadron, mostly Alpha vs. Omega. In general, I play keep away till after the turn break to halve the turn one power in the BBs or take a poor shot.>>
Ah, ok. Now I see what you are saying. As an *opponent* of an Alunda force, you'll avoid contact on T1 to disadvantage their power supply. Check.
Yeah, Ok, I can see that working if the Alunda is planning on shooting on T1, which, generally speaking, I'd tend to avoid. Use T1 to fill up the capacitors as much as possible (to maximize T2 power) and then plan on shooting on T2 while moving fast. I mean, yeah, on an open map with infinite room to run, someone opposing the Alunda can keep ranges at 13+ indefinitely. Which will make the Alunda be really bad. But that is a problem with open maps for lot of empires.
Assuming that you need to close for whatever reason at some point (closed map, something on the map forcing the action), playing to fill up capacitors on T1 and then going fast and shooting on T2 works well for the Alunda. Try to end the turn inside of R12 (Alunda corner dodges if the opponent charges; Alunda moves to the middle of the map if the opponent corner dodges). T2, move fast with a good chunk of capacitor power (see math in previous post from the Alunda perspective). If your opponent closes, you get a good shot at R4, do a lot of damage, and likely come out ahead of the exchange, and can keep the opponent from getting too close with an ARF. If your opponent runs, if you can get to R7, a solid, unanswered R7 shot on a back shield is still gonna be effective--4x 4 point and 4x 1 point bolts of an HS at R7 is going to do, like, 35+ damage with reasonable luck. Mostly unanswered damage if they are running to avoid range. If it is a squadron fight, three ships doing what they can at R7 will mangle a cruiser at this range.
Andy,
It's not Armor 8, it's armor 4x2,which is a significant difference. I can take a P3 shot on one and probably get it down, I can tractor the other ... the individual toughness is substantial.
Your comparison also presumes that 32 is a viable option. For the majority of the game timeline, it's not. In any of that era, TMs are significantly more deadly than a drone, year for year.
Peter,
Yes, sorry for the confusion, you got my meaning correctly. We often end up using a non-tradiational 51dia hexagonal map, which while not "open" gives a lot of running room. By campaign rule, the defender largely gets to pick the initial range all things equal. If I'm defending an Alunda, I'll try to take a medium range so he has to gamble on me turning in or out. If he plots slow, I turn out. If it plots fast, I'll hold him past the turn break at medium speed then turn in (to get the end of turn loss in capacitor). As the aggressor, you pray that it doesn't start at medium range.
Any way you go about it, he's getting one really good shot and then the capacitor is probably pretty close to dry and he's trading off attack speed versus arming as much or more than just about any ship I can think of ... with the possible exception of the Lyran.
Mike wrote:
>>Any way you go about it, he's getting one really good shot and then the capacitor is probably pretty close to dry and he's trading off attack speed versus arming as much or more than just about any ship I can think of ... with the possible exception of the Lyran.>>
Oh, sure--after an initial exchange, the capacitor is going to be empty. But in terms of follow up attacks, as they don't need to pre-arm anything, an Alunda ship can just drop all power into movement and haul after someone, end a chase turn at close range (hopefully :-), possibly though the use of an ARF, and then park and blast the heck out of someone on the next turn.
Even running with a completely empty capacitor, if you can manage to get someone at R2, firing a late turn barrage of 1/2 point BBs is going to take down a shield and if you can follow up with a volley of plasma whips, you are doing a lot of damage for minimal power.
But yeah, certainly power hungry in general :-)
Mike,
If you want to compare speed-20s, the numbers look the same. It's +2 BPV for the TM, +1 BPV for the drones, still double cost. And, as noted, there are better drones than the vanilla type-I. Start comparing armored TMs versus armored and double-space drones and the comparison gets uglier.
As for the armor thing, I think it's a wash. Yes, it is significant that 4 points will kill one drone but do nothing to the TM, but there's a flip side. Having two targets versus one dramatically increases the overkill factor. For example, 3xp3 is guaranteed to kill a TM with armor-8, but only 2/3 likely to kill both drones.
Sure, a single TM is better than a single drone. But a ship with two drone racks can launch 8 drones in a turn (2 rack + SP) compared with one TM launch. (Yes, control channel limits will make launching 8 tricky, and you can't do this too many times and SPs have some other limits, but still....)
Andy,
As usual, I can't debate your appraisal. I do, however, disagree with the "soft" factors.
I've always thought of TMs as a reasonable equivalent (with some pros and some cons) as compared to drones, with the fairly transparent side-effect that it drops the number of seeking weapons in play to plasma-esque levels.
In both cases, I'm going to launch the weapons to give my opponent something else to think about while they're trying to shoot at me. If I'm flying big plasma and my opponent negates a plasma torpedo (guesses right on a psuedo, etc.) it's a pretty big hit to my strategy. In neither the case of the TM or two drones do I blink an eye if they go down. The cost to the opponent in whatever it was that took them down is sufficient compensation.
Mike wrote:
>>I've always thought of TMs as a reasonable equivalent (with some pros and some cons) as compared to drones, with the fairly transparent side-effect that it drops the number of seeking weapons in play to plasma-esque levels.>>
Operationally speaking, I think you are completely correct--they are things that you put on the map, they affect your opponent's movement and make them waste resources dealing with them and if they don't, they hit you and do damage.
On the upside, as you point out, there are far fewer of them on the map (as a given cruiser can launch one per turn and control 3 instead of launching, like, 4-10 and controlling 12). On the down side, as Andy indicates, they are too expensive for what they do and much less effective than drones.
I don't think this is actually a problem, however, until you start pitting Tachyon Missiles vs Drones in a fight. I mean, yeah, I agree that TMs are too expensive in an absolute sense, but in general in the land of Omega, not that big of a deal. When you start matching Maesron ships vs, like, Kzintis, the TMs start to look *really* ineffective. As the Maesron cruiser will launch 1xTM this turn, the Kzinti cruiser will launch 4 drones, will kill the single TM with a single drone, and still have 3 drone on the map. Then 8 impulses later, they'll do the same thing, giving the Kzinti a 6:0 seeking weapon advantage. Without launching a SP.
In Omega world, the Maesron will always have the "drone" advantage due to being the only guy with drones (effectively), and without other drones being around, the TMs are harder to deal with, as they require tractors or phasers or weasels or whatever. So even if they aren't super effective, they'll still do *something*, even if it is suck up 2 tractor power or 2-3 phasers each.
If you stick with basic TMs, what you get is not so bad. They're an extra gadget that does have some influence. This is the case regardless of your opponent. It's when you start paying upgrade costs that there's a problem, and this is true whether you're talking TM-using-Omega versus non-TM-using-Omega, or TM-using-Omega versus anything else.
Now, I agree that a drone is more effective at shooting down TMs than most weapons available in Omega, but I don't think that makes the Maesron unplayable versus the Kzinti. Things like web, ADDs, t-bombs, and large numbers of tractor beams are extremely effective against drones and give Kzintis headaches, but they don't make Kzintis non-viable in those match-ups. And the Maesron doesn't rely on TMs nearly to the extent that the Kzinti relies on drones.
Side note: Maesrons are not the only ones who use TMs, the FRA and Bolosco also use them. Also, the Qixa and Rynish have drone-like weapons that are much better than drones.
Andy wrote:
>>Now, I agree that a drone is more effective at shooting down TMs than most weapons available in Omega, but I don't think that makes the Maesron unplayable versus the Kzinti.>>
Oh, sure--I think the Maesron is hardly completely killed by, say, the Kzinti (although I think the Kzinti should generally be killed completely by a Kholigar. At least a traditionally armed Kholigar). It has enough direct fire to out shoot the Kzinti if it can keep the range open some for some amount of time. But that a Kzinti can totally (essentially) ignore the Maesron's TMs puts it at a not insignificant disadvantage.
Yeah, Kzintis have troubles with all the various drone defenses out there, but they tend to all come with a downside/cost for using them (weasels cost speed; t-bombs are hard to use; ADDs have ammo and range issues; etc). The drone/TM disparity is such that a single type I drone will generally kill a single TM, and cost the drone ship essentially nothing.
>>Side note: Maesrons are not the only ones who use TMs, the FRA and Bolosco also use them. Also, the Qixa and Rynish have drone-like weapons that are much better than drones.>>
Oh, sure. But looking at the FRA and Bolosco, the TMs on those ships seem to be a serious after thought (i.e. the FRA seem to, like, replace probe launchers with TM racks or whatever) and not very consistent. The Qixa and Ryn have drone like weapons, but they are all sorts of weird and seem to be much less vulnerable to defensive weapons.
Too bad there is no upgrade that allows a TM to tractor a drone(-like weapon). Imagine the fun with a TM dragging back a ship's drone and having it blow up on the same target as the TM hits. 
I agree with Mike's assessment, while I don't dispute Andy's apprasal of drones vs. TMs, I do think that it requires a different dynamic in thinking and tactics, on how to deploy and fight with TMs as opposed to drones.
Because the diversity of a TM's loadout, you can use them quite differently than you would a drone.
As two examples:
You can add phasers to a TM and have it travel with the ship instead, thus acting more as a "fighter" escort.
or
With ECM pods and either phasers or explosive warheads, it can act as an ECM drone that has options in attacking a target.
The TM is not just a hyped up drone, it's more of a multi-diverse tool.
The Aurorans replace short-range cannon mounts on some of their later ships with TMs. They don't have a bombardment platform published for them (and may never actually fbe given one); but the ships which do get tachyon missile launchers are equipped with type-B racks, which is better than the racks on most Mæsron ships currently in print.
But then, time will tell whether or not any of the later Mæsron (or Vulpa) hulls will end up with one or more of the better rack options listed in the TM rules.