| Subtopic | Posts | Updated | ||
| Archive through November 14, 2016 | 25 | 11/14 06:46pm |
| By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Monday, November 14, 2016 - 08:36 pm: Edit |
HF5 (R3.95): Seeking Weapons: Text should add "If a special sensor is installed, see (F3.213)". Should have a note what special sensors would be destroyed on. (Nick Samaras, November 14, 2016)
HF5X (R3.213): Seeking Weapons: Text should add "If a special sensor is installed, see (F3.213)". Should have a note what special sensors would be destroyed on. (Nick Samaras, November 14, 2016)
| By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Tuesday, November 15, 2016 - 12:19 pm: Edit |
HF5W, HF5WX: I don't know if these ships should have the Minesweeper, PFT, and Scout/Survey Ship notes to cover those configurations. (Nick Samaras November 15, 2016).
| By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Tuesday, November 15, 2016 - 01:42 pm: Edit |
Nick Samaras:
The Heavy War Destroyers are not going to change from what is listed because of what they are. We looked at this at the time, and decided having
"This ship is an exploration/survey ship if outfitted as per (G33.41)."
"This ship is a carrier escort if outfitted as per (G33.43). It may have limited (D13.4) or full (D13.0) aegis."
"This ship is a Commando ship if outfitted as per (G33.44)."
"This ship is a true minesweeper if outfitted as per (G33.45)."
"This ship is a true PF tender if outfitted as per (G33.46)."
"This ship can operate as a repair ship if outfitted as per (G33.47)."
"If this ship has one or two special sensors in its weapon options, it is a true scout."
"This ship can operate as a 'command ship' if outfitted as per (G33.55)."
notes was superfluous. And the above notes are incomplete as each would have to include additional information for the roles which are already defined by the rules. (Same goes for the Hydran Heavy Lancer and Lyran Jagdpanther).
The carrier role was mentioned only because the escorts needed to be defined.
Same goes for the X-version.
| By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Wednesday, November 16, 2016 - 07:52 pm: Edit |
(SH209): D4 Harrower, Gnasher
(SH210): D# Warmaster, Kartal's Hammer
(SH211): D4 Killer, Slayer, Assassin, F4 Striker, Grappler, Instigator
(SH212): F4 Devoted, Reliable, Mailed Fist
(SH262) G2 Pechov, Chavel
(SL236): D3 Vengeance, Retribution, Retaliation, F3 Bloodletter, Agonizer
(SL285): C4 Conqueror, D4C Khavek, D4 Fierce, Flamer, Fanatic, Ferocious, Fearsom, F4 Rascal, Raider, Repulse, T4 Commissioner Taragon.
| By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Monday, November 21, 2016 - 02:00 pm: Edit |
(R3.33) D6M: Missing "Shock:" intro to shock paragraph. (Nick Samaras, November 21, 2016)
(R3.44) D7V: Reference to (D3.4) should be to (R3.4). Reference to (D3.62) should be to (R3.62). (Nick Samaras, November 21, 2016)
(R3.64) F6: Missing "Shock:" intro to shock paragraph. (Nick Samaras, November 21, 2016)
(R3.75) MD5: Missing "Shock:" intro to shock paragraph. (Nick Samaras, November 21, 2016)
(R3.127) MDW: Missing "Shock:" intro to shock paragraph. (Nick Samaras, November 21, 2016)
(R3.147) MB10: Missing "Shock:" intro to shock paragraph. (Nick Samaras, November 21, 2016)
(R3.214) MD7X: Missing "Shock:" intro to shock paragraph. (Nick Samaras, November 21, 2016)
| By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Friday, November 25, 2016 - 02:31 am: Edit |
(R3.FA16) Z-G FIGHTER: Second last paragraph, reference (j4.231) should be (J4.2131). (Nick Samaras, November 25, 2016)
(R3.148) MC8: Missing "Shock:" intro to shock paragraph. (Nick Samaras, November 21, 2016)
(R3.147) F6J: Missing "Shock:" intro to shock paragraph. (Nick Samaras, November 21, 2016)
| By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Sunday, November 27, 2016 - 08:41 pm: Edit |
(R3.97) F5W: First paragraph "F5 fritates" should be "F5 frigates". (Nick Samaras, November 27, 2016)
| By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Wednesday, November 30, 2016 - 05:30 pm: Edit |
(R1.1-3) SB: Y179 fighter list: Z-Z-E should be Z-E. (Nick Samaras, November 30, 2016)
(R1.89-3) STF: Y179 fighter list: Z-Z-E should be Z-E. (Nick Samaras, November 30, 2016)
| By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Saturday, December 03, 2016 - 08:36 pm: Edit |
(R3.154) E4T: Seeking weapon reference (R3.211) should be (F3.211). (Nick Samaras December 4, 2016)
(R3.155) F5T: Seeking weapon reference (R3.211) should be (F3.211). (Nick Samaras December 4, 2016)
(R3.172) F6T: Seeking weapon reference (R3.211) should be (F3.211). (Nick Samaras December 4, 2016)
| By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Thursday, February 02, 2017 - 09:54 pm: Edit |
(R3.33) D6M: Background provides B refit Y165, year in service is Y168. (Nick Samaras, February 2, 2017).
(R3.62) D5V: Background provides K refit Y173, SSD says Y175. (Nick Samaras, February 2, 2017).
(R3.76) AD6: Background provides K refit Y178, SSD says Y175, year in service is Y176. (Nick Samaras, February 2, 2017).
| By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Friday, February 03, 2017 - 04:27 am: Edit |
(R3.80) E4V: B-refit listed as Y165, YIS is Y169. (Nick Samaras, February 3, 2017)
(R3.114) D6Y: B-refit listed as Y165, YIS is Y166. (Nick Samaras, February 3, 2017)
| By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Friday, February 03, 2017 - 08:01 pm: Edit |
(R3.158) FD5: Ship description gives K-refit Y175, SSD Y176. (Nick Samaras, February 3, 2017)
| By Glenn Hoepfner (Ikabar) on Saturday, February 04, 2017 - 11:17 pm: Edit |
Just an interesting observation.
From Nick's Nov 16 post.
(SH262) G2 Pechov, Chavel
If you rearrange the letters, you get:
Pavel Chechov. If you replace one c with a k, you'd get a famous Enterprise officer.
| By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Sunday, February 05, 2017 - 01:33 pm: Edit |
Careful! You will blow the cover of an GIA operative.
| By Glenn Hoepfner (Ikabar) on Sunday, February 05, 2017 - 02:33 pm: Edit |
Correction:
Pavel Chechov. If you replace one c with a k, you'd get a famous Enterprise officer.
should be:
Remove the ch and replace with a k. Arguably the same pronunciation.
Oh, as far as a GIA operative is concerned, . . . sorry.
| By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Tuesday, February 07, 2017 - 06:16 pm: Edit |
Klingon Master Fighter Chart
Z-1DM: Dogfight rating not reduced, should be -1 to be consistent. (Nick Samaras, February 7, 2017)
Z-3EM: YIS should be Y177. (Nick Samaras, February 7, 2017)
Z-B2M: BPV should be 43.5, not 43/5.(Nick Samaras, February 7, 2017)
Z-B4M: Dogfight rating should be -4, not improved to 0. (Nick Samaras, February 7, 2017)
| By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Wednesday, February 08, 2017 - 08:03 pm: Edit |
Please delete my above post, it should have been in the Module G3 AAR.
| By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Thursday, February 09, 2017 - 02:08 pm: Edit |
Deleted, but whenever anyone posts a "remove my post" note please give the time code so we're sure we got the right one. Someone else coming along and not knowing I deleted the post you wanted deleted might delete another of your posts.
| By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, August 13, 2018 - 05:40 pm: Edit |
(YR1.20-3) YF-AS: Change refits to "None."
| By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Saturday, May 01, 2021 - 09:59 pm: Edit |
(R1.1-R3) MSSB-R3 Klingon SB - Y178 Fighter Hanger Bay Escort Line, there should be a comma before rarely, "or Z-Y/Z-YP, rarely" - Ken Kazinski, 01 May 2021.
(R1.1-R3) MSSB-R3 Klingon SB - Y179 Fighter Hanger Bay Escort Line, there should be a comma before rarely, "or Z-Y/Z-YP, rarely" - Ken Kazinski, 01 May 2021.
(R1.1-R3) MSSB-R3 Klingon SB - Y179 Fighter Hanger Bay Escort Line, should not "Z-Z-E" be "Z-E"? - Ken Kazinski, 01 May 2021.
(R1.1-R3) MSSB-R3 Klingon SB - Y183-Y187 Fighter Hanger Bay Escort Line, "6, 12, 18, or Z-YB" should be "6, 12, 18, or 24 Z-YB" - Ken Kazinski, 01 May 2021.
(R1.1-R3) MSSB-R3 Klingon SB - Y178 Heavy Fighter Hanger Bay Escort Line, By convention there should be an "or" before the "6 or 12" to delineate the next group - "Z-Y/Z-YP, or 6 or 12 Z-H". - Ken Kazinski, 01 May 2021.
(R1.1-R3) MSSB-R3 Klingon SB - Y179 Heavy Fighter Hanger Bay Escort Line, By convention there should be an "or" before the "6 or 12" to delineate the next group - "24 Z-Y/Z-YP, or 6 or 12 Z-H" - Ken Kazinski, 01 May 2021.
(R1.1-R3) MSSB-R3 Klingon SB - Y180-Y182 Heavy Fighter Hanger Bay Escort Line, By convention there should be an "or" before the "6 or 12" to delineate the next group - "Z-YB/Z-YBP, or 6 or 12 Z-HB" - Ken Kazinski, 01 May 2021.
(R1.1-R3) MSSB-R3 Klingon SB - Y183-Y184 Heavy Fighter Hanger Bay Escort Line, By convention there should be an "or" before the "6 or 12" to delineate the next group - "Z-YC/Z-YCP, or 6 or 12 Z-HB" - Ken Kazinski, 01 May 2021.
(R1.1-R3) MSSB-R3 Klingon SB - Y187-Y187 Heavy Fighter Hanger Bay Escort Line, By convention there should be an "or" before the "6 or 12" to delineate the next group - "Z-YC/Z-YCP, or 6 or 12 Z-HB" - Ken Kazinski, 01 May 2021.
(R1.1-R3) MSSB-R3 Klingon SB - Y188+ Heavy Fighter Hanger Bay Escort Line, By convention there should be an "or" before the "6 or 12" to delineate the next group - "Z-YC/Z-YCP, or 6 or 12 Z HB"- Ken Kazinski, 01 May 2021.
(R3.FA19) MSSB-R3 Klingon Z-De - Rule R3.F5C states the upgraded Z-DC is the Z-DCe, rule (R3.FA19), but R3.FA19 has the designation Z-De. When searching the MSSB, there are 36 references to Z-DCe, but none of those are associated with a rule number. There are 57 references to Z-De, one of which is (R3.FA19). Should not all the Z-DCe references be Z-De? - Ken Kazinski, 01 May 2021.
(R3.F6P) MSSB-R3 Klingon Z-PC - The Z-PC rule states "Z-PCe (R3.FA24)" but (R3.FA24) is for the Z-Per fighter. There is no Z-PCe rule but there are 66 references to the Z-PCe; 38 references to Z-Per and 59 to Z-Pe. What is the correct rule number and designation? - Ken Kazinski, 01 May 2021.
(R3.FA21) MSSB-R3 Klingon Z-Ee - There are 50 references to Z-ECer; 44 references to E-Ee; 52 references to Z-EC. What is the correct rule number and designation? - Ken Kazinski, 01 May 2021.
| By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Sunday, May 02, 2021 - 10:33 am: Edit |
(R1.1-3) MSSB-R3 Klingon - The sentence "Klingon starbases add one security station to each docking module (total of six) and the four flag bridge boxes on the generic starbase SSD found in Basic Set are converted to security stations (the starbase has a total of 10 security stations)." is different from the note in the basic set (pg 161). The basic set states the "flag bridge boxes count as security" and not that they are replaced. I believe MSSB-R3 is in error. The correct sentance should be "Klingon starbases add one security station to each docking module (total of six) and the four flag bridge boxes count as security (the starbase has a total of 6 security stations plus 4 flag bridges)." - Ken Kazinski, 2 May 2021
| By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Sunday, May 02, 2021 - 11:53 am: Edit |
(R1.1-3) MSSB-R3 Klingon SB - The Klingon Z-Ee on escort line Y180-Y181 (Line 9) has a Year In Service of Y181 and is after the start of the escort line (Y180). - Ken Kazinski, 02 May 2021.
| By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Sunday, April 10, 2022 - 01:09 pm: Edit |
(R3.FA19) Klingon Z-De Fighter - By convention, C-refitted fighters have a separate entry in the master starship books. The information about the C-reiftted fighter should have an entry (R3.FA19C). - Ken Kazinski, 10 Apr 2022.
(R3.FA17) Klingon Z-E Fighter - The sentances "The Z-E had proven to be a great success, but all Klingon fighter squadrons suffered from the lack of a good electronic warfare fighter (R1.F7) or space warning and control shuttle (J9.0). The Z-1E (R3.F1)/(R1.F7) had shown some success in this area but it was not practical to include one fighter of this series on a carrier filled with other types." seem out of place with this fighter. This is not a EW figher but with these sentances being in the unit description, makes it seem like this is the designation for a EW figher. - Ken Kazinski, 10 Apr 2022.
(R3.FA21) Klingon Z-Ee Fighter - The graphic for this unit should have two standard drone rails and two special (type-III) drone rails and not two light drone rails (type-VI), per G3 Annex 4 page 127 and CL25 page 74. - Ken Kazinski, 10 Apr 2022.
(R3.FA21) Klingon Z-Ee Fighter - The information on the C-refit does not apply to this fighter as there are no Type-VI drones to upgrade, see G3 Annex 4 page 127 and CL25 page 74. - Ken Kazinski, 10 Apr 2022.
(R3.FA18) Klingon Z-W Fighter - The entire section after "Use the Z-1 counters in Advanced Missions for the Z-W." and starting with "The problem was that the entire Zerdon/Zerpon/Zereon..." seems to be about more than just the Z-W fighter. Should these paragraphs be moved under the header "A DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY OF KLINGON FIGHTERS FROM CAPTAIN’S LOG #25" and before the first rule? - Ken Kazinski, 10 Apr 2022.
| By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Sunday, April 10, 2022 - 09:55 pm: Edit |
(R3.F3E) Klingon Z-VE - The megafighter information for the Z-VE should be "Had a mega-pack been developed it would have added two additional pod rails (J16.245)." - Ken Kazinski, 10 Apr 2022.
| By Mark Lurz (Markalurz) on Tuesday, April 26, 2022 - 12:32 pm: Edit |
R3.A22 in the ships in Captains log section is used twice, once as
R3.A22 SD7 Strike Cruiser and again on the same page (103) as
R3.A22 Black Vulture Early Dreadnought
| By IjdsiVonmeege on Saturday, November 26, 2022 - 08:37 am: Edit |
| By JjdsiVonmeege on Wednesday, November 30, 2022 - 03:20 am: Edit |
| By FjdsiVonmeege on Tuesday, February 28, 2023 - 09:27 am: Edit |
| Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation |