Archive through March 23, 2018
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: New Product Development:
Module K2: More gunboats:
Archive through March 23, 2018
SPP:
Yeah, Lyran flotilla Commander Murdock could possibly get in trouble for pulling away from the convoy but if I was in command of the flotilla I would turn towards the Kzinti PFs before they get in range of the convoy to give myself some fighting room. If I can get 100 or so hexes away from the convoy when I intercept I can fight the Kzintis conventionally. They can build up a huge 36 drone wave on approach and I have room to run and exhaust his drones if he does it and still fight and the Kzinti flotilla will probably lose with that many of their drones gone and no way to reload.
If it is an open space skirmish I can do the same thing. The Kzinti flotilla would be unwise to build up a big drone wave in the first place and then he is the one in trouble.
It is possible that I just did not detect the Kzinti until they were closer but if they catch me close to the freighters the drone attacks will have to deal with the freighter's phasers as well. If my PFs are in trouble with a drone wave I can fly through your generous convoy of three large and six small freighters and between their phasers and the phasers on my PFs I should be able to deal with the drones. The convoy is more vulnerable and could take some hits but better that then the Kzintis wiping out my whole flotilla and then wiping out the whole convoy with ease.
Of course if I, for whatever reason, cannot risk any damage to the convoy, and there are reinforcements on the way and I have to hold at all costs and I do not have any running room then I would engage and just do the best I could. Sometimes that is all you can do.
I would hope to have time to run a quick system check on my ejection system.
RB Eitzen: It's not really "power creep" when the Lyran PFs are so weak compared to just about everyone else's. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense that the "premier users of PFs" have the worst ones.
I always thought that SVC intentionally made them weak because they were the first, the "prototype PF". If that is the case, then SVC was really building in this aspect of them that Alan Trevor is bringing up right from the beginning. They were early, inefficient versions of this class. Once the class is fully developed by all the other races building "more refined" versions of it, it makes perfect sense that the Lyrans would have a refit of their original inefficient design to catch back up to all the other races that had the benefit of Lyran experience to make better versions.
Of course, you philosophy of "quantity over quality" makes equal sense. "There is more than one way to skin a cat". I just think it is something that might be considered. I don't seem to be alone in always having believed that sub-par Lyran PFs goes against the grain of them being the premier users of them.
Why would they focus so much effort on a class that they lag behind the rest of the galaxy in building?
Rbeitzen:
Why are ESGs not on Lyran PFs? I mean, it's definitely not a galactic power creep issue if you gave that to the Lyrans. They are the only major power with a Torp hit and Drone hit heavy weapon type that doesn't have both types on PFs, right? If an ESG per PF is too much, maybe it's just one or two in the flotilla that gets one.
Kavik:
The simplest explanation is just facilities. They might have a lot of PF production capable bases, built when they were pioneering the tech, and it wasn't (compared to other races) economically feasible for them to wind those down or put that money into bigger hull facilities due to other constraints, so they built/did what they could. That sort of thing happens all the time.
I'll be honest, I am not a fan of PFs, and when I was playing extensively 20+ years ago, we used them maybe once out of every 100 games. So I can't speak well from personal experience of how good/bad Lyran PFs are. But if they're bad enough they have to use a lot more of them for the same effect, a buff or reduction in BPV seems reasonable to me.
Isn't there something about the Lyrans having more casual gunboats than the other races?
They may seem inferior to other designs in one-on-one situations, but the plan could be to arrange for that to be two-on-one most of the time. While they may have cut corners on the gunboat design, they also made them so they can be deployed on anything that moves, in mass quantities.
ESGs are too big to put on a PF. They are like the bigger plasmas in that they take two connected option boxes on an Orion ship.
Even if they could fit PFs would have a hard time using them due to the way they operate.
Xenocide:
Ah that's right! Still, a G1 has a Disruptor and 2 Drone racks IIRC (3 heavy weapon "slots"), so maybe the Lyran could just mount the ESG and that's it (plus some phasers)? Or possibly with a single Disruptor. Make it a variant that's a little pricier BPV-wise, and limit it to one per flotilla?
Did not see a response to this in a fast look (busy, sorry), but type-B drone racks on PFs are NOT limited to the "Conjectural Frax PFs."
See the Klingon G1D and the Kzinti Drone Needle in Module K. Also note that the Federation Thunderbolt-D carries two type-B drone racks (and 1 type-G) and that the Orions are authorized to put type-B drone racks in the option mounts of their Buccaneers.
Ah, my mistake.
While Lyran (and LDR and Orion) PFs may not use ESGs, they may still benefit from ESG use by larger ships in their battle force - which may not be of much help in "flotilla duels", yet is a factor in larger encounters.
(Given how differently the ESG works over in Federation Commander, I might wonder how these dynamics might be altered as and when the proposed "Gunboats Attack" module is published.)
On a broader issue, the question may also be: even if the Lyrans have individually weaker gunboats than some others of ther kind in the Alpha Octant, are they still considered "good enough" given the challenges faced by the Lyrans (and LDR) historically-speaking?
By the time fast patrol ships enter service, the General War is in its late stages. As noted in Module X1R, the Lyran Star Empire was in about as secure a position as any of the major belligerents; neither the Hydrans nor Kzintis were in any shape to threaten Lyran space directly (the Kzintis were being drawn into major joint operations with the Federation against the Klingons, while the Hydrans were being distracted by the Vudar occupation of their three easternmost provinces); and while the Lyrans were deploying forces to the Federation-Klingon front, this was in effect more of an "outsourcing" of trouble to the Klingon Empire.
Plus, as noted in an earlier post, the issue for the Lyrans in any of the "Carnivon timelines" in Module C6 is less about how their respective gunboats line up against one another - since the Carnivon PF is arguably weaker individually than even the Lyran PF - and a lot more about the respective strategic positions of each species by the time they are being fielded.
After the General War is over, Cordons Echo and Foxtrot of the Inter-Stellar Concordium's Pacification Campaign (as designated in Federation and Empire ISC War) are the last two cordons to be established - and soon after that, the Andromedans show up to crash the party. And even then, the ISC forces in the region are for the mot part distracted by the fallout from the War of Return, or the aforementioned Vudar-Hydran dispute.
In the case of the Andromedans, even a Lyran PF is superior to a single Andro MWP... but then, the odds of there being only one MWP per PF in a given encounter may not be favourable.
Ultimately, the best role which a PF tender (or X-PFT) can be put against the Andromedans is in RTN-hunting, and much of that depends on the capabilities (or otherwise) of the tender itself, as opposed to those of the PFs in its flotilla.
(And even over in the "dark future" timeline, the prospect of an improved gunboat might seem rather moot once the Andromedans start fielding Devastator and Devourer battleships...)
In short, I'm not sure if there is a point prior to Y205 in which the Lyrans would be placed in a position where the relative limitations of their PFs relative to certain others in the Alpha Octant would be seen as a critical drawback. Or, rather, that the overall situation of the Empire would be affected one way or another, as opposed to other technologies begging for EPs (and XTPs) at this time.
And of course, even an improved PF would have been too little, too late for the poor LDR in Y195...
Gregory S Flusche:
The disruptors on Lyran fast patrol ships and Interceptors have a maximum range of 10 hexes. The only direct fire heavy weapon mounted on a PF hull in Module K that has a range greater than 10 is the photon (Range 12). I regret I do not have time to research all other Alpha Octant PFs not found in Module K to see if direct-fire heavy weapons on PFs like the light rail gun or ion cannon can also reach beyond Range 10, but (while I did check to confirm it) I could tell you off the top of my head that Klingon, Kzini, Tholian, Lyran, WYN, and Lyran Democratic Republic PF disruptors (and any mounted on Orion PFs) all have a maximum range of 10 hexes, none have a range of 15 hexes.
Alan Trevor said: Wait a minute... you're putting words in my mouth that I never actually said.
REPLY: No offense was intended, and I will admit to not being clear myself, but I was not "putting words in your mouth." I was citing past precedent. As others subsequently noted, you were trying to say that the Lyrans could do something and no one else could do it. I was noting, as others realized, that in the particular case it does not stand. If you can make a PF that is only (for example) one ton larger and still be a fully operable PF, but able to have heavier armament, then everyone would do it. Production of gunboats is too ubiquitous and to short not to revamp production lines for such a gain. You cannot just upgrade the Lyran PF phasers without admitting that everyone else can do the same thing. And there is absolutely no reason they would not, and every reason they would (for the exact same reasons you have cited that the Lyrans would do this). The only exception might be the Hydrans. But I am fairly certain they would argue that if the Lyrans can make a PF that is slightly larger but able to mount phaser-2s in place of the phaser-3s, then they should be able to mount one extra phaser-2 period. (Even if they have to limit it to firing in the FA arc, but that would just be a start point as the goal would be a 360 mount.) The Klingons would probably demand a third FX phaser-2, the Romulans an extra FX-phaser-1 on their centurions and so on.
Alan Trevor said: That may be my fault for not expressing myself clearly in my previous post. What I meant to suggest, but perhaps didn't word very well, is that the Lyrans made some design mistakes and later realized they could correct those and fit slightly larger weapons into the same space. The empires that designed their PFs later, whether through luck or through observation and engineering assessment of Lyran PFs, did not make comparable mistakes. Their PFs are essentially "maxed out" (other than the shield refit) from the beginning.
REPLY: And as has been noted, that does not work. Again, if making a PF slightly larger retains all of the PF capabilities but allows the addition of more firepower, EVERYONE WOULD DO IT. Everyone would "stretch" or something their PFs to add the firepower.
Alan Trevor said: I don't know how often that sort of thing happens with Army combat systems. But I guaran-dang-tee you it happens with combat aircraft. I could cite several examples but let me give you just one; a plane that I have personal hands-on experience with.
REPLY: Yes, and the other side does the same thing. No one has ever said that this does not happen, and the PFs are just a example of that happening, as is various other refits that have been added to various units. But we also take into account that if empire A does X than empire B will do Y in response. So if the Lyrans do this, other empires will respond in some manner. And if you make the deep dark secret that Lyran PFs are just a little larger, then everyone will make their PFs just a little larger to also install more firepower.
Deleted "real world" F-111 data. While historically true, and generally within its structure supportive of your points, it does not change the above except that in this case no one would copy something that was detrimental (although I have to admit to wondering at this late juncture if in the end that heavier landing gear helped keep the F-111s flying longer, but it is just a point of wonder).
Alan Trevor said: I'm not sure what you mean by
Quote:
Or you are just going back to the age old "Do what I want and tell everyone else to accept it even though what I want could clearly have been done by every other empire once this empire demonstrated it was possible. Once I get what I want, ADB can deal with the fallout of explaining to all subsequent submissions to do a similar upgrade as demonstrated by the one I want that it was not possible for any other empire."
Alan Trevor said: My favorite empire is the Tholians. My second favorite is the Romulans. Neither of them would get anything out of my suggestion. But I do have some sympathy for the notion that the Lyrans got kind of a raw deal with their PFs, and this was my attempt to find a plausible way to rectify it.
REPLY: I know you have a preference for Tholians, but the observation stands in that your statement had fallen back on "Just say only the Lyrans could do it and that no one else could" as the response to why no one else would do this. And again, if adding a ton of mass for no negative impact on operations but a gain in firepower was doable, everyone would do it.
Alan Trevor said: But if it's not in fact plausible, here's an alternate suggestion.
Alan Trevor said: Reduce the BPV for the Lyran PFs.
Alan Trevor said: The Lyran has a BPV of 20/37 (+5 for shield refit). The Tholian is 20/38 (+5) and the Gorn (to take another PF that doesn't carry drones) is 20/40 (+4). There's no way the Tholian is only one point better and the Gorn (with 3 ph-1s and 4 type-F plasma torpedoes) is only 3 points better (only 2 points better with shield refit costs). So that's my alternate suggestion if the Lyrans can't get an improved PF. Compared to the competition, 20/37 is too high.
REPLY: There is a thing called "the canary in the coal mine" (I have no doubt everyone on this board knows this reference) and perhaps you are being such. The problem is that at this point you are the only one that is raising this issue. (I will freely admit that my experience with Lyran PFs when I played a lot does not lend to my going along with you, but also it has been a while since I played a lot.)
Quote:
"Alan Trevor said: That may be my fault for not expressing myself clearly in my previous post. What I meant to suggest, but perhaps didn't word very well, is that the Lyrans made some design mistakes and later realized they could correct those and fit slightly larger weapons into the same space. The empires that designed their PFs later, whether through luck or through observation and engineering assessment of Lyran PFs, did not make comparable mistakes. Their PFs are essentially "maxed out" (other than the shield refit) from the beginning.
REPLY: And as has been noted, that does not work. Again, if making a PF slightly larger retains all of the PF capabilities but allows the addition of more firepower, EVERYONE WOULD DO IT. Everyone would "stretch" or something their PFs to add the firepower."
I think there was a miscommunication still going on here. As I interpret the above statements, the idea Alan was pitching is to suggest that the Lyran PFs were not optimized internally. Other races building them later did. The idea being you make some minor upgrade (Ph-3 to Ph-2 or whatever) but the justification is that by rearranging things internally they got it to fit, the overall size remaining constant. Other races "better" PFs have this internal optimization already done, in effect.
I'm not arguing for or against, my lack of PF flying experience makes me feel unqualified to do so, but trying to restate something to try to make it more clear 
SPP: It's obvious too me now, especially from the posts made by both you and Gary Carney, that there are more aspects too this than I had been considering. But, the point Alan and I were both trying to make is that the Lyran PF would not necessarily need to be made larger to improve it slightly. Because it was built inefficiently in the first place, being the first, and there is "room" to free up more "space and weight" already in the original design. This would explain why it is weaker than pretty much everybody else's PF.
The other races, based on Lyran experience, made theirs better and more efficiently right from the beginning where the Lyran's (being first) had developed a less efficient design than what was actually possible.
I'm not saying that Alan and I are right, just that this is what we were trying to say.
strange i was reading the rules on PFs and it was giving Range 15 for weapons on PFs. I guess i should have pulled out the R sections to look at Disr armed Pfs. Still range 10 is not that bad. The extra firepower is still there for drone defense and when you close on them nasty Kzinti
Gregory S. Flusche:
The rule (K1.51) notes to check the SSDs, and the disruptor tables on Lyran PF flotilla SSDs show Range 10. The phaser tables on those same SSDs show Range 15 (maximum normally for phaser-3s and phaser-Gs in any case, but phaser-2s normally have a range of 50, and phaser-1s normally have a range of 75, and both are limited to a range of 15 on PFs.
My bad, I did mix up the Klingon G1D in place of the G1/G1B (in regards to B-racks on PFs, forgot the Fed PF as well).
The disadvantage the Lyrans have in regard to the Kzinti (or Klingon) is the 44 spaces of drones, but if damage is not done within that drone load, it's the Lyrans that has the advantage...
The two "prongs" on the Lynx have 6 boxes apiece (not counting the warp booster packs), with 2 boxes in the central hull section; whereas the Bobcat's prongs have 9 boxes apiece (again, not counting WBPs) and 4 boxes in between.
Perhaps, if one were to consider a Lyran (or LDR) design team making an attempt to build a trimaran "design competitor" to the Bobcat from whole cloth - perhaps inspired by the Romulan deployment of the StarHawk alongside the Centurion - might there be a workable ratio between the two outer prongs and an expanded centre prong (plus a pair of connecting segments) which might be viable?
-----
For example, I think of Richard Wells' suggestion earlier in the thread for a gunboat with three phaser-2s, one disruptor, and a pair of phaser-3s.
If one were to cut the Bobcat's side prongs down to seven boxes pre-WBPs (so drop the FA disruptors, trim the L and R warp engines to two boxes apiece, and trim the warp booster packs to two boxes apiece also), one could then create an expanded central prong with an FA phaser-2 on the prow, a 2-box C Warp engine (plus room for a third 2-box WBP) "above" the aft portion of the prong - akin to the raised position of the C Warp engines on trimaran Lyran and LDR warships - and then mount an FX disruptor on the front of this C Warp engine.
One could even thin down the side prongs yet further, by reducing the hull boxes on each prong down to one and then shifting them to the central prong - or, perhaps, by only moving one and deleting the other (for three hull boxes overall), making this gunboat somewhat less sturdy than the Bobcat itself.
So, one would then be left with a slightly modified version of the arcs listed by SPP in the post following Richard's; and potentially open the door to a variant which replaced the phaser-2s on the outer prongs with disruptors, and the engine-mounted disruptor with an FX phaser-2.
EDIT: In retrospect, I noted that some of those proposed features - such as the FX engine mount - are already shown on the impossible-to-build Treecat heavy PF from SSJ1; so apologies if I'm listing items which, in and of themselves, are "deal-breakers" here.
-----
In suggesting this, I'm trying to avoid a re-tread of the failed Heavy Interceptor concept, but rather attempting to suggest a "true" PF which could be "something different", yet with its own pluses and minuses relative to the Bobcat.
But then, even if such a design were somehow viable, there's no guarantee that it would have a reason to historically exist - which might put it on the same shaky ground as the proposed Romulan K1...
Interesting. Not a trimaran expansion of a PF, but what one might call "cosmetically trimaran."
I do wonder if they would find it worthwhile to put in three smaller prongs what used to go in two, but discussion will illuminate that. (While reading, I thought you were trying to collect enough boxes in the central hull to swap for an ESG.)
Alan Trevor is trying to make the point that a Tholian PF costs one (1) combat point more than a Lyran PF.
The two PFs (ignoring the web generator version) are the same size, i.e., (not counting booster packs and tracks) both have 22 boxes. The differences are that the Tholian PF's phasers are two phaser-1-FX versus the Lyran PF's one phaser-2-LF/L and one phaser-2-RF/R, the Tholian disruptors are FA/L and FA/R while the Lyran disruptors are FA only, and the Tholian PF has a second battery where the Lyran PF has a fourth hull.
Alan notes that the Tholian PF is thus far more likely to win in a duel than the Lyran PF given the heavier firepower (phaser-1s versus phaser-2s) superior firing arcs so that it is better able to use its shields and the added flexibility of the battery. All this is too much to be reflected by just one BPV point of difference given that both are effectively direct-fire only PFs.
The way the PF Damage Allocation Chart works both would nominally take initial damage about the same, but the Lyran PF would take a box more permanent damage (both block one damage point with battery, but the next four damage points for the Tholian are one blocked by battery and three hull boxes, while the Lyran loses four hull boxes). After that, weapon losses would leave the phaser-1s last on the Tholian PF, and the phaser-2s last on the Lyran PF (weapon-C in both cases).
The upshot is that, yes, the Tholian PF is better than the Lyran PF, and Alan Trevor suggests that a one point difference in BPV is not sufficient to reflect that superiority.
However, PFs are very small and have a number of intrinsic advantages over larger ships, and the BPV system becomes very granular at that level.
Look at other PFs, such as the Hydran Harrier, which is one box smaller than the Lyran and Tholian PFs, but in addition to FX phaser-2s has a 360 phaser-2 and that 360 phaser-G. That "missing box" is an APR compared to the Tholian and Lyran PFs, and the last weapon it loses is that 360 phaser-G.
So, again, I do not think reducing the BPV of the Bobcat is a viable fix, and one of the issues arising from a look is that the PF DAC would also have to be changed/modified to account for changing the phaser-3s to phaser-2s, and again if the Lyrans can do it, every other empire not only could, but would also do it.
Hrm... A Lyran upgrade that helps, but isn't so much everyone insists that PF-X should have it?
Perhaps, using the logic of inefficiencies in the original design are the basis, perhaps space for a single FA ph-3 could be added in front of the bridge. This would help with the pesky Kzinti drones, but not be a significant power boost, as the ph-3 to ph-2 idea is.
If we are talking balance again I'll point to the Lyran -P variant. 20/30 bpv. In a duel where the other guy is using overloaded disruptors you will do 7 points at range 3, he will do 11 at range 4 but you will have 8 points of power to bounce those disruptors and 6 next turn. You also probably have the five point shield refit where he does not or you have other balancing items of value.
In a fleet or full squadron battle the disruptor boat picks up utility because fire can be concentrated at range 8 (average 8 points vs. 2 1/3) but then you aren't reinforcing, you're erratic and ecm'ing. A +2 shift does terrible things to the averages.
Yeah the Lyran Bobcat might be over BPVd by 2-4 but certainly not 5 points but they don't all have to be straight substitutes for each other and the -P is probably *low* by 2-3 points.
If your PF was built inefficiently in the first place then SO WAS MINE and I get the upgrade too!
That's a fair point SVC, I could totally see a player arguing it. But I think that the thought here was that since the Lyrans built their PF first, there's a "reasonable" notion that those were a tad inefficient and had room for slight improvement but other races' (built with benefit of examination of the Lyran) did not. Sort of like the Lyran was the prototype for the galaxy. I'd certainly (as a player) accept that as the justification for a small tweak, if you guys decided to proceed with some small improvement of the Lyran PF.
What we need are Lyran Deathrider PFs with an ESG.
YUCK