By Kurt Byanski (Kurtski) on Thursday, January 19, 2017 - 11:45 pm: Edit |
You are also limited to one CDK per system.
By Kurt Byanski (Kurtski) on Friday, January 20, 2017 - 11:47 am: Edit |
At a minimum the CDK should be able to build SC2.
By John D Berg (Kerg) on Sunday, January 22, 2017 - 10:16 am: Edit |
I echo the comment from rules committee, however Kurt, you may be right in that it doesnt seem to have any advantages that players can perceive. Perhaps players just havent analyzed it use in GC yet, or perhaps they have and found it wanting.
I can say not a singe one has been built in GC. Perhaps rules committee can study the problem and see if it is indeed the fault of the rulings, or just players not analyzing its effectiveness.
By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Sunday, January 22, 2017 - 01:22 pm: Edit |
Wearing my player's hat- there is the shipyard (SY, FRD, CDK, BSSY) set I have based upon the inital setup (with the occasional conquest or upgrade) and the one I'd have if the GM just said "here are xxxEPs that you can spend on shipyards". There are all sorts of quirks that come in to play depending upon the empire, player goals, game specific empire rules, and new ships ADB publishes.
The publication of the BHB and KB for the Romulans changes my build mix from what I have done in U1/U5/U6. How the GM handles the changeover from the Old Series to the New Hawks changes my build plans (U1 and U5 encouraged a certain path, U6 hasn't gotten there yet). The differing rules for how modules are treated changes by build mix (anyone seeing my U5 mixture will not see the same thing in U6). Again, using my Romulan glasses- by the time I have outgrown my starting shipyards, I am typically building ships that are twice as expensive (Vul @ 77 or 120 to Con @ 250ish). Once I've grown enough to handle that, I am looking at the price bump of X tech (or being strangled by exped fees).
AutoSY changes one's decisions too.
Basically, as a player I've not found a case where they are worthwhile. But the in depth analysis being done here is the U1/4/5/6 Romulan one. The numbers for, say, the UFP could be radically different.
By Kurt Byanski (Kurtski) on Sunday, January 22, 2017 - 03:22 pm: Edit |
I will add a little U6 Tholian perspective. Tholian ships by size class and costs change very little throughout the game. We start the game with PC+, DD, and C/CA base hulls. There are few available variants and the tech development for new hulls is relatively slow. The big changes come with CWs and Neos between 178 and 180. This is long time from Y160.2. With a heavy focus on inexpensive SC4 ships, it is not unreasonable to assume the Tholians, or any race with similar limitations, will need to build a lot of shipyards....PC+s (and to some extent DDs) build like attrition units.
In addition, a small race may be limited to six additional major systems. (There can be good financial reasons to leave it this way.) This will also limit the total ship yard capacity of the race compared to a large race.
BSSYs are cute, but with the limitation of 2 military orbital bases some key systems are going to default to 2xSB instead of a SB and BSSY, again limiting the SY count.
Auto SYs and Compact SYs do change the calculations a bit. And, at this time I am considering building a CDK in U6. If they could build SC2, I would start one next turn.
By Kurt Byanski (Kurtski) on Sunday, January 22, 2017 - 03:24 pm: Edit |
CDK – Brief Analysis - I started this before the previous post.
I have looked at potentially building a CDK at the Tholian Home World in U6. With the limitation of building only two military orbital bases at each system, the initial BSSYs at some systems will probably be replaced with bigger bases for system defense. This will reduce the number of available yards. The CDK is a potential replacement for the BSSY, although you would, using current rules, lose the ability to produce a SC2 ship.
FRDs are also viable replacement for the BSSYs; however, they also cannot build SY2 ships. In addition, in U6, it takes 500 BPV of Merchant Marine strategic reserves to support each FRD. Therefore, in U6, the CDK may be a slightly more attractive unit than the FRD, but is less attractive than a standard SC3SY.
In order to add a SC3SY to a HW that has reached its ship yard capacity, you will need to compact the equivalent of two SC4SYs to free up 4 spaces for a SC3SY. If you spend 1000 EPS to get the cSY technology in one turn and then compact two SC4SYs you will have spent 1180 EPS + 600 EPS for one SC3SY. This makes the cost and production time for the CDK attractive. But, if you are going to compact several shipyards in order to significantly increase the number of the yards, the cost per SY improves quickly.
CDK - Pros
SC3SY for standard 600 EPS.
Doesn’t count against the system SY limit. The HW could have 60 spaces of SYs and 1xCDK (+FRDs).
In U6, it only takes 100 BPV of MM SR ships to support a CDK v. 500 BPV of MM SR to support a FRD.
It can be specialized.
It can be built at a major or minor "system" - one per system.
In SFB, the CDK is almost impossible to damage before the planet it orbits has been captured.
CDK - Cons
Takes an extra turn to build any hull.
Is very expensive compared to the BSSY or FRD for the same ship building capacity.
It can’t be moved.
It can’t be automated.
GC rules don’t reflect the inherent damage resistance of the unit, so it may be too easy to damage or destroy.
By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Wednesday, February 01, 2017 - 10:54 pm: Edit |
SC5 security skiffs. They are an R1 unit. Where can I build them and in what quantities?
By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Thursday, February 02, 2017 - 02:20 pm: Edit |
Superficially, they would appear to be alternatives to PFs. Unless others on the rules committee disagree, I'd assume they are produced (subject to YIS and similar restrictions) where one builds PFs. They would also be presumably counted as attrition units rather than ships in many cases (the 5 ship AF bonus rule, for example).
By Kurt Byanski (Kurtski) on Friday, February 03, 2017 - 02:10 pm: Edit |
Clearing “Red” Hexes (Also posted in U6)
Over the last week I have received information (or advice) from two players suggesting that I could use standard scouts to survey the “Red” hexes within U6 Tholian Space. (There is a lot of red.) This would be incredibly useful, but seems inconsistent with the rules as I understand them.
The rules referencing the conversion of UnNav space into Unsurveyed space are provided below.
(A202.10) Navigating UnNav Space: To turn UnNav space into unsurveyed space, an SR must spend Segments 1-12 in an UnNav hex (Note that this is done continuously through a turn. It is not 12 consecutive segments over several turns). If the SR is not disrupted [see (B3.6)], then the hex becomes unsurveyed on Segment 1 of the next turn.
(A203.00) All movement in UnNav space is reduced to a maximum speed of 3. The squadron’s first movement of the turn must be into UnNav space or it may not enter. If a squadron bumps into UnNav space in mid-turn (or not on its first movement of the turn), it effectively performs a strategic stop.
I am posing the following questions to attempt to clarify this rule for a few of us.
Within this rule does the term SR refer to a true Survey Cruiser or does it refer to any Survey Vessel(s)?
If it refers to a true Survey Cruiser, are there any commonly acceptable replacements or alternatives for Survey Cruisers?
By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Friday, February 03, 2017 - 02:59 pm: Edit |
The rule's intent was for survey cruisers. The Tholians lack such a beast, so the GM would have to make an empire (or game, since several empires may lack SRs) specific ruling.
That may require an R&D project, a minor cost surcharge/alternate designation for an existing SC3 cruiser (not war cruiser), acquiring an SR from a 3rd party, or some other alternative.
By John Stiff (Tarkin22180) on Saturday, February 04, 2017 - 09:55 am: Edit |
Ahem. I believe a clarification is necessary. A scout, as we know, may survey a hex into one's own territory. This is done all the time. What separates a SR from a scout is its ability to conduct a MRR.
By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Saturday, February 04, 2017 - 01:04 pm: Edit |
(A202.10) is quite clear on the requirement for an SR, not a scout.
By John Stiff (Tarkin22180) on Saturday, February 04, 2017 - 02:40 pm: Edit |
Yes, that is what the rule says. But is that what was truly intended?
The extra expense of an R&D project would work eventually. Even so, the conversion limits make the SR precious. An MRR would be a better use of the SR than clearing out a red hex (in my opinion). Building the FEL or FES (a substitute for the SR) is a possibility. This is also a conversation. The FEL/FES are slow (MV 2 hexes - i.e. no DTM allowed) and have a SD (or assignment to the military) percentage limit to adhere to.
A non-War Cruiser scout would do the job nicely. (A scout being defined as any ship with a sensor channel!)
By Kurt Byanski (Kurtski) on Saturday, February 04, 2017 - 08:53 pm: Edit |
I don't have any experience prior to U5, but it seems to me the Red hexes are supposed to be difficult...kind of like clearing a heavy woods so you can move tanks through them.
The Tholians have 25+ red hexes in their claimed space in U6. If I had a combination of 12 SR and SC in or near them, I could clear them all in just a few turns. In U6, 30 turns after the game started there are still significant remnants of the two red areas.
By John D Berg (Kerg) on Saturday, February 04, 2017 - 09:32 pm: Edit |
Let me first clarify that it must be a true SR and not a SC.
the rules committee is looking into the other aspects currently.
By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Saturday, February 04, 2017 - 09:33 pm: Edit |
Not all empires have SRs at the start of the game, and warfare (or MRRs) often reduce the SR/SC availability for clearing substantially. U5's blobs also benefit from multiple periods of civil disorder on the part of the Vari and, I believe, Seltorians.
By John D Berg (Kerg) on Saturday, February 04, 2017 - 10:36 pm: Edit |
True, they can of buy one, r and d one, or use the restrictive FEL.
By John Stiff (Tarkin22180) on Tuesday, February 07, 2017 - 11:44 am: Edit |
Ah well, it is clarified. The intent of the rule was for a true SR (or allowed equivalents). Clearing the "heavy woods" will have to wait. Let us hope nothing "bad" is lurking in those "woods". SMILE
By Kurt Byanski (Kurtski) on Wednesday, February 22, 2017 - 01:05 pm: Edit |
I am just looking for confirmation or clarification of how AST (C20.200) works, particularly with fighters and shuttles.
The rule indicates it applies to nimble units. I have assumed units (per SFB) includes ships, gunboats, fighters and shuttles...So, if I have a 7 BPV fighter with an AF/DF of 1.0/0.5 would AST make this 1.0 AF and 1.5 DF?
By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Wednesday, February 22, 2017 - 02:33 pm: Edit |
Fighters are typically grouped into sets of 6 (2+ spaces) or 12 (1 space), so I expect the DF would be (12*.5)+1 for 12 (aka 7), not 18. If you have less than a set, the numbers presumably get added to the set.
By Kurt Byanski (Kurtski) on Wednesday, February 22, 2017 - 02:44 pm: Edit |
Grouping would make sense for fighters for a given carrier or HBM. But, would MRS then be grouped or treated individually? Or, does it simply add to the BPV of its ship?...at least until it is destroyed.
By Howard Bampton (Bampton) on Wednesday, February 22, 2017 - 11:51 pm: Edit |
MRS is typically just treated as a +1/+0 with a 50% (I think that is the number) chance of loss in combat (unless targeted).
By John D Berg (Kerg) on Sunday, March 05, 2017 - 11:30 am: Edit |
Mrs adds one to both af and df.
By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Friday, March 17, 2017 - 09:35 pm: Edit |
When I go to RB do I order the ships into mothballs on the turn I order it or on the first turn it shows on my status sheet?
By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Friday, March 17, 2017 - 10:18 pm: Edit |
Could use newly created OCU on an existing ship? Swapping the regular crew for OCU?
Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation |