---

Quote:

the g-rack seems the perfect answer

---

By Andrew J Koch (Droid) on Monday, October 06, 2014 - 09:30 am: Edit

I am in the give the Fed 40 power just like all the other DF only ships camp.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Monday, October 06, 2014 - 12:45 pm: Edit

Fed CF. It's all about the Fed CF.

By Matthew Potter (Neonpico) on Monday, October 06, 2014 - 02:50 pm: Edit

I haven't noticed that the Fed is particularly power deficient. Sure, on the first turn, they tend to go slow so they can overload all tubes (or look like they're overloading all tubes). But I don't know that it's a need for them. I could be wrong, though.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Monday, October 06, 2014 - 04:09 pm: Edit

The Fed CC is OK. A G rack may or may not be necessary. But a Fed CF adds something genuinely unique to the Tourney field, and also gives the Fed players another option to choose from. Many empires get two ships (the Roms 3), why not give the Feds two as well with a ship that is unique among all the others in the field?

By Jim Davies (Mudfoot) on Monday, October 06, 2014 - 05:14 pm: Edit

The Fed is slightly power-deficient, but gets an artificial boost at the start with some free overload energy. I'd boost it to 40 power, lose the start bonus and give it the G-rack. That way it has more staying power, speed against BP and versatility against droners but doesn't start the game with such an all-or-nothing strike.

But I have nothing against a CF as well.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandor) on Monday, October 06, 2014 - 05:18 pm: Edit

when would a federation cruiser ever not overload her photons at weapons status 3 in a duel type situation? Only when they plan on retrograding.

By Andrew J Koch (Droid) on Tuesday, October 07, 2014 - 10:03 am: Edit

No, no. It keeps the ol energy and gets 40 power.
On turn 1 with full ols it will go 20 instead of 18. On the engagement turn it can go a little faster for a little longer, or god forbid, have a point or two in trac. If it hits well it wins, just like before. If it misses, it will probably still lose, but it has a chance to walk and chew gum when it's trying to survive.
Try it out with 40 power I say!

Ted: I love the idea of the Fed CF. There's one out there that Brook Villa invented that's pretty good. Not sure but I think it may be online. Maybe for Masters next year I'll put it in the mix.

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Saturday, October 11, 2014 - 08:04 pm: Edit

At Council of Nations 2013 Brook played the Villa-class Fast Federation (3 Photons, 7 Ph1) against the LDR and won.

Not much of a data point but is was a start.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandor) on Tuesday, February 10, 2015 - 05:03 pm: Edit

Would allowing the Tholian T-N-CA have PC's instead of disr be something for the ship?. As one from the Home galaxy?

By Chris Proper (Duke) on Tuesday, February 10, 2015 - 07:26 pm: Edit

The Archeo with PCs seems scary. The NCA not as bad.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandor) on Tuesday, February 10, 2015 - 07:44 pm: Edit

Only the NCA as it would have PC's in the home galaxy.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, February 10, 2015 - 07:55 pm: Edit

PCs are horrible. Putting them on any ship is a horrible plan.

PCs are ok in the following circumstance: you have a giant fleet of ships. You are on an open map with infinite room to run. You can fire at R30 and then at R22, and then turn off and run to reload. And then you will do reasonable average damage over two firing passes of, like, 40xPCs, at which point, they become a reasonable weapon.

On a single ship, especially in on a tournament map, PCs are just plain worse than disruptors. All the time.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandor) on Sunday, May 24, 2015 - 10:20 pm: Edit

Ok i notice that the fed, lyran, archo tholian,and seltorian all have 8 phaser I. All direct fire ships. No seeking weapons. The gorn has 8 phI as well but with 0nly 6 hitting a arc. The Jindarian proposed TC has 6 total phaser I and 4 max per arc (2ph3 360). It loses 2 360 phI two imp power, 2 shuttles and 4 option boxses unless you use them for the 2 ph3. From the original LCS. Wonder why it sucks. They thought maybe the Railguns to strong?

By William T Wilson (Sheap) on Monday, May 25, 2015 - 01:03 am: Edit

I believe at one point the railgun was a one-turn arming weapon. But yes, the Jindarian is basically a whole ship class too weak for the tournament; it's not just a couple of ph-3s or two points of power away. It needs to be completely redone.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandor) on Monday, May 25, 2015 - 09:22 am: Edit

The rail gun is two turn if loaded as a med or heavy. one turn if loaded as light. How does one submit a design just do up a ssd and send it some were?

By William T Wilson (Sheap) on Monday, May 25, 2015 - 05:08 pm: Edit

The thing with the jindarian is that its only real tactic is to starcastle. That is likely still true even if the ship is improved. I think a jindarian with all its railguns pointing the same way, or even with something like hydran fusion arcs, is not possible. The only way it can fire all its weapons is to stop and tac. So... Bummer.

If you are able to make a fun jindarian, i think you can get it added by just sending it to paul f. It is probably too late for this year's world league but maybe next year if it works.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandor) on Monday, May 25, 2015 - 07:07 pm: Edit

I have found that in a duel. The Jindo uses the Railguns to snipe at range are defensively vs seekers. Example run in fire forward railgun a. Turn and fire B. Roll away and take out seekers with the rear guns. The phasers are much more important for attacking then the railguns. A Jindo can charge toward a plasma are drone swarm. Slipping out as the rail guns wipes it out. Those side arcs are good for that. Turn in and use the remaining railgun,s and phasers to kill the other ship. Mind you the asteroid ships are much worse but the metal HCS and LCS do this wonderfully

By Justin Royter (Metaldog) on Monday, August 10, 2015 - 09:30 pm: Edit

Not sure if this is the right topic or not but I was thinking...

What is the point of the playtest ships and will any of them ever be sanctioned? It seems to me many of the playtest ships have been playtest ships for several years. I am just curious, is there a point to playtest ships? Is there a real intention to get them sanctioned? I, for one, would really like to see the list of sanctioned tourney ships expanded upon to include the frax (needs 30 box shields instead of the 24 boxers.. just an opinion), the fed playtest with the g-rack, and also perhaps a few of the CW's.

Anyway, seriously.. is there a point to playtest ships (tournament ships) and is there any real intention to get any of these ships sanctioned and balanced? Again, it seems many of these ships have been playtest ships for several years, maybe even a decade of two... So, is there any plan to get any of these ships sanctioned for official play ever?

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, August 10, 2015 - 09:53 pm: Edit

Same plan from day one, get play test reports (not enough received to move forward), then adjust and test again.

We have interpreted the lack of play test reports as a lack of interest. We cannot force people to test the ships. Years ago we organized test programs and few signed up. Too few.

By Chris Proper (Duke) on Monday, August 10, 2015 - 11:32 pm: Edit

I just got fraxed up. I'll write a report.

By Justin Royter (Metaldog) on Tuesday, August 11, 2015 - 10:11 pm: Edit

I will start to work on battle reports for the Fed (g rack) and the frax...

Steve do you have a lineage of playtest results for either or both of these ships? Is there a ship that is close to being sanctioned? Something that has significant playtest results and that is close to being sanctioned? Lastly, how do I submit playtest results?

PS: Thank you for the quick reply.

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Thursday, August 13, 2015 - 09:13 am: Edit

Isn't part of the issue if you use playtest ships you are not playing a sanctioned tournament?

By Randy Blair (Randyblair) on Thursday, August 13, 2015 - 10:22 am: Edit

I haven't seen a "sanctioned tournament" in a long time. Doesn't mean they aren't out there, of course.
I think you can still playtest ships in a tournament rules scenario without being in an actual tournament, though.

I'm liking the notion of an answer to Justin's question of "how do we submit playtest results?"
Are there forms or specific metrics that are measured?

I can see how a person may be a bit daunted by the task if s/he doesn't know what to report and how (what format, etc.) to do it.

By Shawn Hantke (Shantke) on Thursday, August 13, 2015 - 10:38 am: Edit

How to be a playtester- http://www.starfleetgames.com/sfb/playtest/playtest.shtml