There is some debate in the rules committee about the whether their is any value to building small freighter variants.

so..

a) Do you build small freighter variants?
b) Do you think there needs to be some kind of rule incentive to do so?

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Wednesday, August 06, 2014 - 10:01 am: Edit

Wearing my player hat:

I only build small variants when I have rules making the call (i.e. AXCVAs take a shipyard while AXCVLs can be done at a StarBase). To date I've never downsized for cash flow reasons (I agree that it could turn out this way). Since cash isn't the limit (for me), I see no reason to ever build the small ones.

OK, there are some esoteric corner cases where I might build the small models, but 9 times out of 10 my limit is conversion slots, not cash. I.e. if it were possible to build 4 different F-S variants in a turn vs. 2 F-L ones, I might be inclined to do so.

By Jean Sexton (Jsexton) on Wednesday, August 06, 2014 - 03:26 pm: Edit

As a player.

Yes. Especially when they are cheaper at 2 for 1 and I am not stressing about needing conversions.

I can't see making it easier to build conversions. Suck the expense up and build the big ones at one slot and a higher price or suck up the MM conversions and build the small ones at two slots. That is what makes it a balanced situation.

By John Burton Steele Sr. (Johnbsteele) on Wednesday, August 06, 2014 - 03:46 pm: Edit

The only reason I build small freighter conversions is to get to that threshold to add an extra ship to convoy defense. There is no other reason to build them.

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Wednesday, August 06, 2014 - 04:06 pm: Edit

John S- AXCVL and AXPFS vs. the SC3 build at a shipyard are two good counter examples where the small version is worth building. Just about all of the others are cost based decisions.

By Charles "Lucky" Coleman (Mwmiyd) on Wednesday, August 06, 2014 - 05:36 pm: Edit

Not having a lot of MM funds, I normally build 2 small.. but not on the same turn, so it takes me a few to get what I want. Cost reasons and SY reasons. I don't worry about the conversion slots, but I do worry about tying up that SC3 SY.

By John Coleman (Aligato) on Wednesday, August 06, 2014 - 09:56 pm: Edit

As a minor empire EP expenditure is important. It pays for me to go small. In very few instances is there a need to build larger ships that require SC3SY usage and I don't worry about conversions.........yet! Almost all MM construction is from SBs.

By John Stiff (Tarkin22180) on Friday, August 08, 2014 - 02:31 pm: Edit

a) Yes I do.

b) Is there a need for an incentive? No. Would I use an incentive? Probably. I would be curious to hear what the proposed incentives are. It sounds like Howard would like the small freighter variants to cost a 1/2 converson slot.

By William Gary Glattli II (Wglattli) on Friday, August 08, 2014 - 08:23 pm: Edit

I tend not to build small freighter variants excepting for part of an initial build at the beginning of a game and even then, it is always the FES. On the subject of 1/2 cost conversion slots for small variants, I think it would be interesting but I would probably stick to building the large variants myself.

Gary

By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Saturday, August 09, 2014 - 12:08 pm: Edit

John S- yes, my thought is to normalize freighter conversions to F-S counts, and then charge 2 (large), 3 (jumbo), or 4 (huge) for larger hulls or non-freighters. One of the things that I've no doubt been annoying John with is to reread the rulebook and to standardize notation (some things use wartime as their basis, others peace for example). This is an outgrowth of that.

As things now stand, I always go for the largest version even if it means the military pays for part of the cost. If I could build more smalls, I would in many cases as they are less than half the cost. Note that while you'd be able to build more smalls, the huge and jumbos would be curtailed- no more 2xF-OL for MRRs with your 2 conversions...

For those noting cash constraints for their MM- do recall the E1.151 limits minor empires to 35% (not 10%). I.e. On peacetime, and assuming no CAN games, no MRR, no CORE economics the MM income maxes out at 170EPs per turn. A major empire's doesn't reach that number again until 13 Majors (169EPs)...

By John Stiff (Tarkin22180) on Saturday, August 09, 2014 - 02:03 pm: Edit

It is a mixed bag. Sometimes 2xFS conversions are better bargains, sometimes not. If one looks at the BPV sometimes 2xFS are better than a single FL. Sometimes the EPV and BPV are better for 2xFS vs 1xFL.

The drawback that you pointed out is that each FS takes up a full conversion slot, making the FL better from that point of view.

The last rule change requires that the "Heavy" freighters be built at a military shipyard (not a SB). This would be the F-OL and F-OP that are needed for MRR. This was recently addressed (SMILE) by allowing for the TCBSY. They can build any freighter using MM funds.

I have forgotten the war vs peace rates of conversion upon occasion. One would think that I could remember that the rate is 1. The conversion rate R&D's allow for 2 but only at war mobility. I sometimes forget the "at war mobility" part.

I admit that once the minimum required FL and FS variants are achieved, I generally have other uses for the MM besides freighter conversion, MRR requirements for example.

One day, just for ginns, I'll build the OAL. Is it really worth 316/228?

By Chris Reando (Sfbo11mav) on Wednesday, August 13, 2014 - 11:28 pm: Edit

I typically only build the large freighters variants unless I am topping off a count to meet a convoy roll requirement. You could say that to support X number of systems you have to have X number of freighter variants small and large.

Let's look at rule -

(E4.50) An empire must have one F-ML and one F-MS in the Strategic Reserve for every 50 hex spines of minefields or fraction thereof.

The larger the minefield the larger the number of freighters needed. I wouldn't allow substitutions here because you physically need the number of freighters to manage a larger volume of mines. I'd also stipulate that the other rules should be based on the size of the empire. Larger empires need more freighters to manage its internal workings. Tie the E series rules to empire size require a mix of small and large freighters.

In this case substitutions would not be allowed.

By John D Berg (Kerg) on Sunday, August 17, 2014 - 09:19 am: Edit

This ends the debate. No consensus on the need to have a bonus to build small freighter class.