Okay, so don't kill me. This is from memory. The PWs are 360. If I can blow 4 power to drop effectively a F torp every 32 impulses out any side of my ship to hinder pursuit, prep for an attack run, etc. It's a very nice perk.

They are actually advantaged that it's 5pt. torps, at least in Omega. Given the wonky phasers, many opponents will need several phasers to take one down, They also help depend against the feared Rad phaser conversion rate as no matter how much damage you do, you still need to shoot at one per torp to take it out.

Not saying it cannot be in balance, nor (definitely) that the TCC wasn't balanced with it. They were, however, an afterthought for the Alunda as a whole (appearing after O-2 IIRC) and it seems an awfully major upgrade for where it falls in the release cycle of things ...

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, March 19, 2013 - 06:48 pm: Edit

Heh--it is actually 1 power for an F torp (.25 power per WT). They are certainly handy, the WTs, but, well, for my money they seem to work out pretty well and the +2 BPV per PW for the upgrade seems totally reasonable.

By Andy Vancil (Andy) on Wednesday, March 20, 2013 - 12:56 am: Edit

4xWT is better than an F-torp. At 11-15, they're better than a G-torp. And you can launch them at different targets. And every 32 impulses. I totally agree with Mike here, if you are flying Alunda, buy this refit if you can.

On the other hand, a lot of refits are worth far more than their BPV cost. 1 BPV to upgrade a p2 to a p1? I'll take it. 4 BPV for a drone rack (plus full drone control and the ability to make SPs)? Any time. 8 BPV to upgrade 2xp3 to 2xphoton? Sure. (See: Tholian DN) 2 BPV for 3 warp engine boxes, extended arcs on 4 disruptors and 2 p1s, plus 18 shield boxes? Quite the bargain. (See: Kzinti CA->BC)

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Wednesday, March 20, 2013 - 07:43 am: Edit

Andy wrote:
>>I totally agree with Mike here, if you are flying Alunda, buy this refit if you can.>>

No one is suggesting that you shouldn't. WT torps are pretty good. But they aren't free (see: 2 BPV per launcher for the refit; not super expensive, no, but not unreasonable), nor are they without other opportunity costs (trading 4x point defense guns for essentially an F torp for 32 impulses sometimes is a good thing, other times is not so much). If you are an Alunda, you probably have WT capabilities (as they get them very early on in the timeline; just assume that ships have them most of the time).

By Stephen McCann (Moose) on Friday, May 31, 2013 - 06:20 pm: Edit

Has anyone made a Nicozian tournament ship? I like the concept of their ships and would be interested in seeing what a tournament version of the heavy cruiser looked like.

By Ken Burnside (Ken_Burnside) on Friday, May 31, 2013 - 08:06 pm: Edit

Stephen, right now playtest reports on the Nico CA are that it's too weak in duels for its points, but that pairs (or more) of them in fleet actions are closer to being right.

It also has special sensor channels, which are a supertanker full of worms for tournament play.

By Stephen McCann (Moose) on Friday, May 31, 2013 - 08:38 pm: Edit

Right, which is why I was wondering if a tournament version had been done, with no sensors ands maybe some beefed up systems. I will just have to play them in normal games for now

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, May 31, 2013 - 08:41 pm: Edit

There is no tournament Nicozian ship. I don't expect to see such a thing before an actual official release of the Nicozians in an SFB non-playtest product.

By Mike Kenyon (Mikek) on Sunday, June 02, 2013 - 12:28 pm: Edit

Would a Nicozian ship be a viable candidate for a tourney ship? I'm generally an advocate for opening up the Tourney Ship set some, but you would have to kill the sensors (or HIGHLY limit them) and you'd get debates from the Klingon and Seltie players that the inability to board them makes their increased transporter count ineffective. After you remove half the things that make them special and different, is it meaningful to have them as an option? Most of the tourney ships still "feel" like their race and enable you to use that race's tactics. Using such a Nicozian I don't think would function like one of the regular ships.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, June 02, 2013 - 12:32 pm: Edit

I can't see why any of that would be a problem. Take out the special sensors, tweak the ship up a bit so it is reasonably balanced, and go with it. Like, are the special sensors that important to the ship?

You can't board an Andro, either.

I mean, like, I can't see it get officially sanctioned any time soon or anything (the skip warp, for example, is likely to be the source of infinite rules and balance issues), but as something to mess around with in a tournament game environment (see: all the Omega TCs, etc.), I can't for the life of me see why one couldn't get whipped up.

By Ken Burnside (Ken_Burnside) on Sunday, June 02, 2013 - 02:31 pm: Edit

Peter: The sensors would have to go, the weapons would have to improve. And the sensors are part of their background - they're searching for a new home.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, June 02, 2013 - 03:09 pm: Edit

The sensors would have to go (see: "Take out the special sensors" above), yes. I can't see this as a problem for making a TC out of their cruiser.

The weapons might have to improve, but, well, then they need improved weapons. I have never used them, but on paper, they look totally reasonable. Are their guns particularly weak?

By Ken Burnside (Ken_Burnside) on Monday, June 03, 2013 - 02:33 am: Edit

The sensors largely keep the ships alive with defensive ECM; they're very small, internally.

The people playtesting the ships say that the missiles are hard to hit with, and without the missiles dropping the shields, the subspace auger doesn't do enough damage fast enough to survive.

Running in close to fire the phaser-2s in pulse mode has the problems that the Hydran generally has, of staying alive to do the damage. This is one of the places where the special sensors help a lot, in non-tourney contexts.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Monday, June 03, 2013 - 09:08 am: Edit

Would a tournament ship have to be based solely on their CA?

I recall how the base hull used for the playtest Hiver ship has changed over time, and how the playtest Worb is technically based on their MC 1 escort cruiser (as opposed to their MC 1.25 heavy cruiser); so there are precedents for allowing empires with non-standard-sized ships to scale up or down if necessary.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, June 03, 2013 - 09:16 am: Edit

There are official tournament ships in playtest for Omega races? Where can one see these?

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Monday, June 03, 2013 - 09:54 am: Edit

Richard;
Omega Tournament ships were in Starfleet Times Issue #45, Available here from e23.

By Mike Kenyon (Mikek) on Monday, June 03, 2013 - 05:16 pm: Edit

Peter: EVERY ship in their fleet has special sensors. Taking the Special Sensors off of their ships is like taking the ESG off the Lyran, the drones off of a Kzinti or the IPG off of Vudar.

You CAN do it, usually with a little jiggling, but what you're left with is something that is fundamentally different than what you started with.

Replace each Lyran ESG with 4 P3s and it's drone defense is about the same. Now would that ship fly the same, take damage the same ... probably not.

You can, and it's been proposed to, take the IPG off of the Vudar and what you're left with is a ship with something that's a mashup between a disruptor and a photon, little drone defense and heavily changed tactics (as it cannot generate terrain to get itself an advantageous firing position).

You COULD do it, but SHOULD you do it? What would be gained by doing it apart from checking off the box that says that we have an another unapproved playtest TC.

By Stephen McCann (Moose) on Monday, June 03, 2013 - 05:56 pm: Edit

"You COULD do it, but SHOULD you do it? What would be gained by doing it apart from checking off the box that says that we have an another unapproved playtest TC."

Uh, maybe because they might be fun to play? I didn't mean to start an argument, just was asking to see what people thought.

I don't see what the big deal is. There are no special sensors in the tournament so:
1. Remove them.
2. Alternately, make a tournament only special rule for their sensors, similar to the tournament rules for the Andro DisDev. Maybe that they can only turn off seeking weapons. This will obviously be a non-sanctioned ship, but I find them interesting and they might be fun to play with. If I had any skill at making SSDs I might make one up myself, just to see what I could come up with.

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Monday, June 03, 2013 - 06:51 pm: Edit

In standard games, the Nicozians use their Special Sensors for all three forms of EW (obviously they only loan ECCM when they have multiple ships, and that would not apply here), and for turning off drones. Without it they become very fragile. Can they be done without them, likely yes, but they would be very different from standard SFB. If Special Sensors cannot/are not worth integrating into Tournament rules, then the Nicozians really should not be either. IMHO

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Monday, June 03, 2013 - 07:07 pm: Edit

There was something I was wondering, in terms of how the shields on non-standard potential TCs might look. How much leeway could, or perhaps should, there be for certain hulls to have less than the "standard" amount of shield blocks, when it comes to accounting for any secondary defensive systems the ship in question might have?


For example, the Helgardian Protector CA from Module E2 has only 18 shield boxes per facing (16 boxes apiece prior to the Y120 refit). However, it also has the unique Helgardian rotary shield system, which allows it to generate two adjustable shield blocks which can be used to augment one or two specific facings if used carefully.

Each RSH has a four-point capacitor, which allows it to run a three- or six-box shield box with one or two points of power at a standard level, or use three or four points of power to go to an eight- or ten-box reinforced level that requires a "cool down" turn once used. However, these rotary shields are somewhat porous, and leak half of the damage points scored (up to the strength of the facing RSH) onto the regular shield behind them; or, if there is no active shield in that facing, straight onto the hull of the Helgardian ship itself.

Historically, this is less of a problem for the Helgardians in duels than it is in squadron or fleet actions, since smaller engagements make it easier to focus one or both RSHs into certain at-risk facings. However, while this might seem like it would benefit them in a tourney environment (at least against direct-fire opponents), it would make the Helgardian a risky ship to take against Big Plasma, since the overall shield facings are that much weaker, and there are only two shuttles on board to help plan for anti-plasma defences.

(The CA is a re-working of the Vanguard Cruiser, which had no less than eight shuttles to spare; most of which were taken out to make room for more weapons and power.)


Of course, it may be a long time, if ever, before anyone has to worry too much about creating a playtest Helgardian TC. But, as a thought exercise, would the rotary shields allow the ship to keep its historically weak standard shields and still be somewhat competitive; or would something have to give one way or another?

By Jim Davies (Mudfoot) on Tuesday, June 04, 2013 - 06:43 pm: Edit

Re the Helgardian: it would get 5 shuttles (and 2 tractors and 5 batteries) like all TCs so that's not such an issue. As for the shields, I can imagine that it would keep the rotary shield more or less as-is, and the normal shields would be tweaked for suitable balance. The place I can really see it having problems is against Hellbores.

The Nicozian special sensors could be done with a simplified EW rule: each turn you can
a) switch off drones
b) ECM: 4 points for a 2 shift
c) ECCM: 4 points for a 2 shift to counter the shift from a WW, IPG, small target modifier or HWs at drones.
Blinding as normal.

It's a hack but it should keep the ship's basic operating characteristics.

Ultimately, this is one of those oddball edge case ships that will be hard to balance (like Omega, Vudar, etc) and thus belongs in the wingnuts & weirdos secondary tournament. So don't get too hung up on its being a bit odd.

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Tuesday, June 04, 2013 - 06:49 pm: Edit

Jim; That ought to work well for the Nicozians.

By Mike Kenyon (Mikek) on Wednesday, June 05, 2013 - 02:53 pm: Edit

Jim,

I'd agree that that would work for the Nicozians.

However, I know that there's a significant amount of angst over the significantly less amount of EW produced by the IPG on a Vudar, so I'm not sure that everyone would have the same opinion.

Mike

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Wednesday, June 05, 2013 - 03:02 pm: Edit

Mike wrote:
>>However, I know that there's a significant amount of angst over the significantly less amount of EW produced by the IPG on a Vudar, so I'm not sure that everyone would have the same opinion.>>

The IPG generates a lot of EW.

The issue with the IPG generating EW (which we tried for a while a ways back for playtesting) is that it is really easy to have a huge amount of EW when you need it. Which results in things like tractor beams missing and seeking weapons doing half damage. Which, if you don't have the ability to generate ECCM to try and counteract it, is hugely problematic, balance wise.

The Powers that Be are incredibly wary of any amount of EW leaking into the tournament other than what it is already there. Thus, the Vudar is yet to get anywhere as an actual TC (although even without any EW, it is a pretty solid ship that is like a Fed with a slightly lower initial shot, significantly better drone defense, a better turn mode, and better weapon arcs).

If a Nicozian TC was worked up (which for my money, would be worth doing as if for no other reason, people could mess around with the Nicozian goofy rules), removing the Special Sensors is likely the most reasonable way to go. As inventing a whole lot of new tournament rules just to make some half version of a special sensor is unlikely to gain much traction.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, June 16, 2013 - 08:47 pm: Edit

Barry wrote (over in the World League thread):
>>How about a C rack? That would give it the possibility of firing 2 missiles per turn, but the C rack only holds 3 missiles and runs out quick.>>

Maybe? The Maesron, I think, suffers from two things, both of which are the result of being the Maesron:

A) The split arc heavy weapons (2xFA, 1xLF/L, 1xRF/R).

B) The very nature of the heavy weapons.

Tachyon Guns are *really* good at long range--they are probably the best R16 gun in the game, hitting on a 1-5 for 5 damage. But in close (and it is really hard to be able to take advantage of long range combat in a tournament game), they kind of blow--they always hit well (on a 1-5 at pretty much all ranges but past 16), but for a two turn weapon, they don't actually do that much damage anywhere but point blank range--at R8, they do 8 damage. I mean, yeah, they are usually going to hit, but with only 3 of them shooting most of the time due to the arcs, the Maesron has about the same damage output of the Klingon at R8, but then doesn't have heavy guns the next turn. At R4, they jump up to a maximum of 10 damage, again, hitting most of the time, but if you are at R4, you need to be able to really hurt someone, as otherwise, they are going to run you over and mug you. At R1, you get to shoot for 16 damage, which is nice, but as the maximum range for 16 damage is 1, you rarely will have guns armed to that level, and will usually need to rely on reserve power to up your guns, and that is a very limited resource.

So you have a ship that has about the same damage output as the Klingon most of the time, but with fewer tricks--no SP, the Tachyon Missiles are pretty good, but you can only launch 1 per turn, and they are easy to deal with with a couple points of tractor power or a counter drone.

Giving the ship 4xFA Tachyon Guns would help, but then it wouldn't be a Maesron, really.

On another front, I've flown the Peladine a couple times now, and it is a rough ship. It really only has one reasonable game plan, which is an anchor attack--the 2xPlasma G aren't particularly threatening for a ballet kind of strategy; the 9xP2 (and 2xP1) seem like they should be significant, but outside of R3, they aren't doing much, and in a lot of games, multiples of the phasers end up shooting drones down. The best plan it has is go fast (as its weapons are cheap) with tractor and try and grab someone, hoping to hit then with 3 plasmas and a couple drones. But anchor attacks are very hard to pull off (folks know to just run into the wall and stop rather than get tractored), and the reactive plan when someone *does* hit the wall (bolt, run away, and start enveloping bombardment) is vastly worse with the Plasma G's, as opposed to Plasma-S's.

I don't know what could make the Peladine work better and still have it be the same ship--if it had Plasma-Ss, it would be likely way too good; same with more P1s. A SP (which it had at some point) would help, but then it becomes even more of simply an anchor ship and nothing else.