Ah, that makes sense.
Would it be possible (i.e. worth the time and effort) to get SSDs of them to add to the Tournament ships you can download from ADB?

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Wednesday, July 10, 2013 - 10:24 am: Edit

That seems like it shouldn't be too difficult--they are getting a new web guy, and maybe when that settles in, we could get the more viable ones uploaded? Barry?

Off the top of my head, the ones that work pretty well currently as they are are:

-Probr: Completely reasonable, weird plasma ship.

-Hiver: The most recent version is, as far as I can tell, totally untested (it is a 1/2 move DD based ship with 4 B2s), but it at least is workable and not weird. It just might be too strong or too weak.

-Chlorophon: Playable, but IIRC, very weak in a tournament environment, due to the basic design of Chlorophon tech.

-Maesron: Totally playable and viable. Still might need a bit of a tweak, but totally sound.

-Vari: Completely viable. Might be a bit weak, again, due to Vari technology. But certainly playable.

-Alunda: Totally sound. Has trouble vs Alpha drone ships, but otherwise, completely solid.

-Trobrin: Indications are it is currently weak, but playable.

-Koligahr: I'm not quite sure which version of the ship is up currently--they have a lot of balance issues due to their phasers being complete death to Plasma ships (a Koligahr CA can outright vaporize an enveloping plasma S).

The rest of them (that various versions of exist) tend to be very untested, fraught with weird balance/technology issues, and just a random thought experiment design at this point.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 - 01:09 pm: Edit

Omega vs Alpha rematch!

bakija (Alunda) vs droid (NTC)

T1: I go 15/16, hold an ARF and a SS, and put a bunch of power in my Bio Bolt capacitor. Andy moves 28/21/26 with 4 standards. I corner dodge, he just comes in. On impulse 25, he shoots my #1 for 6 damage with 4 standards. Impulse 26, I launch 4xWhip Crack torps. He turns off and runs away. I just follow him.

T2: I move 16/31/16, hold the ARF, put some power in my guns so I have 22 total capacitor power this turn. Andy moves some sort of 28/21/26/15 plot. He wiggles around to run my WTs out, and then comes back in. I speed up to 31 at about the same time we hit R8. We close in. We end up at R3, 1 hex off centerline. I hit him with my ARF to pull him closer a bit. He shoots my 24 box #1 with 4xOL, Fist, 5xP1, 1xP3. He misses with the Fist, hits with 3 of 4 OL, rolls hot on phasers. I take 23 in, losing a single BB, a PW, my non active ARF, and my PCG (and then also a Sensor...). Next impulse, he goes forward, I slip out, I ARF him into R1 #2 to #2. He launches a shuttle and fires 2xP3 at my #2 for 7. I blast him with 4x 4 point BBs, 2x 2 point BBs, 2x 1 point BBs. I hit with all the non overloads, but miss with 2 of the 4 heavy bolts (hitting on 9s on 2 dice). I do a total of 44 damage, doing 14 internals. We both turn off. I ARF him a long for a couple impulses, looking for a good place to hit him with my SS, but it doesn't look like it will pay off, and he still has 2xP3 anyway, so I drop the ARF, we both slow down, and we separate. I kill his shuttle with a couple WT by the end of the turn (it was a guy). We end the turn at about R10, facing away from each other.

We call it here as Andy has a meeting to go to.

He is ahead here--I have a down #1 and 23 internals, having lost 5 power, but still have most of my guns and haven't lost batteries yet. He has 14 in (2 power, P3, disr) and a down #2. He is in better shape, and still has a #1. I can fix, like, 6xF hull on the next turn, which is helpful, but the down #1 is a problem. My ARF turned out not to have helped at all--without it, I still hit R2 (it wasn't impossible that he could have HET somewhere and the ARF would have pulled him into R2 when I needed it to, but he didn't). And cost me 2 power ech on 2 turns to hold (which translates to 3 less power in my guns on T2). If I hit with 3 of 4 heavy BBs, I think we are even here.

By Michael Kenyon (Mikek) on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 - 01:36 pm: Edit

Peter, not sure how the Trobrin has changed over the years, but we pretty much ended up banning the original from our local gaming group as it was very hard to beat given the additional power it had over an actual, non-TC Trobrin. Better plasma, solid direct fire, don't-miss phasers and a rock-solid (all pun intended) armor belt made it tough. When it had the power to power everything and still go at a better than average combat speed, it was mighty tough.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 - 02:11 pm: Edit

The current Trobrin TC (as of right now as posted on SFBOL) is:

-2/3rd move with 24 warp, 6 impulse, 3 APR for 33 total power.
-Normal TC shields, plus 8 armor. 12 total hull, so less than most other ships.
-2xImplosion Bolt (RS/LS)
-1xITH (FP), 2xITL (LP/RP)
-6xPR1, 4xPR3

It is a CL sized ship, so it lacks internal fortitude (but has the 8 armor to make up for it). I have only played against it once or twice, but indications are that this version of the ship is slightly on the weaker side of things. I mean, I haven't ever used it, so I don't know off hand, but in the couple of games I played against it, I think it got killed, and there is discussion fairly recently up above in this thread reflecting the same thing.

By Michael Kenyon (Mikek) on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 - 02:15 pm: Edit

I want to a say that the original was off of the CA, with 32 warp as I recall.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 - 02:31 pm: Edit

If there was ever cause for a re-done Trobrin TC based on a MC 1 ship, there would be justification for scaling back the armour belts if need be, since the Trobrin have done so themselves historically.

The armour on a Trobrin ship is there as one or more discrete belts, as opposed to being woven into the hull the way they are on a Terran/Fed/FRA CL or Romulan War Eagle. Which is just as well, as it not only makes certain hull variant conversions easier to manage (such as the DSN-to-SCS modification shown in Module Omega 5) but also accounts for the ability of the crew to nibble away at said belts while away on long-range patrols.

So, perhaps the officers and crewblobs aboard a TC can be expected to stick to a low-rock diet?


And speaking of Omega TCs, has there been any further thought put in to doing one/s for the FRA and/or the Iridani?

Perhaps the Aurorans could start with the BC and scale back as required, while the Questors might be able to either work with a Galleon (with a careful selection of "default" modules) or a Clipper (which can already go speed-31, but only has room for one module instead of two).

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 - 03:24 pm: Edit

As noted, I don't know that there is a lot of interest in the FRA and Iridani ships, simply 'cause while they have an interesting background and history, their ships aren't particularly compelling in and of themselves, such that I don't think anyone who is invested in making and uploading Omega TCs is super set on doing so.

The FRA are basically Feds. I mean, they have some slightly different technologies (light and heavy photons; SRCs; shuttle bombs) sure, but not so much that they are really that different than playing a Fed.

The Iridani have phasers, and then some phasers. And a thing that might make their phasers slightly better. But not so many phasers that they are a scary phaser boat TC. And occasionally weird (and probably disadvantageous) weapon arcs.

I mean, like, I'm certainly not *opposed* to the Iridani and FRA getting playtest TCs, but I don't imagine that Barry is rushing out to put together and upload some. Like, if you wanted to design a couple and send them to Barry, I'm sure he could upload them for you.

I suspect that the main impetus for folks to make Omega TCs is that they are kooky and different than Alpha ships and have fun angles to them, that makes them compelling to play in the tournament setting. Like, I certainly could see how an FRA TC based on, like, the BC (with, say, 3x regular photons, 2x mini photons, 7 or so P1s, 2xP3, couple SRC, maybe a couple built in shuttle bombs over and above the 4 standard shuttles) might be good, but then you basically get a Fed TCC that is either just better than the Fed TCC or just worse (I suspect that in most instances, it'll probably be just better), neither of which is particularly good for tournament play.

The Iridani ship is interesting due to the background and the modular aspects, but not so much in tournament play--the modules are all not really something relevant for a tournament game, other than the basic fighty module. So you end up with what is essentially just a low impact phaser boat that is stuck on a closed map and has no seeking weapons or anything at all to dissuade an overrun or anchor attempt. So likely, just a ship that gets killed a lot. And isn't that interesting in the first place.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 - 03:26 pm: Edit

Michael wrote:
>>I want to a say that the original was off of the CA, with 32 warp as I recall.>>

Yeah, there was one of those a long time ago (I suspect it was one of the original Omega TCs that Burnside made all those years ago), but the MC1 version was apparently way to powerful, so Barry scaled it back to the current CL version, which is apparently a tad on the underpowered end of things.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 - 09:04 pm: Edit

I'm not sure if it's particularly fair to start pulling up the drawbridge on the FRA and Iridani, either based on their percieved capability in a tourney environment or on how "normal" they may seem compared to the likes of the Alunda.


For the FRA, the very fact of them having a "Terran" hull template for their cruisers would go some way towards making them distinct, not least since no tourney version of the Fed OCA exists at this point. (The Romulans got to have three TCs, one for each of their generations of starship design. And those three hulls would have less variety between them weapons-wise than what one might be able to offer for the FRA relative to the Federation.)

And in terms of effectiveness, if an Iridani ship is not deemed as being able to compete on a closed map, are they essentially obliged to go without while the likes of the Vari get to stay, simply because the latter had their TC done first? (From what I recall, the current version of the Vari ship has no particle splitter torpedoes to bolster its range of options. But then, I suppose the very option of adding the PST into their TC would, in theory, offer a "fix" to the Vari that the Iridani would not be able to get.)

Personally, I don't see the FRA or Iridani as being any less worthy as Omega factions, simply because they have more "normal" technologies than some of their more exotic counterparts. Although, I suppose I might well be letting my appreciation for both factions as they existed historically unduly colour my view of them here, which is probably not all that fair either.

(Okay, sure, the Iridani are technically not an "Omega" power, in that their home territory lies outside of the Milky Way Galaxy proper, but still.)


Unfortunately, I don't have the kind of tools or templates that Barry has to hand in terms of trying to draw up such SSDs myself. And I would not want to oblige him to draw up something he is not interested in pursuing. So, the point may well be moot in any event.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 - 09:28 pm: Edit

Why not learn how?

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 - 09:42 pm: Edit

The last time I was able to fiddle with any of the graphical aspects of an SFU-related work was when I used a trial edition of Adobe InDesign to update some of Rick Smith's files for the FC Omega project. But even then, using the trial software can only go so far when one does not have the kind of artistic talent which Rick has at his disposal. (I was only able to make the edits look half-way decent because of the fine work he'd put in to make the templates so easy to work with.)

Of course, the kind of files involved here would be different, as would the software needed to create them. But even so, I don't put much stock in my ability to generate the kind of SSD that would be fit for playtesting.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Thursday, July 18, 2013 - 10:59 am: Edit

Gary wrote:
>>I'm not sure if it's particularly fair to start pulling up the drawbridge on the FRA and Iridani, either based on their percieved capability in a tourney environment or on how "normal" they may seem compared to the likes of the Alunda.>>

Well, here is the thing. The tournament play environment is far more about "Is this an interesting tactical dynamic" than it is about "Let's make sure all historical aspects of the game are fairly represented." For someone to want to put a TC into the tournament environment, it has to offer something that isn't already there--an interesting dynamic, a new tactical challenge. The game could, in theory, support adding, say, a Gorn Tournament CM to the mix. But as it wouldn't really add anything particularly new or interesting, I don't see a lot of people supporting it happening.

>>For the FRA, the very fact of them having a "Terran" hull template for their cruisers would go some way towards making them distinct, not least since no tourney version of the Fed OCA exists at this point.>>

But it wouldn't, really, relative to the existing Fed TCC; just having a different SSD shape doesn't make it something worth adding to the tournament environment (don't get me wrong here--I have no problem at all with people messing around with ships just for the sake of messing around with them, but for something to get enough traction and support to get tested and tried out, it needs to offer something new and different). It would still be essentially the same dynamic--a heavy hitting ship armed with Photons and Phaser 1s which doesn't have seeking weapons and has a mostly FA arc and takes damage reasonably well. But due to the mini photons allowing it to take damage a little better (and even out the odds a little better) and, say, some SRCs giving it considerably stronger drone defense, it would probably end up just the like Fed, but better. At which point you start having to rip stuff out to make it not just like the Fed, but better, and you probably end up with a ship that is just like the Fed, but worse.

>>And in terms of effectiveness, if an Iridani ship is not deemed as being able to compete on a closed map, are they essentially obliged to go without while the likes of the Vari get to stay, simply because the latter had their TC done first?>>

The Vari has, at the very least, new technology that adds a very different dynamic to the mix--guns that fire twice a turn, and a gun that lets you hit a non facing, down shield. To be fair, the Vari also isn't particularly good.

>>Personally, I don't see the FRA or Iridani as being any less worthy as Omega factions, simply because they have more "normal" technologies than some of their more exotic counterparts. Although, I suppose I might well be letting my appreciation for both factions as they existed historically unduly colour my view of them here, which is probably not all that fair either.>>

I mean, again, there needs to be, for my money, an interesting reason to make a TC for them, other than simply "Well, they existed! So they should have a TC!". TCs could certainly get designed and posted for them (I'm not saying that no one should do that. I'm just saying that I can't imagine that there is a whole lot of want to see that happen), but I suspect that they probably wouldn't get a ton of play if they were up there, and as such, the folks who do this sort of thing (i.e. Barry and Paul F) probably don't feel a burning need to do so.

I mean, ya know, if you wanted to invent an FRA and an Iridani TC, even just on paper, I'm sure we could tweak them to make sense, tournament environment wise, and maybe Barry or Paul would want to post them. But who knows?

By Michael Kenyon (Mikek) on Thursday, July 18, 2013 - 11:57 am: Edit

The Vari does suck, but it's SOOOO much fun to play. Okay, it's actually significantly better in those situations where you're using TCs in a non-tournament way (Space Hockey, etc.) as it may well be the ultimate bottom-feeder.

The Iridani I think could be interesting just from the perspective of what pallets you'd end up putting on. Would you do a choice and have it be like the Option-boats?

In similar fashion, I think the Bolosco would be great fun, but it'd be hard to balance with the other boats out there. On a fixed map, it will eventually run you down into a corner, take your shot and mug you ... out of breathe while it does it. They also have a lot of options that both complicate the tournament and their balance.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Thursday, July 18, 2013 - 12:36 pm: Edit

I should note that the FRA BC has only one photon (of any size) that can fire in the FA arc. The others are split into LF+L and RF+R arcs, which obliged the BC to fire all five along the front hex row.

(Even the Mæsron CA still gets two of its four tachyon guns to fire in the FA arc, so isn't quite so keenly obliged to centreline its opponent.)


In terms of what a TBC might look like, I was thinking that it could start by having its L and R warp engines brought up to 15 boxes apiece, but that it might have a slightly weaker than standard set of shields as a trade-off for the hull and armour boxes on the hull proper.

If a pair of SRCs are too much, perhaps replace them with a lone FH SRC, akin to those on the DD and DDL? (Or maybe assume the presence of the TM refit, and let the Auroran player deal with missile operations instead.)

It may or may not need to worry about shuttle boms, though. (Even historically, those bomba do not come as standard on any FRA ship, and are always treated as Commander's Options.)


As for the Iridani, the simplest way to get a Galleon up to speed 31 would be to add a pair of boxes to the L and R warp nacelles.

As for modules, the Iridani equivalent of a "command cruiser" would presumably fit a Command Module in the front, and a Weapons module in the back. (Or if the Command module is too good, maybe use a standard VIP module instead.)

As with the shuttle bombs, I'm not sure if leaving the Gig in there would be worth it. (Unlike the shuttle bombs, the historical ship gets one Gig as standard, but would using it add anything to the ship in a tournament environment?)


And for the Vari, why not consider adding in a pair of particle splitter torpedoes?

If I remember correctly, the current Vari template looks like it ws based off of the historical Command Cruiser from Captain's Log #23, and that ship had a pair of FA PSTs to work with.

The torpedoes could help with the ship's seeking weapon defence, since it could use the post-split warheads to target incoming drones or TMs (or Barbs or Stingers), while the short-range punch from the torps could provide a close-in deterrent (or increase the threat of an overrun).

By Michael Kenyon (Mikek) on Thursday, July 18, 2013 - 01:53 pm: Edit

You'd have to look at the power curve then. As I remember it, there's not a LOT of spare power to be had. You've got a lot of weaponry on the boat, but it all does like <= 3 points per shot, but you get a lot of shots per turn. If you add in the PSTs without changing the curve, you're either going end up having to pick between whether you want to ignore them or ignore your traditional heavy weapons or go dog slow and never get to use either.

Personally, not a fan of the PST but it would help I'd imagine. The Vari has to keep his enemy in knife-fighting range while avoiding the overrun and that would help there.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Thursday, July 18, 2013 - 03:42 pm: Edit

Michael wrote:
>>The Iridani I think could be interesting just from the perspective of what pallets you'd end up putting on. Would you do a choice and have it be like the Option-boats? >>

Maybe? My memory of the various Iridani modules is that most of them aren't suitable to tournament play--there is the basic combat module that gives you some extra phasers and power (up to the point that the ship is reasonably armed), and then the rest of them are, like, the scout module (not tournament viable), the carrier module (not tournament viable), the cargo module (not worth using), the science module (not worth using), etc. So other than, like, giving yourself a handycap, I can't really see how different modules would be a good idea.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Thursday, July 18, 2013 - 03:47 pm: Edit

Michael wrote:
>>The Vari does suck, but it's SOOOO much fun to play.>>

The current version that is posted isn't actually *that* bad--it is based on, like, the battlewagon or something, and has 6xPB (3xFA, 1xFA/L, 1xFA/R, 1xRX) and 7xPP1/4xPP3 (with Particle Stabilizers) and a lot of power. It actually didn't do that badly on the last playtest tournament, winning a few games.

I mean, it too has the problem of being a pure DF ship without devastating single impulse hitting power that can shoot a lot stuck on a closed map. But in a knife fight, if it isn't already dead, it can be very effective.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Thursday, July 18, 2013 - 03:51 pm: Edit

Gary wrote:
>>I should note that the FRA BC has only one photon (of any size) that can fire in the FA arc. The others are split into LF+L and RF+R arcs, which obliged the BC to fire all five along the front hex row. >>

Yeah, see, that isn't really a selling point (I thought it had 3xFA photons and then 1xLF/L and 1xRF/R?) so much as a significant disadvantage in a tournament duel. Being forced to either centerline your opponent or split fire, especially with something like a Fed, is asking to get killed a lot.

>>As with the shuttle bombs, I'm not sure if leaving the Gig in there would be worth it. (Unlike the shuttle bombs, the historical ship gets one Gig as standard, but would using it add anything to the ship in a tournament environment?) >>

I don't think that it would.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Saturday, July 20, 2013 - 02:08 pm: Edit

Over in World League, Brett wrote:
>>Mike - I wasn't commenting on the Maesron ship being broken (or not), but only on the TM. I do think that it's trivial for drone users to deal with TMs and difficult for everyone else.>>

Yeah, that is the big flaw with the Maesron vs Alpha ships--the TMs are pretty much comletely ignored by drone users, but against everyone else, they are pretty good. Barry did a lot of gymnastics trying to address this issue long ago (like allowing TMs to have defensive phaser modules or ADD modules or whatever), but in the end, the general consensus was just "Don't worry about it too much", as all the other ways of addressing it involved making up too many kooky rules or adding too much Tachyon Missile rule.

I still don't know that there is a good solution--keep in mind that in Omega, there are no drones, and limited plasmas (that are either small, so you need to use a lot of them to get a single TM or big, so that using one to get a TM is generally overkill). So in the Omega side of the galaxy, TMs are pretty much always a significant thing.

>>Comparing the WBS to the Maesron... I think a better comparison is WBS(11), since that compares 8 offensive phasers on each and 2 drones vs 2 TM. >>

It isn't an unwarranted comparison, but:

A) The GBS disruptors are *vastly* more flexible and efficient.

and

B) The Shark has much more aggressive arcs for the guns.

As noted, the PW1 is a little worse than the regular P1 pretty much everywhere but R6-7 and 9-12, and in those ranges, they are only marginally better. So the Maesron has 4xTGs (with arcs that make it hard to fire all of them at once, but easier to fire one or two of them in weird arcs to the sides and behind the ship), 8xPW1s (with similar arcs to the TGs; it is easy to get 6 in arc, hard to get 8 in arc), 4xPW3 (in worse arcs than the GBS, but not horrible in general), and the 2xTM launchers (which launch 1 missile per turn, total). Which is *similar* to the GBS, but:

-The arcs are less good, as noted above, for most aggressive shooting situations.

-The phasers are all slightly less good than regular phasers.

-The missiles are hard to use, infrequent, and easy to deal with if your opponent has a drone rack, which is often.

All of which make it a lot harder to use than the GBS.

The Tachyon Guns are also 2 turn arming weapons. That are flexible, yes, but if they are armed to do a lot of damage, they are short ranged. You are rarely ever going to get to fire them for maximum damage (as they have a max range of 1, so you really have to start a turn at R1 to use them like that). In mid-late game, they are fantastic to snipe at long range down shields (hitting for 4 damage on a 1-5 most of the time).

Someone pointed out earlier on in the discussion (Brian maybe?) that probably the best thing to do with the Maesron is to try for a late turn R5 shot with 3x 6 point TGs (that hit on a 1-5 for 10 damage) and 6xPW2s (that are pretty good at R5), followed by turning off and trying to get the last few guns in that same hole and running, with a couple TMs in the way. It costs 3 power to hold a 6 power TG, so you have a little more power to play with than a disruptor ship with OLs (12 power to hold 4x 6 point TGs as opposed to 16), and you can reasonably expect to do about 45 damage at R5. So kind of like a Klingon in that respect, but without the SP, it is harder to get away.

By Michael Kenyon (Mikek) on Monday, July 22, 2013 - 12:55 pm: Edit

On the issue of TMs versus drones ... Is this really any different (in the large scope) as any other drone vs drone engagement. Generally, you end up with the drone users with teh smaller array using their drones in self defense and the user with the larger array being advantaged by that the difference (up to control limits).

On the TGs ... the arcs are definately difficult to deal with. Generally, you're taking your first shot from midling range. Because of the awesome to-hit on the TGs, and the ridiculous range you need to parallel the power of a Photon, it's generally not wise to try for the full power shot. You get a better exchange from the mid-range, but that means that you're spending a fair chunk of time running out the reload period. I've started staggering fire to help mitigate that somewhat and trying to always have at least one TG up and loaded to discourage an overrun. This generally means however that you end up favoring one side and as you only have one TG per side, you're challenged as damage comes in between taking the TG that's already fired (hopefully) that turn or cutting your next turn's fire and wasting the first turn of loading energy. In two of my three games, I lost a flanking TG and my opponent kept camping off of that side.

Facing almost exclusively plasma opponents in this one, R5 was rough to get to. I took the safer, if slower R12 or R7 breaks as firing opportunities. Before the games, pretty much everyone had questions about the TMs and felt pretty confident against the TGs and phasers. I generally got one shot per opponent where they saw the possible impact and they they tried keeping out of the range breaks.

The starting 4 power generally seems to be the most flexible to me. If you give me dumb-close range, I can up them to exploit it a good deal. If you play keep away, I'm keeping my holding costs and range-options open. The Maesron will be happy to exchange R16 fire all day long with anyone on the board, even the Fed.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, July 22, 2013 - 01:05 pm: Edit

That being the case, it can expect that opponents will not stay at range. I mean, what can it do to prevent that?

By Michael Kenyon (Mikek) on Monday, July 22, 2013 - 04:16 pm: Edit

Well, in Alpha, you pretty much have a single decision - overload and limit yourself to R8 or don't and have max range and MAYBE be able to overload some portion of your fire off of battery.

With the Maesron, you've got about 5 gradiations from solid shield scraping at R30 to doing fully-overloaded photon damage with an R1 limit. Like a few of the Alpha weapons, you can hold an overload, but as the system is twice as expensive as a photon to hold, you're pretty much shooting yourself in the foot if you load up and cannot deliver.

Given that the tournament is on a fixed map, it's almost impossible to stay out of R16 from your opponent. That enables you to fairly safely load to the 4-point halfway point. Going to 5-pointers limits you to R8 and does nothing for the to-hit and little for the damage. If you get to R5 and R3, definately worth loading up the TG, but at that point you've subjected yourself to the oppponents shot in return. As the increments are one point per, you generally have battery to up yourself at least one-level if not per TG you're firing.

If you can reliably get a shot at R12-16 and deny your opponent R8, you win in the Maesron. That's however, MUCH harder done than said. In those range brackets you're doing twice the damage of a disruptor and a better to-hit, you're doing less damage than a photon, but have better than twice the odds of hitting (from memory). Heck, at R12, your phasers hit on 1-4, which ain't shabby for adding insult with the blast. They do sucky damage, but they hit.

An alternate tactic is to take their best shot, get close and unload the next turn. You can do pretty good damage ... once. I think it's a better tactic your 2nd-3rd battle run. If you're doing that, you probably want to pick a side, load that lower and then take a shot on the way in with one side TG and it's phasers. It's hard to stay centerlined and that lets you lose some as padding if you cannot keep the line.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Monday, July 22, 2013 - 06:40 pm: Edit

Mike wrote:
>>On the issue of TMs versus drones ... Is this really any different (in the large scope) as any other drone vs drone engagement.>>

I'd argue that it is. As the TM ship only can launch one TM per turn, meaning a drone ship needs to use only 2 drones to deal with your pretty much best possible seeking weapon wave.

Of ships with 2 drone racks:
-They can get 4 drones on the map in 8 impulses. Which takes 4 counter drones (which is significant).

-They generally have something else going on as well. The 2 drone Shark is very tough and has 4x disruptors (which are arguably better than TGs), and even then, is likely the least good of the Shark layouts and still has dual shuttle bays; the Klingon has a SP, which is very significant; the Orion (with bb) is, ya know, an Orion (and has a ton of power and probably a gatling and HBs). The FRX has the kooky arcs (and indications are, really, that it isn't that good).

By Michael Kenyon (Mikek) on Monday, July 22, 2013 - 07:45 pm: Edit

Peter,

Putting the SP aside, how's that any different than a Kzinti dealing with a Klingon?

The Kzinti can get 6 on the board in 8 impulse, or 8 depending on range, either way you count it, the Klingon is still disadvantaged by the same amount.

The Maesron DOES have to deal with potentially two more drones in a 8 impulse end-of-turn scenario, ceded. That's not the worst situation in the world.

My general feeling, however, is that drone users tend to be able to deal with drones easier than non-drone users. The same is true of drone users being able to take care of TMs. I haven't seen a lot of complaining that the Shark has an unfair advantage on the Kzinti because it can negate most to all of it's launch rate. I just don't see how it's different.

As for comparisons with the Shark, I'd pretty much rate it as better (either 11, BB, or 1B) than the Maesron, but the majority of the difference between them I see in the arcs. The shark is far easier to play offensively than with the Maesron.

Of the other drone boats, the arcs are closest to the FRX which isn't a good comparison as another wingnut. The Klingon and WBS both have vastly more aggressive arcs, while the Klingon is closer. That comparison has to way the gain of TMs over drones in comparing the ADD and SP and still having better than twice the launch rate. And I agree that the Orion is problematic to compare against.