---

Quote:

When galactic forces captured the Devastator construction facility at the conclusion of Operation Unity, several examples of what were thought to be the weapon [Dissection Beams] were found in the wreckage.

---

By Kevin Humar-Barrett (Cheethorne) on Tuesday, July 05, 2011 - 07:24 am: Edit

Personally, I don't mind that they were conjectural and I absolutely love the dissection beam, definitely the most interesting new thing in the book. In fact, the dissection beam is one of my favorite weapons in the game, and I'd love to see some race or simulator race use smaller versions of the weapon too.

Unfortunately, I didn't like how the Heavy Mamba worked out. It got an extra 12-box warp engine (bringing it to 36 warp), but where the other "heavy" small satellite ships jumped up a move cost (the heavy viper went from 1/3 to 1/2 and the heavy cobra went from 1/2 to 2/3), the heavy mamba only jumped from 2/3 to 3/4, the same as a heavy war cruiser. The new power-curve on the ship seems like it would fit a 1-move cost, not a 3/4 cost.

The other thing I didn't like was low cost of the TRH refit for the satellite ships. I certainly didn't mind the fact that the upgrade existed, but the cost seems a bit low. Refitting the TRL on a Viper only increases its cost by 2 points, refitting the Cobra only costs 4 points? I would think the refit, which effectively doubles the number of heavy weapons on the ship, would cost a bit more than that.

Overall, I loved this product and would certainly pay more for books on conjectural stuff if the company felt the desire to print it (such as giving the Paravians a regular F-type module).

By Terry O'Carroll (Terryoc) on Tuesday, July 05, 2011 - 10:00 am: Edit

The dissection beam didn't strike me as that interesting, but there is a lot of tactical meat to be chewed in this module IMHO. Lots of play value here.

By Stewart W Frazier (Frazikar2) on Tuesday, July 05, 2011 - 08:05 pm: Edit

Kevin, what doubling of heavy weapons, think of it more of an overload function (can still fire as a TRL)...or like a Plasma-G being upgraded to a Plasma-S...

By Scott Tenhoff (Scottt) on Tuesday, July 05, 2011 - 09:17 pm: Edit

re: Heavy Mamba MC

Remember, for the Andromedans, the INT-class is their only MC=1 ship. So a satellite ship having MC=1 would be pretty problematic.

Even the COQ-class has MC=0.67.

So a Heavy Mamba w/ MC=0.75 is "larger" than a COQ.

By Terry O'Carroll (Terryoc) on Wednesday, July 06, 2011 - 12:43 am: Edit

Re: the TRH sat ships, in the designer's notes for the first Andromedan appearance (in C2 I believe), the original Andro sat ships had TRH's (actually there was only one kind of TR) and were way overgunned. That's why the TRL was invented. A 100% boost in damage output for a 50% increase in power cost vs the TRL, plus the extra power to run them, is way better than overloads or the G to S upgrade.

IIRC the TRH sats were included in C3A because someone requested that the old sat ships be included.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Wednesday, July 06, 2011 - 10:28 am: Edit

Having just picked this up and finding it totally entertaining, I want to confirm (as I no longer have all my Commander's Edition stuff anymore...) that the Cobra+ (and Courier+ and Terminator+, etc.) are just the original Commander's Edition (and Designer's Edition) Sat Ships, yes?

Funny :-)

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Wednesday, July 06, 2011 - 11:04 am: Edit

---

Quote:

IIRC the TRH sats were included in C3A because someone requested that the old sat ships be included.

---

---

Quote:

Having just picked this up and finding it totally entertaining, I want to confirm (as I no longer have all my Commander's Edition stuff anymore...) that the Cobra+ (and Courier+ and Terminator+, etc.) are just the original Commander's Edition (and Designer's Edition) Sat Ships, yes?

---

By Kevin Humar-Barrett (Cheethorne) on Thursday, July 07, 2011 - 09:51 am: Edit

Oh, I have nothing against conjectural satellite ships with TRH weapons on them, my point is that the BPV cost of the refit doesn't seem right. It seems like upgrading a Viper's TRL to a TRH should cost more than 2 points, or 4 points to refit a heavy cobra.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, July 08, 2011 - 04:44 pm: Edit

Kevin Humar-Barrett:

For what it is worth, it is not a straight conversion (TRL to TRH) and the cost also reflected that there is an increased power demand, slowing the ship, to use the heavier weapons. Upgrading phaser-2s to phaser-1s does increase firepower, but has zero impact on the unit's energy situation. [A phaser-1 takes one point of energy to fire even if it reaches all the way out to Range 75, while a phaser-2 takes the same point of energy to fire and only reaches Range 50, the phaser-1 autohits (barring die roll shifts) out to Range 5 while the phaser-2 only autohits out to Range 3 (again barring die roll shifts) and this does not even compare damage output averages or maximum/minimum damage.] A Cobra with two TRHs to arm needs two extra points of power to do so, nominally reducing its speed by four hexes a turn, and the TRH is not as flexible as some weapons, i.e., if you decide to more faster, it would take two turns to convert the TRH charge into a TRL charge.

So it is not just a case of upgrading the weapon, but considering the power needed to operate it. And sure, a Mamba has more power (as does a Heavy Cobra), but the weapon still impacts the available power of the ship if you are loading it as a TRH which affects its ability to close.

By Andrew Granger (Captaincf) on Saturday, July 09, 2011 - 07:14 am: Edit

I just bought this and I have to say I like it. Maybe my group needs to fight some conjectural Andromedans to work on tactics.

By Peter Thoenen (Eol) on Wednesday, July 20, 2011 - 02:24 am: Edit

I was about to gripe (blood was boiling) about the new timeline on page 46 but quickly realized, after a triple read, it was a conjectural what if IF the rest of the module had gone legit, not fact

Basically I got to page 46 BEFORE page 48 !!!

By Peter Thoenen (Eol) on Wednesday, July 20, 2011 - 02:36 am: Edit

Two e23 gripes on the product.

1: The covers are pixelated low/medium quality scans. Can you either rescan them with a high dps scanner and/or fix for future products. If not the scanner, might be the scan to pdf converter causing the issue; regardless it's not the quality I expect.

2: Ditto with the SSD's. They seem (when I print them out or even visually look at them in the module) a lower quality than the paper version of the same product. I.e. me printing a SSD from the e23 module should look the same as me making a copy of a SSD from the paper module.

No problem with the rules section though.

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Wednesday, July 20, 2011 - 08:40 am: Edit

Hhhmmmmm, while I agree the cover looks rather low-res, the SSDs look good to me, even if you zoom in 6400% they still look good and crisp.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, July 20, 2011 - 10:07 am: Edit

The PDFs we upload are the same ones we print, so the quality is going to be dependent on your printer, not the PDF.

As for the covers, I am not sure what they do/did. They may have wanted to keep the file size down. I am sure whatever they did is whatever they do, and they don't need to do it over.

By Scott Iles (Smrl) on Tuesday, July 26, 2011 - 01:43 pm: Edit

In the Demorak campaign, Campaign Victory Conditions and Campaign Variations are both numbered (T12.4)

SIles 072611

By John Hall (Fedf111fan) on Wednesday, July 27, 2011 - 04:07 am: Edit

Page 56: RC10.PF0 header has an I in front of Andromedan (John Hall, 07/25/11)

Page 57: AB-HM phasers are reversed, It should be 3 FX & 2RX.(John Hall, 07/25/11)

Page 57: AB-2M, the number of TR-H charges should only be 2, not 3 because bomber mega packs only increase speed and damage, not weapons.(John Hall, 07/25/11)

Page 57: AB-3M, the number of TR-H charges should only be 2, not 3 because bomber mega packs only increase speed and damage, not weapons.(John Hall, 07/25/11)

Page 57: AB-HM, the number of TR-H charges should only be 2, not 3 because bomber mega packs only increase speed and damage, not weapons.(John Hall, 07/25/11)

Page 122: AB-H heavy bomber has 2xPh-3 listed for fighter data, the rules annex has 2xPh-2 listed.(John Hall, 07/25/11)

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Wednesday, August 17, 2011 - 02:43 am: Edit

(RC10.PF) Module C3A Andromedan Mobile Weapon Platforms - C3A shows the MWP's to have PL and LB notes but G3 does not. Is this a change? - Ken Kazinski, 17 Aug 2011.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, August 17, 2011 - 10:53 am: Edit

Ken Kazinski:

It is not a change. See (G35.624).

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Wednesday, August 17, 2011 - 09:17 pm: Edit

Ah - so G3 was incorrect.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, August 24, 2011 - 03:21 pm: Edit

Current errata for Module C3A:

(EC1.11) There should be a dashed-line between the two boxes of each DSB, the way there is for other double-space weapons around (like stasis field generator boxes found on Klingon ships armed with that weapon).
(EC1.325) Dissection beam damage against various non-ship targets work normally. If fired at a monster (or other target) that is not affected by direct-fire weapons the dissection beam is wasted, i.e., it cannot do any more damage than any other direct fire weapon. If fired at a target that has its own unique damage system, such as a space dragon (SM7.463), the dissection beam works normally [note, it may not be possible to tractor a target, such as space dragons (SM7.469)], i.e., the damage is applied as indicated. For example a space dragon is hit with 20 points of dissection beam damage, a die is rolled (as there is no tractor link) with a result of "two" and all 20 points are to be resolved. A die is then rolled on the space dragon damage chart with a result (for purposes of the example) of "four", and all the damage points are applied to the space dragon’s wings. In the case of a ship of the Branthodon Regime (OR22.0), once the amount of damage scored by the dissection beam is determined roll for hit location on the damage chart appropriate to the ship’s SSD (all dragonships include a hit location table). Once the damage location is determined, the first damage points will strike any armor at that location, the remainder will be resolved against that location. If the exoskeleton is the location hit, you would (after destroying any armor) proceed to the Damage Allocation Chart as normal (and provided by the hit location table). Alunda (OR9.0) ships are damaged by the normal rules. A dissection beam striking Ryn (OR19.0) ceramic-composite armor (OD1.0) would first have to destroy all armor in the facing bank before it could score any internal damage, once the facing ceramic-composite armor bank was destroyed, internal damage would be resolved normally. Ceramic-composite armor repair (O26.34) operates normally even if the armor bank has been stripped by a dissection beam. Alunda healing (OR9.015) operates normally, as does Branthodon dragonship regeneration (OG19.444) and fast regeneration (OG19.445).
(GC8.214) last sentence: ". . . Impulses #4, #9, and #12" should read "#8" instead of "#9," as seeking energy modules displace every four impulses.
(JC1.347) ". . . medium satellite ship . . ." should be ". . . large satellite ship . . ." as (JC1.346) covered the medium sized bay.
(T12.4) In the Demorak campaign, Campaign Victory Conditions and Campaign Variations are both numbered (T12.4).
(T12S1.41) ". . . xx30 edge of Map #8 . . ." should be ". . . Map #6 . . ." (otherwise Map #9 is in direction D of Map #8, not direction B/C).
Page 56: RC10.PF0 header has an I in front of Andromedan .
Page 57: AB-HM phasers are reversed, It should be 3 FX & 2RX.
Page 57: AB-2M, the number of TR-H charges should only be 2, not 3 because bomber mega packs only increase speed and damage, not weapons.
Page 57: AB-3M, the number of TR-H charges should only be 2, not 3 because bomber mega packs only increase speed and damage, not weapons.
Page 57: AB-HM, the number of TR-H charges should only be 2, not 3 because bomber mega packs only increase speed and damage, not weapons.
Page 122: AB-H heavy bomber has 2xPh-3 listed for fighter data, the rules annex has 2xPh-2 listed.

By Alex Lyons (Afwholf) on Monday, August 29, 2011 - 05:55 pm: Edit

Im looking at the SB-A (Armed Desecrator Star Base) and it stats that for only 2 BPV each, its PH-2's turn into PH-4's...is this correct?

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Tuesday, August 30, 2011 - 12:35 pm: Edit

RC10.45 EXTRACTOR SSD; Three letter designator missing from top of page.

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Thursday, September 08, 2011 - 03:08 pm: Edit

At one point in time, the possibility of C3A counters for download on e23 was mentioned. Is this still a maybe, or has it gone the way of the Dodo?

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, September 08, 2011 - 08:34 pm: Edit

A. David Merritt:

A draft was done and exists, but it was done based on printing the counters and having them punched.

It is obvious that if we are uploading them for you to print and cut on your own, we could do a more efficient layout for that purpose, i.e., it would be easy for you to print multiple copies of the page.

The problem is that I have not had time to get around to devising a new "counter layout" that takes this "opportunity" into account.