I could maybe see a base that had weapon modules. You know, instead of the fighter or PF modules? A module could have a pair of P4's, maybe some P3's, APR, and add a few boxes of shields. Something like that put on a BATS or BS would enhance it's power, but wouldn't require a new base.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 06:47 pm: Edit

Andy mentioned that. And as one could gather from our back and forth, the problem would be making the good enough to compete with fighter modules, instead of one clearly being supieor to the other

By Les LeBlanc (Lessss) on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 07:15 pm: Edit

Well that depends on what race and FTR though doesn't it?

By David Kass (Dkass) on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 07:27 pm: Edit

I just proposed a couple of items along these lines in the Omega 5 topic (new product development), the heavy defsat and the batsat (battle sat). These were Omega versions, but could easily be modified for alpha quadrant use (the heavy defsat is 3 ph-2 one extra heavy weapon and 3 ph-3).

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 07:48 pm: Edit

A little SFB history lesson.

Actually, augmentation modules got their start from a proposal by then Kzinti Patriarch Alan Gopin for a Drone Module that could be mounted on any Kzinti base. This caused SVC to invent all the other modules (with the idea of modules having thus been invented), including a number of other weapon modules.

The then Chiefs of Staffs almost unanimously voted in favor of all the non-weapon modules, and rejected the weapon Modules (the exception being, if memory serves, Patriarch Gopin, who only voted in favor of his original drone module, i.e., he also voted against all of the other weapon modules).

On to other things.

Geoff Conn:

Either you misunderstood my point, or I failed to make my point, or you are talking about something else.

The point about mass is that if something is very small, it will not last long. Base Stations, however weak they seem, can take a pretty hefty pounding and pound back because they have multiple weapons that fire through different shield arcs and small phasers to shield the heavy phasers somewhat. If you want to knock every phaser-4 off of that base station you have to knock down at least two shields and score at least nine (in some cases ten) phaser hits, and that is assuming the base does not repair a few phasers. And you have to score at least 26 points of damage (assuming no shield refit) before you have a chance to even roll that first phaser hit. And all the other internals mean that other things can be hit besides important things.

The minimal Orbital Defense Platform I mentioned loses something important on the 11th point of damage (bridge), and the 12th (APR), 13th (APR), 14th (APR), and 15th (phaser-4), and brews up on the 16th (well, maybe the 19th if we assume a Sensor box, a scanner box, and an excess damage box).

In other words, each one is no harder to silence than a single fighter. They are effectively out of the fight at 14 points of damage (either last APR goes down or the phaser-4 is destroyed). They have no ability to absorb damage. No ability to effectively defend themselves.

A base station has more staying power.

So clearly a minimal five box orbital platform would be wasted effort. At least a Ground Based Defense Phaser-4 is protected by atmosphere from attack at long range so the enemy has to get close where its (the ground base's) weapons will do optimal damage.

But an Orbital Defense Platform big enough to operate a phaser-4 is not going to be as small as a DefSat, and will lack the DefSat's near invisibility, i.e., it will be visible and able to be engaged at long range, and that just makes them targets.

Even at that, there cou

By Daniel G. Knipfer (Dgknipfer) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 05:09 am: Edit

Alex,

Why do you have to make weapon pods equal or better than fighter pods? Make them an earlier tech that existed during the middle years. An older tech that fighter and PF mods replaced. Drone pods would be the scariest and most expencive. They shouldn't add any control capability to a base and should always be H racks, or they would quickly become just too much.

In F&E terms a weapons pod would add 1 AF per pod to a base.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 05:15 am: Edit

You know, I really should have looked up the DefSat before I posted before .... for some stupid reason, I was thinking they have one each phaser and heavy weapon. Must have been thinking about ground bases or something. {shrug}


Garth L. Getgen

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 06:12 am: Edit

SPP, part of your post disappear?

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 10:30 am: Edit

Christopher E. Fant:

No, just a left over fragment from editing that I did not notice and so did not delete.

David Kass:

Your design gets into a gray area. You are nominally making the DefSat 50% larger. At what point does it stop benefitting from (R1.15C)? I realize you did not increase the number of damage points needed to destroy it, but in adding a phaser-2, a phaser-3, and a heavy weapon (like say a disruptor) you are also nominally adding power systems equivalent to 3.5 points of generated power.

At that point, the DefSat becomes large enough that it can be identified and destroyed at long range (in my opinion, SVC may disagree and say that you can do this). A disruptor DefSat already has two phaser-2s, two phaser-3s, and two disruptors, meaning it has the equivalent of seven points of power being generated to fire all of its weapons, or in another respect, it already has 13 boxes, you are increasing it to 19.5.

I do not know at what point a DefSat simply becomes a target able to be engaged at long range, but I would imagine that the existing ones are at the upper limit on that already, and adding anything to them would push them over the limit.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 10:39 am: Edit

Huh, I should have remebered that bit about the origin of the augMod, I remember reading something bout that long ago. Still an amusing bit of the game's history

I could possibly see a heavy DefSat as a late war,or more into ISC/Andro/X-era development. Improved minirization and/or stealthing.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 11:05 am: Edit

Hey Ed ... jump back in here anytime you want. We really didn't mean to hijack the topic YOU opened -- that's just the way it goes here sometimes!!!


Garth L. Getgen

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 11:17 am: Edit

Alex Chobot:

I really, really, really, REALLY do not want to get into "improved miniturazation".

If you can do this for the DefSat, why cannot I put these new wonderful miniaturized power systems on my ships? Double my APR banks, and increase my phasers and disruptors by 50%.

It is a can of worms that I do not want to open.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 11:36 am: Edit

I figured that's how we got the extra weapons on X-ships

But yeah, it's a fine line. And one can just as easily say that the minutaization just allowed the increased stealthing needed to defeat the improved sensors of advancing technology.

By John Kasper (Jvontr) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 11:43 am: Edit

So, how about and X-Def Sat? That would explain it.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 12:13 pm: Edit

John Kasper:

Since (R1.200) says that (among other things) ground bases never got X-Technology, I would be hard put to believe that DefSats did.

By Ed Grondin (Ensignedg) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 01:07 pm: Edit

Garth....

Thanks... Actually when I saw that the original proposal was not working I went for something different (see the Andro TPI proposal...)

Not that I have a problem with where this proposal went. If the original was deemed as not having a place because other systems are available there was no reason to pursue it.

I was not interested in a Heavy DefSat. Or a Mobile Base. Not sure how many people here read any of the StarWars fiction (I know evil word here) but the original idea stemmed from the ODP orbiting Coruscant in X-Wing Rogue Squadron 3 The Krytos Trap.

By Ed Grondin (Ensignedg) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 01:17 pm: Edit

Okay... So back to the drawing board. I see in the Middle Years discussion some talk about when BS/BATS/SB are introduced.

Were the EY equivalants for these (I do not have Y1 having left the game just after Module M was released)? If not would an orbiting weapons platform such as the ODP be appropriate for the early years? Planetary defense but no ship docking capabilities. Additionally no fighters or pfs since this is before their time. And possibly use PH-1 as the heavy phaser?

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 01:18 pm: Edit

There is an early years base station (ph-1 armed, less combat capable than a MY/GW BS) and an early year space-dock, which filled the starbase roll.

By Ed Grondin (Ensignedg) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 01:40 pm: Edit

Thanks Alex....

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 01:44 pm: Edit

De nada.

By Scott Tenhoff (Scottt) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 01:57 pm: Edit

SPP.

Any chance getting that quote/history lesson about "Weapon Augmentation Modules" added to the "Auto Reject List" under "The Proposal's Board"?

By John Kasper (Jvontr) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 02:59 pm: Edit

SPP - I knew I should have put the smiley face on that one.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 03:02 pm: Edit

Scott Tenhoff:

You would need to ask SVC to do that.

By Geoff Conn (Talonz) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 09:09 pm: Edit

Alex, a 'base' with no actual 'base' capability that orbits a planet and has heavy firepower is merely a heavy defsat by another name.

SPP;
I understood you, and your points about size and the defsats targeting protection are entirely valid. I was just disputing the claim that at a certain mass point a defsat becomes a base.

Strategically, building bases is the way to go for supply points, etc. But at major planets or other strategic points several ODP's might be organized for extra defense when building several bases would not be necesary.

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 02:06 am: Edit

If I was the Tholians with a ring of other bases near a base I am rebuilding, I certainly would like to reduce the space devoted to repair and increase weapons if possible. An exposed vulnerable base might not survive long enough to actually use any repair potential. For other races, a ODB-BATS paired with a FRD would cost about what a Starbase does and have similar defensive attributes but could be cheaper in the longer run as the FRD could be redeployed to the next combat focused base.