Archive through February 10, 2003
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board:
New Rules:
Orbital Defense Platforms:
Archive through February 10, 2003
SPP:
I was just responding to the earlier questioning of my reason for attacking. It was suggested that one might be on a "raid" to merely devastate the planet and the base itself is not part of the mission objective. Personally, I see no reason not to take the base out first if it's way out at 15, and unsupported.
Returning to the original proposal, I still just don't see the cost effectiveness of these platforms as compared to either defsats or ground bases.
The moment anything unusual enters the system the fighters scramble. Then escort them if they are the good guys. If it is a Q-ship surprise it will soon be Q-ship flamebe` as the fighters from the other ODP swing around a blast him. Also any GBDP will finish it off. I'd give the Q-ship(s) one chance to fire and they would be dust.
Pirates, ya they could dream but how would they do it. The Groound base warning system will see them comming and the fighters will launch.
Perhaps it is more expensive and ground bases are better. I just figured they could be out and fighting faster in the very case of a pirate attack. Not having to climb out of the atmosphere and all. There would be some defense against small drone attacks but it has very little offesive ability. One the fighters are off what would be the point offocusing firepower on them. They would be worth keeping if you plan to take the system. Maybe a few small mizia shots to take out the ph-3s then capture them when you take the system.
Pirates can't tow them away and to get that close would be disastrous. GBDP and the other ODP and it's fighters and all.
So I see a system like this.
Two ODP with fighters. (This also serves as a comercial layover point). Add the ability to dock two cargo pods to the ODP.
Three Def. Sats.
Three to Six GBDP-4.
One (or two)Medeum Ground Bomber Bases.
Two small Ground Warning stations (oposite sides of planet.
Any number of commercial and mining colonies.
Two corresponding ground "Fighter Parking lots". Possibly with replacement fighters (two+ each) and supplies.
How is this so easy to take out. Sure take your long range shots at the ODP. They're not so valuable to the system now that you are attacking. The fighters launched impulse one of the senario. The ODPs will take a lot of long ranged firepower to kill as they are protected by EW from the GWS. But eventually you will kill them but for what gain. To take out two ph-3 and two ADDs? That ODP had capture value and probably some cargo on it.
Otherwise, get closer at take it out quickly going through a full squadron of fighters and medium ranged ph-4 shots.
Pirates will need at least a full squadron to make head way here.
Loren Knight:
Spoken like a commander who has never had to bother about the weapon status of his fighters.
Your discussion above assumes WS-III. And many fighters can do quite well at a high weapon status.
The reality is that when you put these things in orbit, you are constantly running the risk that they will be caught at WS-0. It would take your six deck crews two turns to fully loadout (assuming you do not add any pods and just slam type-I drones on the rails, if you add Pods, add one turn for each pod loaded assuming all six fighters are being loaded with two pods) a flight of six F-16Ds. In that time, the base could be obliterated with them aboard, or they could launch without their drones, greatly impacting their effectiveness. And since their Orbital Defense Platform suffers from the problem that I have discussed from the start (i.e., it is targetable by the raiding force from much further than five hexes range) you are taking quite a gamble with a considerable investment in resources.
Not to mention that it would not take many "shuttle" hits to trigger a chain reaction in the bay as you were hastily trying to load the fighters.
Further, the number of fighters will make reloading Hydran Fusions extremely difficult (the base will go down, and fighters landing at bases on the planet will take an interminable time to get their reload charges).
You need to consider the tactical implications of different weapons status scenarios versus the value of having such a small station, and the operations of fighters other than Kzinti drone fighters (well, maybe you were thinking of Klingon, Lyran, Orion, WYN, or Federation drone fighters).
I considered Plasma fighters.
I didn't consider WS. Duh...
However, I did to some degree when I put the Small Ground Warning Stations on the planet.
As I post this I am going to review WS. Isn't there a part that says a carrier can have a couple fighters armed and ready at all WS?
I'll check.
Could a rule be feasibly granted to allow full time partial loading of fighters on this unit. Say two spaces of drones at all times? I mean, that would sort of be their mission. Being in the proximity of a planet, could not a certain level of readiness be maintained? Crews would be relieved regularly. A real world example would be our Startigic Air Command.
It would be a good training ground too, with regular drills.
OK, I looked.
(S4.10) Weapons status 0: ....Carrier may have two of their fighters armed and ready to launch, but no other fighters may be armed with any reloadable weapons.
Since there is two of these (and I would consider them carriers) that would allow four fighters to be ready fully and two Bombers as well? Or does the rule apply to the entire system?
With the Ground Warning station present there is only a one in six chance. No laughing matter. It will happen then, I understand that, but first turn fighters would probably get one turn of loading and could launch on turn 2, impulse one. Fire their drones, (that would be 8 drones+ 4 from the "Combat Patrol" fighters. Two bombers are also in the air on turn two. If the situation warrents the second station might be lucky enough to be opposite the planet and could load for another turn.
While the fighters hold on to the situation, the bombers are finnishing loading. They then launch and the fighters go planet side to reload, if they are still around.
If the attack force is very big the fighters would only get one turn of drone launch anyway so they did get vertually fully loaded anyway, by turn two, impulse one.
At this point I don't see a need for a special rule. I think this could handle WS0 IF that rule does not apply to the system. If each base counts as a separate "Carrier" and could have two fighters (and bombers in the case of the MBB) fully ready, then I think this could work. If the rule applies to the whole system then if would fail at WS0 and probably WS1 too.
Oh, man, I just had another idea! What if the majority of the systems like the bridge, tractors, transporters, batteries two hull and cargo were on a module that could eject from the main platform is the case of catestrophic damage and land vie tractor on the planet? That way the expense is minimized if this go bad.
What I'm presenting here is that the ODB gains value when the primary offensinve capability is not so easily destroyed. With Ph-4s and such it is a prime target. But a carrier can get destroyed and the fighters can still fight. In a carrier battle you can destroy the carrier and leave. The fighters are then considered lost. But here you cannot destroy the carrier. The ODP can blow up but the fighters can allways land on the planet no matter what you do. You must deal with the fighters.
This is most certainly less expensive than a BS or BATTS and a sizable deterent.
Is it better than just basing the fighters on the ground?
Well, at WS2 or 3 definatly. At WS0 maybe a little. Your fighters do get flying faster. At WS0 your ready fighters are at an advantage. Planet based fighters still have to load at the same rate plus they have to exit the atmosphere, though they are protected b that until they are ready.
Cost can be mitigated by the above new idea. These can also opperate in a comercial sense further mitigating cost. Docking two cargo pods would make them stand up to damage better, too.
SPP. While WS is a neat rule for pickup games, how realistic is it that a planet would get caught unawares to that degree? Just looking at the TacIntel numbers, they would know something was coming in plenty of time/distance to arm the fighters.
Andy, I know you addressed that to Petrick but I have a thought on that I'd like to share.
There might be conditions available for a force to gain considerable closure on a target. Such as, in the instance of a base, a coincidal alignment of planets in the system. Maybe far off there is a weak Ion storm between the two forces but given stratigic speeds the attacking force could take advantage of that and drop out of high warp to enter the battle zone before the defender can react.
There is also the crew factor. The attackers are broadcasting expected ship I.D. and they are not idetified as Enemies until Impulse 32 of turn zero (still 30 to 45 hexes out). Maybe the scanner opperator keeps taking a sip of his coffee just before the blip appears on the screen. He would catch it but perhaps seconds too late.
I think Weapons Status is reasonably realistic. Any combination of things can lead to various levels of readieness. Things happen fast in the SFU even though it can take a long, long time to play them out. 
Andrew Palmer:
Loren Knight has the right of it. The reality is that no matter how good your detection system is, sometimes things go wrong. The "unexpected". One of the reasons we had bombers constantly airborne and submarines at sea was the fact that a Soviet First Strike might take out our land based missiles and bomber bases before those could be alerted.
You have to accept, whether you like it or not, that there are "human factors" in the decision cycle. You may report "an approaching enemy force", and the alert goes out, and it turns out to be "a flight of geese" (this did happen several times). The upshot is that a key decision-maker could hestitate overlong before hitting the alarm klaxon.
And SFB already has built into it that the scanning systems are not foolproof, i.e., Orion Pirates. If they systems were foolproof, there would be no Orions.
So, I am sorry, but the concept that you are always going to be at WS-III is bogus. No matter how good your scanning system is, there is always going to be a chance that the enemy will gain "surprise".
I mean, the mere fact that we published "Titan and the Unicorn" (or "Destruction of the Third Star Legion") should have been more than enough to tell you that sometimes the scanning system fails to detect the approach of the enemy force.
Loren Knight:
You are trying to delve into areas where you are, I fear, outrunning some game rules. Having more smaller bases does not mean that you can have larger fractions of your fighters always in readiness. Why would a planet that had two Medium Fighter Ground Bases only be able to have four fighters in readiness, while a planet with four small fighter Ground Bases can have eight? Both have the same number of fighters, the same number of deck crews, and thus the same maintenance burden, yet one is somehow able to operate twice the number of fighters at a high ready state?
Planetary defenses need to be regarded as a "whole", i.e., one carrier. They are in essence treated as such in Federation and Empire (a planet with 24 fighter factors is not required to hold 6 fighter factors out of a battle because 18 factors is three squadrons).
As "getting out of the atmosphere", why? Fighters in atmosphere can launch drones that go out of atmosphere I seem to recall. No rule books here I fear.
SPP: I checked the rules. As far as I can tell, and there may be something I missed, a fighter could launch his drones from within an atmosphere.
(P2.85) SEEKING WEAPONS: Seeking weapons launched from a planetary surface move one hex when their speed first calls for movement. If this takes the weapon into a non-atmosphere hex, it moves normally thereafter. If not, the weapon stops and repeats this procedure next turn.
I sighted this rule to go with several others we reviewed when discussing Cluster Bombs and Bombers. (I never did get that ruling, BTW)
Given a Class M planet most all situations would have the fighters launch (when ready) and fire drones, 16 impulses later, from with in the atmosphere. Basically, the drones would effectively continue unimpeded. A larger planet might have the drones go through another atmosphere hex in order to contunue following their target, but lets just assume class M size planets.
Here is the rub. What if one of the fighter bases is on the other side of the planet. Half the squadron is out of the picture and the enemy can then deal with half a squadron at a time. (In a balanced scenario it would be with BPV based on the full squadron.) On the other hand all the fighter bases (or one big base)could be on the same hex side or adjacent sides. If they are on the side of the attackers approach they can all launch drones but they will not emerge from the atmosphere until the next turn and will be vulnerable. (Lets assume since the attacker is attacking a fixed instalation he gets auto WS3. [or is that the rule?] The Planet is variable WS) The attacker could be close enough to use all sorts of anti-fighter tactics like ADDs, T-Bombs, Ph-3s and tractors. Fighters, if at anything less than WS3, emerging from a planets atmosphere would get slaughtered.
If they are opposite the attackers approach then once the emerge, they will have to come around to gain lock on. More delay.
Space based fighters get at least two full turns jump on planet based fighters and can avoid being jumped. It is possible the attack is meant to catch the fighters at the vunerable point of emerging from an atmosphere.
Then expand the system a bit. Put a commercial platform and def sats out. The planet has GBDP-4s. (in a balanced raid this only gives the attacker more to work with, against a historical raid it may or may not increase the odds). Def. Sats can be taken out as soon as they fire and ships can try to mitigate the Ph-4s with specific (since they know where it will come from) and make a run at the platform to board it or what ever. If the planet system is at WS3 you have a full turn to make your raid and not deal with fighters. If less the situation is much worse.
The space based system I proposed addresses these problems. It's not a perfect solution though it would be cheaper than a base. At any weapons status the fighters have more options. It is highly unlikely they will be sitting on or facing a t-bomb once they emerge from an atmosphere since they are at full maneuverability on launch from a ODP. If need be they could seek protection from the planet after they launch (given a really bad situation.) If they can't reload on the ODP then they can reload on the planet.
I guess I can sum a lot of this up by stating that WS0 is even worse for planet based fighters than space based fighters. (and lets not even think about transporter artillary if they get caught on the ground still loading.)
Note that my original proposal had balcony positions for all six fighters. They could launch in the first impulses of the game at any weapons status at full maneuverability to begin attacking or for survival.
I could easily see a special rule to allow fighters based on a ODP to be allowd two spaces of drones loaded on them at all times given the nature of the mission of the proposed ODP (further increasing the value and reason for this ODP). A carrier could never do this because it's not stationary. A Orbiting Base with Fighter Augmetation moduals doesn't have too because it can hold on long enough. But fighters on the ground loading drones(WS0 or WS1) only give me more BPV to use against the Def. Sats. and GBDP-4s.
The fighters do not have to leave the atmosphere. Yes they could launch their drones turn after turn and could not be attacked by T-Bombs but the drones could. And you know where they are going to be launched from. You know, if you are careful, the line they will travel so you could just drop t-bombs and not make your self vulnerable to the GBDP-4s.
The fighters in an atmosphere could be targeted by drones and ADDs (though I would want to make sure the Ph-4 are gone first). They would have a point of ECM against them for firing at the drones and cannot EM.
If you have fighters in an atmosphere and I'm within range to fire back, consider your timeing carefully when firing you Ph-4s. As soon as you do, I am free to drop a shield and transport t-bombs into orbit (set to SC6). Your fighters are stuck, reduced to mock Ground Based Drone Launchers (unless you sacrafice one at a time).
Lastly, I never even mentioned that I could have fighters of my own giving many targets to possibly overwhelm the Ground and Satillite defenses. (The mighty Ph-4 only being able to engage on target per turn.)
I'm standing on my best leg for this one. And am only trying to present what I see as being the merrits of the idea. Surely changes will have to be considered but the main idea, a cheap station that serves to place the fighters in space rather than on the ground (though there would be a corrosponding ground "Parking Lot") for areas of concern. An example of the area I'm thinking of is where there is no base because the front line is way off. Or rather it used to be and there is no time to build one. And this planet needs to be ready because it just became the front line. I can't always have ships stationed there. The war is going badly (could be anyone).
Maybe all I'm proposing is a Fighter Carrier class of Commercial Platform. It should serve as a duel purpose to mitigat the expense of the near constant state of readiness.
Finally, sorry for the long posts. If I was better at this it would have been shorter. But I have learned to have my ducks in a row when addressing you (because you know your SFB!).
Loren Knight:
Simple question about blocking the fighter drones with T-bombs.
You are really going to drop shields facing ground based defense phaser-4s inside 6 hexes range?
You are a braver man than I.
Review your rule cite, the fighters would not be launching drones in "stacks" but could stagger them since they are launching from within "atmosphere" of the planet, not "on the ground" or in a "deep atmosphere well" (my quotes, not yours). The upshot is that each fighter could launch (assuming fast drones as an example) one drone every impulse (assuming they could launch that many) and no T-bomb would kill more than three.
SPP:I wasn't stopping drones. Note that I set the bombs for SC6. I also noted that I would do this after Ph-4 fire. If you hold your fire until I transport then I wont transport and I then managed to stop you from firing at least one of your Ph-4s. If you fire impulse 32 then that gives me Impulse 1 to transport. I might also be able to transport through a side shield not directly threatened by the planets Ph-4s. But a ship that close is going to be in trouble any way. But so are the ph-4s. While the fighters are stuck in the atmosphere, I am more able to deal with the GBDP-4s.
No need to bother with this stuff right now unless you really want to. You have plenty on your plate, Friend.
Loren Knight:
One of us is missing the other's point (I do not claim it is you automatically, but there has to be some disconnect somewhere).
If you launch 6 fighters fom an Orbital Defense Platform, I am quite free to pick them off from . . . say 20 hexes range with salvoes of disruptor fire. I have plenty of time and space to maneuver to avoid drones they might choose to launch. Phaser-4 fire in support is minimized, and if I want I can even open the range and run out the drones.
If my fighters operate from within the planet's atmosphere, they are still able to launch drones with no real degradation, doing so perhaps when a drone screen is needed to dirupt your efforts to close on the planet. They gain protection from the atmosphere which will to some extent degrade the effects of your weapons fire, and if you try to plow through the drones you further degrade your weapons fire on approach. Their operational bases are protected (i.e., I am not going to watch my fighter bases with their stores of reload drones and deck crews with access to repair parts be vaporized in orbit, even if only half of them are) unless you want to spend weapons fire to kill the drones, or lower that facing shield to lay that T-bomb as you are charging in to get those needed range five shots at my ground stations.
I am defending a planet, YOU HAVE TO COME TO ME, not vice versa.
Sending my fighters out to chase you simply allows you to destroy them and then my bases and other ground defenses.
Perhaps you like to be "defeated in detail", but I do not. I much prefer the synergistic effect of having my various systems work in coordination with each other. I would need to have adequate force to fight you with a part of my defense in deep space before I would consider sending a detachment to meet you. Letting you lure my fighters away simply means that eventually they will be without drones and a long way from their source of reloads, and soon dead.
Sorry, just not my way of doing things.
But I have to ask. Your fighters, remaining in an atmosphere, must fire basically from a single hex. I then know the early trajectories. I could place T-Bombs considerable distance from the planet knowing where their going. I know your fighters can only launch so many drones. (I could rush in when they land to reload. You might be able to trick me right here but not to much an advantage). You can launch in patterns so mine warfare wont be effective but that just makes it easy to use weapons on the drones that I wouldn't use at long or medium range(Ph-3s and ADDs). All those drones will repeatably be launched from the same hex. That simplifies things for me, whether you launch them one at a time of all at once or in between.
Launched from space fighters can EM which provides a greater benefit than atmosphere (only one ECM as opposed to four[+Sm Tgt Mod]). They can launch drones and either go behind the planet (handing off control to the small ground warning station or to the ODP), or they could enter the atmosphere if you prefer or they could continue to maneuver being dificult targets to hit.
Yes, I have to come to you but you are stuck in one place. In space the fighters have more freedom, more defences and more maneuverability. I'm not suggesting they go out to meet the approaching enemy. They should stay with in 4 hexes of the planet. The offencive advantage is that they can launch drones from various positions making it harder to pre-determin where they will be comming from. From the planet, I can prepare for the next turns launch. I'd have no idea where they would come from if the fighters a space born. ( Side note to self: If I get to place my ODPs as I choose (but must be on opposite sides) I would place one on the covered side of the planet. There probably should be a rule where you role a die and that's where the ODP is and the other is opposite.)
Disruptors are going to have a pretty hard time hitting fighters from long range (and forget about photons and plasmas) and if they approach, I can react. I can choose what to do. My options are open.
I'v got three phaser-4 to deal with each turn. A slow bombardment approach with a fast dash to finnish them would be the end of those. Then, I can deal with fighters any way I want.
Passed experience tells me that planets die slow miserable deaths if there is nothing in space that can maneuver. However, the combination can be very dificult to deal with. The inpenatrable shield that a planet can provide and the dangerous, plan disrupting ability of a maneuverable foe can be very difficult to beat.
The situation for the Plasma Races is a whole other story. They really want to be in space. If not, and you launch fighters into the atmosphere, I can peg off your fighters one by one, never at a good range for fighter plasma to be of much effect.
The ODP is not expected to survive a serious assault. It serves to give the fighters the greatest advantage and therefore increasing their deterence factor. As I mentioned before the ODP could have a "Command module" that could escape in the case of catastrophic damage. Always facing and landing on the planet.
Someday, I'd like to take a trip to Texas. Of course, I've been saying someday I'll join SFBOL. Work is getting crazy. Just sold a $6000.00 Aligator in an Everglades swamp mozaic, bathroom floor.
Someday....
Oh one last note. I had also stated the ODP could dock two cargo pods. These wont be all that easy to desrtoy. The ODP IS small but with fifty docked cargo, it gets considerably bigger. So in a game with a large attacking force, you would have this option to strengthen your ODPs.
Loren, I would point you in the direction of (J13.0) in module J, casual bases. They can be put anywhere, like that convenient asteroid you towed into orbit as a new moon around a planet.
If you're attaching cargo pods, it isn't an ODP anymore, its a full fledged base. It needs all the capability to do the logistics of handling the cargo and all that. At that point, an MB is going to have the same functionality (it can mount HBM IIRC). I don't recall if a Complat can mount HBM, but if so, it would give the same effect. For that matter, so would a detached CV pod.
I did consider that. Above I posted that perhaps all that is needed is to modify a Cmplat to carry fighters.
Maybe, I should have looked into it further. I will.
I suspect that risking full CV pod might be too expencive. At least for the Feds, anyway.
An asteroid is an interesting solution. It too would put the Fighters in space T1/I1.
Interesting alternatives, Dkass.
BTW, feeling better?
Not to mention sticking a pair of cargo pods onto a unit for no other purpose than "It's 50 more internals" is dirty pool
Well, no really dirty pool. I had stated that these would have commercial aplications to off set the cost of the Constant Ready status of the fighters.
Cargo pods might be there anyway. However, one could state under a (S8) type rule that you roll a die. 1-2 = no pods, 3-4 = one C-pod, 5 = two C-pods, 6 = two C-pods or one of any type (including combat types). This is known during force selection. This is done to determine what you are allowed to purchase. The Player could elect to purchase less of none of what is allowed by the die roll.
This is to reflect the various possible states that the system my be in at the time of the scenario.
At which point we're not realling deal with ODPs any more (pure comat platforms) but something in the general form and function of jumped-up ComPlat.
Perhaps. But the result would be run by the military. And could have the name of ODP. And by making it a Commerce unit, that takes away some of the "Just kill it quick" factor. It contains the prize a pirate would be after. Or possible value to a raider. One thing though, the ODP I proposed has a detatchable command module that can escape under catastophic damage and land planet side (preserving some of the expense).
My main point has been that the original ideas for a ODP(as clearly pointed out by SPP) had the ODP offensive enough and vulnerable enough that they would be the first target to take out. Their value would be near nill because they are big enough to hit from range and dangerous enough to warrent destruction early, while not being tough enough to hold up (like a base).
But with fighters you get to move the main offensive force off the target (ODP). The target is no longer dangerous. It even has value to preserve. The fighters are not as easy to kill given that they are small and fistey. There are advantages to having the fighters pre-spaced based over ground basing (I believe). Depending a comming ruling there might be even greater value in the ODP.
You increase the survivability of your investment and the deterrence facter as well.
Complats are civilian units. Use a SAMS to attach your HBMs to -- it can handle two base modules -- plus it has better sensors and power in the same size hull (tug pod).
Loren Knight:
Uhm, what are you defending?
My fighters are doing their job, i.e., defending the planet. They launch drones to keep you away from the planet, i.e., keep you from getting to range five where you can begin to silence the ground batteries. Thus, I do not need to launch drones from multile directions. I do not really even need them to hit you. I just need you to stay away from the planet, no closer than range six, and allow the direct-fire weapons on my ground bases to pound you whenever you try to close.
As noted, you have to come to me. The fact that the drones are coming from that point is irrelevant. You are here to attack the planet, right? Well, if you cannot reach the planet, you cannot attack it.
I honesty (I am sorry) do not understand what is driving your tactics.
As to the ECM situation you alluded to, you should consider the effect of that atmosphere I am in on DEGRADING the effect of your weapons. Even if you hit, you do less damage.
I will admit that circumstances vary. If the planet had "mobile defenders", i.e., ships, it might be worthwhile to have the fighters break atmosphere to support the ships. That, however, falls under "if circumstances were different, then circumstances would be different".
The point comes back to the synergy of the fighters supporting the direct-fire ground defenses with their drones. If you want to take out that battery of phaser-4s, you have to close to range five at the least. If you are going to try to close to range five, then the fighters are going to launch drones in your face that you will have to deal with. You might deal with them by firing weapons at the drones that will the not be available to fire at the ground bases, but dropping a facing shield at ten or so hexes range to beam a T-bomb out is going to be a very bad idea. Letting the drones hit you and then taking the direct-fire shot from the planet is a bad idea too.
And sticking unsupported fighters out of atmosphere is just asking you to kill them. There is no carrier to support them (most fighter ground bases lack adequate power to lend sufficient amounds of EW to the fighters) with EW. THey are very much on their own, and even weaker the farther they are from the planet's fire umbrella.
So, forgive me, but placing my fighters in little orbital penny packets is just not my idea of a good idea.