We have already seen an intergalactic survey ship built on a battleship hull. They are called Hive ships.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 08:52 am: Edit

Getting back to the subject, are we not discussing a SSJ proposal for Size Class 2 carrier variant?

There have been comments about adding this to the "Real history" of SFBs... but that is absolutely not the case.

The CVO is broken, and not able to participate in SFBs or F&E as it violates the implied warranty... I.e. That it play nice with the existing game.

That said, the standard for SSJ is much lower. That it be a "fun" ship to play, and by that standard, the CVO qualifies.

So, from my perspective, what I would like to see is some changes to the CVO so it better fits with the published game. It will never qualify for the real history of SFBs, and that isn't the point anyway. The point is to get it "right" to be useful in a home campaign setting.

To that end, I suggest several changes:

1. Modify the CVO to better balance game play. This has a couple components.
A. Change the size class to 3, but alter the movement cost rate from MC=1.0, to MC=1.2.
B. Designate the character of the CVO as closer in type and Systems as a subtype of the BCH (heavy battle cruiser).
C. Reduce the number of SSD boxes from 132, to 125(the number of ssd boxes of the fed BCF.)
2. Confirm the CVO as SSJ, and not playable unless with the consent of all players. It may act, look and even play like a normal ship, but is not.
3. For F&E campaigns, the CVO is a substitute for a CVA or DN build slot, and is subject to the limitations of carriers, and DNs.

We can argue the merits or limitations of the CVO as better fitting in as a BCF type hull, but I feel we should also appreciate the history of the CVO, the much loved "flatbed" carrier. It will never be "official", but it is missed.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 10:51 am: Edit

I'd be interested to see some Size Class 2 survey ships(/RTN-hunters) in SSJ3, as well as a set of SC 2 variants akin to the Paravian dreadnought and battleship Raid Motherships.

In the Alpha Octant, the Romulans might be half-way there already: one could perhaps present a DemonHawk with a pair of SparrowHawk-C modules and a SkyHawk-F module as an oversized survey ship, or install a pair of SparrowHawk-H modules and a SkyHawk-H module as a "raid mothership". That "DemonHawk-CF" configuration would also make for a powerful RTN-hunter, if not quite as capable at the task as the infamous "REDHawk".

I'm not sure if or when it might have been suggested before, but a would-be Romulan modular battleship, were such a thing also to be considered for SSJ3, could then be given similar configurations.


For the Andromedans, perhaps SSJ3 could offer "Delineator" and/or "Demarcator" variants of the Dominator and/or Devastator base hulls respectively, akin to the Infestor and Missionary variants of the Intruder and Conquistador respectively? Such Size Class 2 support units could go a long way towards building up (or replenishing) the Rapid Transit Network, or perhaps even help construct new Desecrators - such as the starbase the Andromedans were in the process of building in the Iridani Cluster before work was interrupted by the Grand Quest.


Of course, said Iridani are already historically capable of configuring their Brigantine dreadnought and Man-O-War battleship into "survey" or "Quest mothership" configurations. The Bolosco can do something similar with the appropriate choice of pods installed on their mercenary dreadnought. It remains to be seen what kind of options might be available to the Zosman Marauders, though they are noted as deploying a "Godfather" dreadnought at some point.

But while they might not work for SSJ3, one could also imagine other Omega empires being offered such variants. Indeed, the silicate Trobrin historically use their dreadnoughts for deep-range patrol missions; it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to picture them converting one into a giant survey ship. Or, once they discover that the Paravians of Omega are parked in their back yard, borrowing the "raid mothership" idea for their own speculation - assuming, of course, that the Omega-Paravians themselves make use of the raid mothership concept.

By Eddie Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 10:57 am: Edit

Jeff rather than making all of the changes, just re-institute the 4 point surcharge for the photon freezers in this class, it was an earlier design based on early version of the freezer boxes. Do we need another mvt cost to worry about Do I really need to know that to move 24 I need 28.8 points of power if just using warp or 28.6 if I use 1 point of impulse. As far as boxes, the BCV has 134. It is one time design that although very effective took longer to build when compared to the DN version. More parts were compatible. Cheaper mass production. Much like a Sherman vs a Panther 1 or 1 no contest, but look at the overall cost and production. IN F&E add to the production cost or production time or both. No need to confirm as SSJ, thats what it is in this version of the game, I think if it used it already has to be approved by the players, just like Fed PFs

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 11:32 am: Edit

Along with Gary, I would also like to see more Size Class 2 RTN-Hunters. But I would like to see them as "real" ships rather than "Stellar Shadows" ships. I have long believed that the Alpha powers would have built more "heavy" RTN-Hunters (most of which would have been SC3 (Fed GVX or Romulan ThunderHawk for example) but a few of which might have been SC3 (Kzinti SSCS is the only existing example I can think of off hand)) than are currently represented in the game.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 11:33 am: Edit

Ed, I think, (just my personal opinion), that that ship sailed years ago. The 4 point surcharge I think would have been an option back in the days leading up to the publishing of the Commanders rule set. It makes no difference that it wasn't presented, agreed to or accepted. It's late in the day to be restoring an early version photon freezer. The rules in effect for handling reloads for photon assault shuttles are what they are, doing anything now, would just confuse players. (Not sure what SPP will say when he recovers from the plague... if he hears that you want to mess up the photon freezer rules, the result might not be pleasant! 😊

Still, I figure if you can master the Dewey decimal system, a little thing like indexing movement cost ratios in sfb's is small potatos!

Now, in general, I appreciate your insight to the BCV in comparison to the DN.

The problem is that finicky dad burned flatbed secondary hull on the CVO.

It's just too darn long, and probably too long to fit properly in the ships warp field. For all I know, it's the root cause for why the CVO failed.

Still, I would like an updated history in SSJ explaining how it came into existence, and how it fits into that timeline. I am okay with it not being in the REAL star fleet history. Just that some where, somehow, in the cosmos...there is a niche for the legendary flatbed.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 11:37 am: Edit

Oops - accidentally wrote in my previous post "... but a few of which might have been SC3 (Kzinti SSCS is the only existing example I can think of off hand))", which makes no sense in context, and is wrong. SSCS is SC2, of course.

By Eddie Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 11:43 am: Edit

Jeff sounds like time for the Air Force Academy to release more the the translated tapes.

By Eddie Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 11:47 am: Edit

Jeff why do you think he has the plague!! WILE the cats away the mice will play.

By Eddie Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 11:56 am: Edit

I prefer the Library of Congress System, gives me a lot more room to expand.

By Glenn Hoepfner (Ikabar) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 12:45 pm: Edit

Picture this:
Captured klingon C8 rear hull.
Attach fed DN+ saucer.
Convert klingon weapons to fed equivalents.
Fed impulse becomes APR
SSD now has 4 15-warp-box engines.
Shields are altered to reflect saucer and C8 rear hull.
movement cost would still be 1.5

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 02:53 pm: Edit

A Fed DNG saucer attached (somehow) to a C8 rear hull would probably increase the move cost to 1 3/4 or something.

I think that no one would purposefully build a DN or larger sized SR to do RTN hunting, but rather would forgo the shuttles, labs and cargo and shuttles of an SR in favor of carrying PFs and/or fighters, plus repair systems for said attrition units. Probably similar to that Gorn size 2 ship with two PF flotillas or possibly an SSCS.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 03:07 pm: Edit

I think there would be DN-sized RTN Hunters but they would be converted warships, not converted survey ships. Granted, you have the Fed Galactic Survey Cruiser (and its variants, especially the GVX) but I think those are the exceptions. The requirements for RTN hunting are not the same as either the requirements for survey or for "standard" combat ships. But in general it's probably easier to convert the latter to a good RTN Hunter.

By Eddie Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 04:56 pm: Edit

Actually you would think that a fast response group would be best. Use a scout or special ship for hunting and a fast response force to do the job. A survey cruiser may be ideal for finding them, but it also has to be able to survive and report back, most survey cruisers do not have the capabilities to do the hunter killer routine. How many DN class ships can you convert to the mission without it affecting your fleet balance. Fast DNs and fast cruisers would seem to meet the response team approach.

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 05:35 pm: Edit

A fast PFT, or a fast system control ship as an RTN hunter killer.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 05:36 pm: Edit

Eddie,

I think at this point we need to break "RTN Hunter" into two categories, "RTN Finder" and "Responder". The RTN Finder must have special sensors and it must operate without other ships in the vicinity. What you are describing is a Responder; something that can quickly get to an RTN node the Finder has located, and destroy it before the Andros can relocate it. If the base is relocated, that's a minor setback for the Andros. But if it is destroyed that's a much more severe blow to them. While the defining characteristic of a Finder is special sensors, the defining characteristics of Responders are speed and firepower. Ships like a DNL or X-cruiser make excellent Responders (especially with attrition units). But standard-speed units can fill the role as well, though in some cases they may arrive too late to prevent the Andros from relocating the base. So you have sort of a race between the Responders and the Andro reinforcements.

Now what I referred to above as a "heavy" RTN Hunter, a ship such as the Kzinti SSCS, Fed GVX, or Romulan ThunderHawk, will certainly be expensive. But I believe its ability to fill either the Finder or Responder role, combining special sensors and (at least standard) speed and firepower makes it well worth the cost for two reason.

One - In some cases it (plus any attrition units it carries, of course) will be able to attack and destroy the RTN node all by itself, before more Andros can even arrive to relocate the base. This greatly increases the chances of dealing a major rather than minor blow to the Andros.

Two - Andro mobile forces will be out looking for the Finders, who will not have other warships in the immediate vicinity. If the Finder is an ordinary scout, the Andros then kill it easily. But a heavy RTN Finder is a much tougher proposition. Depending on exactly which ship we are talking about and which Andro finds it, it may be able to resist the attack or hold out long enough for Galactic Power Responders to arrive. Each heavy RTN Finder that is destroyed will be harder to replace. but their loss rate will also be lower.

That at any rate is how I see it.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 05:46 pm: Edit

Wayne,

If by "RTN hunter killer" you are referring to essentially the same concept as what I have referred to as a heavy RTN Hunter, I'm not sure "fast" (in the sense of an X-ship, CF, or DNL) is actually critical. I believe "standard" speed is adequate, though faster speed certainly won't hurt. And being fast does improve its ability to respond to an RTN node that some other scout has located.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 05:53 pm: Edit

Indeed, even "standard" speed may not be absolutely necessary. Consider the following ship (which I believe is a legal configuration). Start with a Fed Battle Tug and then add an F-111 pod. I believe the F-111 pod is single-weight so this combination should be legal. It will have Battle Tug firepower (actually, slightly better since the F-111 pod does have some weaponry of its own) and shields that are better than a Battle Tug's, along with 6 F-111s (megafighters - of course) and special sensors. It will also be very slow. Such a ship ought to make quite a decent "Finder" but, due to its slow speed, a poor Responder.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 09:25 pm: Edit

Alan,

I appreciate where you are trying to go... but I wonder if the rules set supports what you are trying to accomplish. You are mounting a double weight pod (the battle pod) and a single weight F-111 pod. What is the combined tug plus pods movement cost? A single weight pod plus tug is MC=1.0. A double weight pod, plus tug is MC=1.5. A double weight pod plus single weight pod, plus tug MC=2.?

That means your Tug+BP+F-111 pod is going to be screaming across the map board at 16 hexes per turn (30/2)+1 impulse.

Fortunately the BP can reload photons from its own WPRs... but the Andromedans will have time to respond to the finder...as it approaches at a speed egual to most large freighters.

Too bad as this sounds like an idea that should work... tantalizingly so.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 11:08 pm: Edit

Jeff,

MC2 is correct I believe for a Fed Tug with 3 "pod weights" (Battle Pod is double-weight, F-111 pod is single weight). So, yes, it would have an absolute maximum "SFB speed" of 16. But there are some other factors we don't know; how long does it typically take Fed (or other Alpha) reinforcements to arrive once an Andro RTN node is detected, and how far out does a scout typically detect the node? If even the very slow Fed "RTN-Hunter Tug" can move from initial detection range to combat range in less time than the Fed reinforcements (which are much faster but also initially much further away, and won't head for the node till a scout locates it) could arrive, the Hunter Tug could still have value for killing small, weakly defended RTN nodes.

By Eddie Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 11:31 pm: Edit

Could you work out the time frame using F&E speeds and distances? I dont play F&E so I am not familiar with the speed and distance involved.

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Thursday, December 19, 2019 - 11:41 pm: Edit

Alan,

A fast system control ship would be nice, it could be for independent operations against RTN (has the scout channels and good fire power to hit heavy defended nodes).
A fast PFT would be cheaper to build and have enough fire power for most of the RTN nodes perhaps.

These RTN hunter killers, are a similar vain to the heavy RTN hunter, with the scout channels and fire power on one ship.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, December 20, 2019 - 06:34 am: Edit

Eddie:
A F&E game turn is six months long, and a F&E hex is 500 parsecs wide (call it a bit more than 1500 light years.)

The general Approach (consider it a WAG, wild a$$ guess) is that each turn represents any number of sfb scenarios in the time period, and that the ships involved could traverse th hex several time in that same six month period. Further, most warships (CA, NCL, CL, FFG, single weight tug&iPod) can move up to 6 F&E turns using operational movement, or a limited number of ships could use strategic movement to travel up to 12 hexes during a F&E game turn.

There is also a "reaction" movement option for use during an opponents turn.

So, it's difficult to relate sfb movement to f&e movement.

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Friday, December 20, 2019 - 08:19 am: Edit

Jeff & Eddie,

Just as a note, the hex sizes in F&E make our galaxy almost twice as big as it should be.

A F&E hex should be 236.8 parsecs.

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Friday, December 20, 2019 - 09:57 am: Edit

The difference is before and after they reversed the Thanos finger snap.