Given the following from the Auto-Reject List:

Obvious variants (leader, scout, carrier, PFT, commando, drone, minesweeper) of standard warships which do not already have them (e.g., Klingon F6, E5, Kzinti DW, Orion DW, Gorn BDD, Fed FFB, Gorn CM, etc.). You might suggest or ask for such a ship, but if we agree it is needed, it will be designed in-house.

I would ask for the Seltorian CLS and command variants of the CA, CL, DD and FF. Given I didn't see the AR List item until now, please disregard my email on July 10.

By Stuart C. Brennen (Evlstu) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 12:10 pm: Edit

I'd like to see more background and more scenarios with the Seltorians.

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Friday, December 26, 2003 - 02:57 pm: Edit

New Seltorian designs (if for no other reason than to generate some discussion... J):

(R15.RC1) HEAVY PF TENDER (HPF): This is an obvious variant, but one I felt needing done given the Seltorian's supposed love of PFs. (Though, after J2 they have more carriers than PF Tenders... go figure.)

(R15.RC4) BATTLECRUISER (BC): When the Seltorians discovered Tholian forces in our galaxy, they quickly setup shop and began harassment campaigns while waiting for reinforcements to arrive.

Lacking any fleet command ships the Seltorians developed the Battlecruiser. By extending the rear-hull, designers were able to increase power, command facilities, and the weapon suite of a standard CA. Unfortunately, the expanded rear-hull made it impossible to convert existing CAs to BCs, and the BC was considered only partially successful (the DNL fielded the next year was more along the lines of what Naval Command wanted).

- Ships designed by Robert Cole

By Jon Berry (Laz_Longsmith) on Friday, December 26, 2003 - 10:09 pm: Edit

No offense concerning the BC, but the Selts were, well, let's put it honestly. They were building what they set out to want, and designed the Hive Ship around that need. Re designing the rear hull of the cruiser class would have required a lot of resources that the HVS didn't have. And consider that the docking bays were purpose built for churning out the CA/CL and DD/FF. The DNL and the NCA were what was done after the Klingons went over what the Selts could and could not do. I would suggest changing the BC's R.xx description to indicate that it was one of the first suggestions made by Klingon engineers to assist their new allies, but the Hive Ship could not take the expanded hull. Make it purely CJ instead of an UNV.

--
Jon Berry

By Stephen J. Schrader (Wyvern) on Thursday, December 16, 2004 - 02:44 am: Edit

I'm not sure if this has been floated before, but, I had the idea for a Seltoran "Special Assault" ship.

Basically replace the PC's with additional WB/SC's and add aditional boarding parties (Possibly Commandos?) and transporters.

Purpose is to:

1) Against non-web-slingers bring down a shield as soon as possible, then beam over either precision hit'n'run raids or massed BP's with the intention of capturing the ship.

2) Against web-slingers it would be a primary fleet-support element for breaching the web. (Then do the #1 thing).

Shoot, just the power-savings from not having to pay for holding/Loading the PC's would significantly increase the speed of the assault.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Thursday, December 16, 2004 - 08:07 am: Edit

Stephen,

I don't object to it. But what your proposing is a suped up Commando ship. (Which most Selts are admittedly already halfway there.)

Why wouldn't the other Selt commando ship's use the same set up?

I can see it as a UNV or CJ.

By Stephen J. Schrader (Wyvern) on Friday, December 17, 2004 - 12:06 am: Edit

That was my thought, Why didn't they do it on the original Commando ship? But, what the hey, maybe nobody thought to suggest it?

By Michael Powers (Mtpowers) on Sunday, February 27, 2005 - 10:18 pm: Edit

Thread Necromancy!

These are just proposed designs, showing what the Selts might mix-and-match. Most of these designs wind up with ridiculous amounts of phasers and a weird power curve.

With the advent of the DNL "triple-boom" design concept and the new "short" boom sections of the NCA and NCV, the Seltorians investigated several further increases of their ships' abilities. Unfortunately, the demon of optimization struck again; the Seltorian factory was designed to produce only certain types of ship components, and those components were only really workable if combined in certain ways. Nonetheless, the Seltorians believed that they could produce several improved ships, with engineering assistance from their staunch allies, the Klingons.

SELTORIAN BATTLE-CARRIER: An attempt to produce a BCV-class ship, this used a rear hull similar to the standard strike carrier, but with the heavy weapons reinstalled and tractors moved to an aft-hull sponson. An NCA forward hull section would be attached to the center hull "socket". Simulations indicate that this ship would have had difficulty maintaining fleet speeds, due to its heavier structure; the Seltorians probably would not have produced it, as they did not think highly enough of fighters to consider the reduced speed worthwhile.

Seltorian BCV Notes: MC 1+1/8 (34 warp cost to go speed 30.) The center-boom phasers should be FA, not LF.

SELTORIAN BATTLE CONTROL SHIP: A design more favorable to the Seltorians, but this ship still would have been too heavy for its engines. In addition, there would be no way to both install centerline repair-capable tractors (and the associated systems) and keep the heavy weapons; as a result, the repair tractors are on the sides of the ship. When PFs docked, they would block parts of the firing-arcs of the side phasers.

Seltorian BCS Notes: MC 1+1/8 (34 warp cost to go speed 30.) When PFs dock to the repair-capable mech-links, the phasers on that side become LF+L/RF+R. (same effect if a PF is on either position, or if PFs are on both positions.)

SELTORIAN MEDIUM CRUISER: Obvious-variant, Cruiser-class rear hull with two NCA short booms instead of one CA long boom.

SELTORIAN GROUND CONTROL SHIP: Klingon engineers were never quite sure whether the Seltorians proposed this because of a childlike sense of faith in Klingon ship-design abilities, or as a really strange joke. The concept had an ACS-type rear hull, replacing the fighter squadrons with an extensive array of Ground Assault, Ground Bombardment, and Heavy Transport shuttles (a half-squadron of Z-Y fighters were still operated to escort the shuttles.) The central forward boom was a standard particle-cannon type, but the side booms were completely new. They were similar to the NCA "short" booms, but each could separate from the rest of the ship, becoming a self-propelled pod that carried both troops and cargo (including Ground Combat Vehicles.) These boom sections were similar to the Troop Transport Pod, but their engines were powerful enough to lift the pod off the surface (to return for another load, or to evacuate troops from a difficult situation.)

(I haven't done an SSD for the GCS, but it shouldn't be too hard to visualize.)

By Steven E. Ehrbar (See) on Tuesday, October 03, 2006 - 09:42 pm: Edit

More Necromancy:

The Seltorian Battle Frigates

While the NCA quite effectively provided extra heavy cruisers for Seltorian use, it made another problems much worse. Each NCA displaced the production of two destroyer-frigate front hulls, effectively replacing two destroyers in production with frigates. As frigates were already marginal in the combat environment of the late General War, this constituted a serious problem, which the Hive Ship did not have the capacity to address.

However, the problem was not insoluble. While new military-grade shipbuilding facilities were not practial, the Klingons were able to provide the Seltorians decades-old facilities for the production of small civilian ships. While requiring too much maintenence to be of value to the Klingons except as scrap, the Seltorians needed any additional capacity, and workers were easily provided to operate and maintain the equipment. With this additional gear (and Klingon computers for design calculations), the Seltorians were able to make small power-weapon units that fit into the two open "sockets" on the frigate rear hulls. These PWUs didn't make the improved frigates equivalent to a destroyer, but did provide an important improvement in overall fleet firepower.

(R15.?#1) Seltorian Battle Frigate (BFF): The standard BFF pattern with power-weapon units inserted beside the frigate's single forward hull.

SSD Bits: Each power-weapon unit would have 1 phaser-2, 1 forward hull, and 2 APR. Power-weapon units were always installed as pairs. Phaser arcs are LF+L/RF+R. Shields #1/2/6 18 boxes each (halfway between DD and FF), #3/4/5 the 16 of the FF and DD. Crew would be 23 units, other stats would be same as the frigate.

(I'm going with ph-2s on the assumption that the Seltorian ph-1 building capability is maxed out, and they're using old Klingon gear to make the ph-2s at the same place as the subhulls and APRs.)

Then, of course, the obvious variants, with the PFT using the same rear and forward hull designs as the destroyer-based PFT, putting ph-3s or special sensors in place pf the ph-2s on the PWUs; a commando battle frigate where the ph-2s are instead tractors, etc.

A useful variant could be fighter quick-launch subhulls, perhaps 3 fighters and 1 forward hull each, with launch tubes to dump all six fighters quickly. You could put them on carrier designs for more fighters, or on straight FFs for a frigate that brings along fighters.

You could potentially put one on a DD in the middle socket. Arc on the weapon might make FA, might have to be a narrower special arc. Instead of a ph-2, a particle cannon (made with the PC machinery used for the destroyer-frigate hulls but not being used for the NCA booms) in a mauler arc, perhaps.

By Tony Downs (Whitetyger009) on Tuesday, November 27, 2007 - 06:30 am: Edit

are there any plans for a product with bases and other Old Galaxy equipment that the Seltorians used, or have these already been relesed?

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Tuesday, November 27, 2007 - 12:09 pm: Edit

Tony Downs:

The Seltorian Starbase was in Module C3 as was the Seltorian BATS. I will have to admit that off the top of my head I cannot recall if Seltorian Ground Bases were done (Ground Based Defense Particle Cannons) or DefSats (I just do not remember, but it is possible they were). It is doubtful that the Neo-Tholians or Seltorians in their "Home Galaxy" ever developed "Mobile Bases" as they had no real need for them. Base Stations are possible, but a Civilian Base Station (if such existed and I am not completely ruling that out) seems unlikely. Both Base Station types are not that difficult to extrapolate from the existing BATS design. Hangar Modules probably existed, but only in the limited application of providing extra shuttles, not fighters (for supporting mining operations and such). Other modules would have to be looked at on a case by case basis (probably nothing like a PF module or a PF ground base existed, but Skiffs and a modular cutter variant probably did). As things stand right now, most Seltorian and Neo-Tholian bases would simply look pretty much like the existing bases in he Alpha Sector.

By Tony Downs (Whitetyger009) on Tuesday, November 27, 2007 - 11:29 pm: Edit

ok. the reason i am asking is for a campain i am getting ready for that uses ground bases for economy. if using the standard Alpha ground bases would work for their original bases that would be fine. the question would also arrise would they have ph-4 bases? was there a DN printed or just the DNL?


for the fighters and pfs we would use the standard klingons. as that is what they used when they got here. or would you have a better suggestion?

By Michael Powers (Mtpowers) on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 - 02:09 am: Edit

Tony: You do have module C3, right?

By Gary Bear (Gunner) on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 - 07:30 am: Edit

Module R6 has the Particle Cannon versions of the DefSat and Ground Defense Base.

By Tony Downs (Whitetyger009) on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 - 09:06 am: Edit

i have one of the very first press C3 so i am not sure if there was a reprint with more information or like Gary said there were more support units issued in other modules. and i had ment DNH (sorry about the confustion) but it doesn't say if they used ph4 ground bases.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 - 11:57 am: Edit

Tony Downs:

The Tholians and Seltorians used standard Ground Based Defense Phaser-4s in the old galaxy. They appear in a scenario titled "Rebel Reduction" in which the Tholian Will player must reduce a planet with about a dozen of that type of ground base that has revolted against The Will. Both Tholian and Seltorian Starbases have phaser-4s, so the idea that they could put them on small ground bases is obvious.

By Michael Powers (Mtpowers) on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 - 01:32 pm: Edit

Really, the only Alpha-sector race that wouldn't use "standard" defensive items are the Andromedans, and that's because they don't use phaser-3 or shields.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 - 02:51 pm: Edit

Michael Powers:

The Seltorians are not really an "Alpha Sector Race". There was, for example, never a Seltorian Starbase in the Alpha Octant, and it is doubtful if there was ever a Seltorian BATS in the Alpha Octant, much less a Base Station. The Hive Ship served those functions, as well as that of shipyard and other tasks. Ground Based Defense Stations and DefSats were probably used in the Alpha Octant.

By Dale McKee (Brigman) on Monday, January 19, 2009 - 09:18 pm: Edit

Is there a Seltorian Command Cruiser (Command Rating 9)? My perusal of G2 didn't show any. If not, would this be something that could be added to the game?

By Jeremy Gray (Gray) on Tuesday, January 20, 2009 - 08:23 am: Edit

Dale, to my knowledge there isn't. The closest thing is the DNL (CR 9), which has got to be one of the smallest size class 2 ships in the game.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, July 31, 2012 - 02:47 pm: Edit

This is more of a request than a proposal...

Is there any way to add some sort of "command plug" to a Seltorian CA and DD open center slots that would result in a command variant if added to one of these existing ships?

Rationale: The Seltorians arrived with a big disadvantage in fleet combat fire power but more seriously that extra command slot that could be used to absorb more damage. The Klingon could help them design the plugs in Y183 that adds the following:

CA to CC: 2xFLAG, 2xPH1, 2xAPR; F&E: +1 CR, +1AF/+1DF

DD to DDL: 2xAUX, PH1, APR; F&E: uses leader rule (303.52)

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, July 31, 2012 - 03:22 pm: Edit

Request Seltorian theater transport variants of their FF/DD aft hull. Seltorians don't have an early means to transfer EPs to grow their economy or blockade-run supplies to separated units.

Suggest variants removes web breaker and other systems as required to add sufficient cargo space that enable ship to carry 5 EPs.

Suggested F&E Factors:

DDT: 5-6U/3, YIS 183
FFT: 4-5U/3, YIS 183

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, July 31, 2012 - 03:22 pm: Edit

Not a new idea, but one worth discussing.

A "short pod in the center spot" may not be the best way to accomplish it, but then again, it may.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, July 31, 2012 - 03:32 pm: Edit

The benefit to the Seltorians is they don't have to come up with two whole new aft hull designs. We can also limit them to one CC plug per year and one DDL plug per turn.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Tuesday, July 31, 2012 - 03:52 pm: Edit

I have checked Module C3 and can find no reference (I thought there was one) to the Seltorians not being able to build Command Cruisers. So I guess (unless somene else finds the reference) we can look into the following Seltorian ships:

CC (Command Cruiser, variant of Heavy Cruiser).

NCC (New Command Cruiser, variant of New Heavy Cruiser).

Possibly a CCH (Heavy Command Cruiser, Heavy variant of Command Cruiser).

CLC (Command Light Cruiser, variant of Light Cruiser).

NLC (New Light Command Cruiser, variant of New Light Cruiser).

DDL (Destroyer Leader, variant of destroyer).

FFL (Frigate Leader, variant of frigate).

As to theater transports, it seems to me that the size of the Seltorian economy in the Milky Way could be more than adequately supported by theater transports of allied empires and/or the existing auxiliaries (APTs, FTs, etc.) with no real need to divert a hull or hulls to such a mission.