Dennis is right. Missiles have some advantages, but some of their capabilities can be two edged swords. E.g., an enemy ship can avoid missiles by moving right in front of them. Since missiles can't HET, they then have to clumsily circle around for another attempt, giving the enemy time to react.

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Thursday, May 23, 2013 - 01:04 pm: Edit

Missiles are different enough to be interesting. Like drones, they rarely hit, however; due to the fact that you have to do enough damage to destroy them in one impulse soaks up more phaser fire, also since you need to do five points to kill them you can't fire a ph-3 and hope you get lucky, now it's a ph-1.

As far as the "always go to range one" tactic. This heavily plays into the "influences movement" part of seeking weapon interaction. In fairness this is a valid tactic, just don't make it your only tactic. The counter to this tactic is to launch missiles one at a time every two impulses, this gives you eight missiles from either cruiser in a duel. Even if none of them hit, you just deprived your opponent of eight ph-1s if s/he gets lucky and they do at least average damage, more with poor rolls. If they use T-Bombs, they can only do that four times, and it will be tricky to get more than three missiles per t-bomb.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, May 23, 2013 - 01:43 pm: Edit

The other thing is to look at the EW situation. If you can hit an enemy ship with offensive EW when he is trying to deal with the missiles (and he is not running a lot of ECCM and cannot boost to max ECCM with reserve power) you can suddenly really complicate his drone defenses. A shift of two (rare, but it can happen) changes and autokill by a phaser-1 and phaser-3 combination into the risk of a miss at Range 1, means two phaser-3s are not a guaranteed kill on the missile at Range 1 and so on.

By Stephen Elliott Parrish (Steveparrish) on Thursday, May 23, 2013 - 05:14 pm: Edit

Yes, there are things the Nicos can do help the missiles hit (and things their opponents can do counter them). And with skillful tactics, at least the Nicos can tie up many of their opponent's phasers in missile defense.

At the same time, an opponent with drones will be tying up the Nico's phasers on drone defense (And, their phasers aren't good at a distance anyway). All other things being equal, a Fed, Klingon, or Kzinti will still have a significant advantage with heavy direct fire weapons. Photons and Disrupters can fire effectively without the drones hitting, while the Space Augers cannot--at least not nearly as much.

This isn't mere theory. Dennis and I have played over a half dozen games with the Nicos, and we keep having the same problem with them. Perhaps someone more skilled than I am with speed changes or sensors would do better, but there is still nonetheless a built-in significant disadvantage for the Nicos here.

There are other disadvantages for the Nicos. Being able to break tractor is a major plus, but if I am reading the rules right, when the Nicos tractor a drone and then skip warp, the link is broken. To make matters worse, all the Nico ships have only one tractor. So while the Nicos's opponents can tractor missiles, the Nicos won't be doing much drone tractoring.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, May 23, 2013 - 06:01 pm: Edit

Against a drone-armed opponent the Nicozian should use special sensors as a first line of drone defense. Two points of energy to power both channels gets six 50% chances to kill drones. Leakers still have to be dealt with by phasers, mines, tractors, or counter missiles of course. And, yes, it is a timing matter. You have to watch how the drone launches cycle and bear in mind that if you fire weapons that blind the sensors you will lose them. Sometimes you might get by with just one sensor at a time supporting the counter-drone mission so you can alternate them. But if the opponent launches a bunch of drones on Turn #X, then you may be able to break up his attack by using your sensors on Turn #X+1, and again it is only two points of power.

By Dennis Surdu (Aegis_777) on Thursday, May 23, 2013 - 09:12 pm: Edit

SPP...now the offensive EW is off the table and the Nico missiles will not hit. That is endgame once a Fed or even a Klingon closes with OL heavies. The augers are not effective at all unless the missiles hit.....too hard to coordinate unless BPV is adjusted lower due to the difficulty of getting "all these planets aligned".

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, May 24, 2013 - 12:00 pm: Edit

Dennis Surdu:

Tactical situations vary.

Feds do not normally have a lot of drone throw-weight and do have those photons. Different circumstance from trying to keep a Kzinti from coming at you behind two turns of drone launches.

Do not take the observation as "one size fits all." Special sensors used on one turn to weaken a drone salvo started on that turn could be used for OEW, Defensive EW, or more drone jamming on the following turn.

By Dennis Surdu (Aegis_777) on Friday, May 24, 2013 - 01:06 pm: Edit

SPP....agreed. That is why I made the "aligned planets" comment. It seems that to be successful with the Nicos there is extreme need for perfect timing or perfect luck, but only in one-on-one engagements. By the way, on a side note, given they are combat ships with spec sensors versus scouts, do we use economic or combat BPV in one-on-one engagements? It seems there should be a special rule in that regard for them. Maybe there is and I have not seen it.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, May 24, 2013 - 01:53 pm: Edit

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, July 13, 2012 - 06:08 pm: Edit

Alex Lyons:

They are scouts, and if two of them appear, both are scouts and pay the scout cost. If one appears, you use the lower combat cost for purchasing, and the higher economic cost for victory determination.

By Alex Lyons (Afwholf) on Friday, July 13, 2012 - 06:15 pm: Edit

Ok, I wasnt sure because G24.352 specifically stated 'non-scout ships' Thanks for the clerification

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Saturday, July 14, 2012 - 02:24 pm: Edit

Alex Lyons:

I can see where (G24.352) creates the problem and have made a note to correct it. The point is that a lot of the electronic warfare effects of scouts require other ships to be present (hard to lend ECCM if there is no ship to lend ECCM to), and a scout can lend ECCM to another scout (as well as ECM). So if you have two scout ships, one can act as a scout providing electronic warfare services to the other allowing it to not power its own channels but use its power for weapons and other functions. Plus, they can trade off the duty, e.g., scout #1 lends scout #2 EW on Turn #1, then scout #2 lends scout #1 EW on Turn #2. Special sensors are optimized because the scout doing the fighting on a given turn can be allowing his channels to recover from blinding, or can have his channels ready for various seeking weapon defense functions and fire only after having used them for such, as well as being further protected by the seeking weapon defense function of the other scout's channels.

By Stephen Elliott Parrish (Steveparrish) on Saturday, May 25, 2013 - 09:55 am: Edit

Is anyone else playtesting the Nicos? Dennis Surdu and I have been, but we only get to play about 3 hours a month, so we are playtesting slowly.

We think there is a problem with the Nico's in single ship combat, at least against the Feds, Klingons, and Kzintis. Possibly others, like the plasma races, Lyrans, Hydrans, Andromedans, and the Omegans--but we have not playtested them yet. The basic problem is that Nico's direct fire weapons are too weak. (In multi-ship combat, the Nicos sensors would be more of a factor.)

It is somewhat like if the Feds had only light photons (that cannot be overloaded) like the FRA when firing against shields, and then heavy photons when the shields are down. And, all the phaser ones were phaser twos, and there were only four that could be used in any one direction. Under these circumstances, I doubt that the Feds would win many battles.

We tried altering the rules in the last game, fairly drastically. We allowed the Space Augers to fire every turn, and the phaser Ps to fire as phaser ones instead of twos, and several of other changes. I have to say that it was a much closer game than the others we have played.

It would be good if others were playtesting the Nicos. They are an interesting race.

By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Saturday, May 25, 2013 - 01:17 pm: Edit

Go for the overrun. Use your missiles and offensive EW to get there. Then use your phaser-ps as gattlings to take down a shield. Next impulse hit him with the augers on the now down/very weakened shield. Easier said then done perhaps but give it a shot.

By Stephen Elliott Parrish (Steveparrish) on Saturday, May 25, 2013 - 04:29 pm: Edit

Thanks Nick. Actually, I tried something like that in a game, and and ended up with a ship looking like Swiss cheese, without even penetrating his shields.

Something like that might work, but it would take perfect timing, good luck, and it wouldn't hurt if the enemy made mistakes.

There are at least a couple of problems with this strategy: with a drone using race (which is what we are discussing) the enemy will have a scatter pack, which means that 6 drones are headed your way. If you are going to use the phaser threes to break his shield, then you can't use them for drone defense, and you only have one tractor--and that breaks when you skip jump. Meanwhile, the enemy will have tractors and several phasers ready to deal with your missiles. Also, before you get close enough to use your phaser threes on his shields, you will be close enough for him to fire overloaded photons or disrupters at you, and probably a few phaser ones too. This will cause internals, and probably cut the number of weapons you can fire at him. If you haven't cut through his shield, the SAs are not very effective. Which means, you are on the losing end of the exchange.

In short, while this strategy is possible, it is very hard to pull off--at least I couldn't do it.

Are you play testing the Nicos? If you and other people were, it would help.

By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Sunday, May 26, 2013 - 06:40 pm: Edit

Stephen, I played them when the module first came out. Don't have a regular gaming buddy at the moment.

By Stephen Elliott Parrish (Steveparrish) on Sunday, May 26, 2013 - 09:23 pm: Edit

Nick: Too bad. I was like that for about 10 years.

By Dennis Surdu (Aegis_777) on Monday, May 27, 2013 - 10:04 pm: Edit

Steve P and I have been getting in some great battles in the last few months and we hope to get many more in as I try to keep a tenuous grasp on a rag-tag bunch of hard core players in the Detroit area. It is hard to get enough together for fleet actions but I think the Nicos may perform better in that environment. Of course, it means their CA's may be facing BCH's due the spec sensor adjustments so my bet will still be to sell short on the Nico stock :-)

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, May 27, 2013 - 11:34 pm: Edit

Nico missiles must be annoying to kill, with the built in natural ECM, the immunity to ADD defensive fire and the fact that if you don't kill them in one volley (*or multiple aegis volleys) they are undamaged.

By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - 10:38 am: Edit

I found when playing that few missiles get through but they were great for diverting phasers for the reasons stated above.

By Stephen Elliott Parrish (Steveparrish) on Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - 02:44 pm: Edit

The missiles have some advantages, but also disadvantages--no scatterpacks and no HET. Also, the skip warp is almost as much a hindrance as a help. In practice, they hit about as much as drones--which is not very often. Like drones, they are mainly good for soaking up phaser fire.

Unfortunately, as Dennis and I have argued, the SAs are not effective without the missiles knocking down the shields.

This might be fixed by lowering the Nico's BPV. However, this doesn't fix the problem of their being a one trick pony.

By Ken Burnside (Ken_Burnside) on Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - 05:25 pm: Edit

What trick would you like to teach them to do, Stephen?

More mid-range firepower? Slightly better fire arcs than FH/RH?

Does the Auger need have its base damage increased by about 50% and have the multiplier if it gets inside be set to 2x rather than 3x, or is the Auger too weak as it currently is?

Or just a BPV reduction?

By Stephen Elliott Parrish (Steveparrish) on Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - 08:54 pm: Edit

Ken: Sorry to criticize your creation. I do like the Nicos and think that they a lot of potential. The problem is, we have them played over and over, and keep getting the same results.

I think that more is needed besides a BPV reduction, because this still doesn't solve the problem of the Nicos being so dependent on one strategy. Another factor is that we think that the Nicos made indeed be better when they have multiple ships. The Nicos should be flexible and dangerous.

In the last game we played we tried several different changes. The SA were set to fire every turn, and only took two points of energy to load. To make up for this we stated that they could not be held, and only did twice as much damage when they actually hit the ship. The Phaser Ps were changed from phaser twos to phaser ones. We changed the missiles so that their first hex on skip warp could be any of the front three hexes. Finally, the turn mode for the CA was changed from an H to a D.

Needless to say, these were rather drastic changes, and they might not all be necessary. However, I must say that the one game we played with these rules with a Nico CA versus a Klingon, (I forget which ship) was a real slugfest.

In an earlier game, we had tried an alternate table for the SA in addition to the regular one, so that like the Eneen, they could pick one. The other table was more like a disrupter or photon. It didn't work so well.

I think that if any changes need to be made, it is to the SA. I believe that either what we did in the last game, or one of your suggestions, or something similar would be the way to go. Also, I do think that the phasers should be made stronger.

All this should be thoroughly play tested, to see what is best. However, at present Dennis and I seem to be the only ones doing this, and we can only play about 3 hours a month.

You can call me Steve--I only put my full name up because of an over literal reading of the posting rules.

By Stephen Elliott Parrish (Steveparrish) on Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - 09:15 pm: Edit

PS: If others were playtesting, they would either be getting the same results we are getting, in which case the need to do something would be strengthened, or they would not. In which case, they could tell us what we are doing wrong.

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - 10:46 pm: Edit

Stephen EP; Since our group does multi-sided fleet engagements,we have not had the issue you have described, but I can see how it could be a problem.

By Ken Burnside (Ken_Burnside) on Wednesday, May 29, 2013 - 03:53 pm: Edit

Special sensor channels get significantly better when everyone in the fleet has them.

And Steve, don't worry about criticizing these things - they were my very first attempt at making an SFU race. I got significantly better as I got more experience.

What's the average and typical damage the SA has at each of its range bands, versus how much power? How does this compare to the photon/disruptor baseline?

I strongly suspect that turn mode D with skip-16 makes these ships a bit too maneuverable, as that's effectively turn mode 3 while covering 25+ hexes per turn. Remember, they're nimble so they already move last and get small target mods.

By Stephen Elliott Parrish (Steveparrish) on Wednesday, May 29, 2013 - 07:59 pm: Edit

Ken: I haven't calculated the average and typical damage compared to the power. Do you mean with the published charts, or with the table I came up with (and then discarded)? If the former, I may do so when I have a chance.

You are right about the sensors--which is why I think that the Nicos are better when they come in a fleet than when they are alone--though we haven't tested them in a fleet or squadron action.

You are doubtless right about the D turn mode--but H might be too restrictive. They have to be maneuverable enough to avoid being crunched until they can knock a hole in a shield.


One problem that Dennis and I have is that we are only able to play at random intervals for short times. It is certainly possible that we have missed something that would make the Nicos better. This is one reason that I wish that others would be testing them too.

We will keep working on them when we have the chance. I will keep posting with whatever resluts we have.

By Stephen Elliott Parrish (Steveparrish) on Wednesday, May 29, 2013 - 09:03 pm: Edit

Oops--that should be results.