Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	Archive through June 01, 2020	25		06/01 12:49pm
	Archive through June 02, 2020	25		06/03 04:19am

SVC,

I am not aware that you made any such statement (50 RTN hunting ships) in any of the topics I started.

The "50 RTN hunting groups" is an estimate in X1R , page 30.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, June 02, 2020 - 09:00 pm: Edit

My mistake, some how I associated Joe C. Referencing “50 RTN hunting groups” from X1R, With “SVC said”... cant imagine how I confused a rule reference with SVC.

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Tuesday, June 02, 2020 - 11:32 pm: Edit

All:

Do we have the Fed proposal well enough defined to move to the next empire?

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, June 03, 2020 - 12:15 am: Edit

Just so you don't think your Fed proposal has been accepted.

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Wednesday, June 03, 2020 - 04:19 am: Edit

No worries. SPP, when he has time, needs to review. And with any proposal few make it but some do. The process is what is fun. I have confidence in you and SPP in keeping the game balanced and fun.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Wednesday, June 03, 2020 - 11:22 am: Edit

You have to posit:

1) A hunting group is composed of the sniffer ship with special sensors, the response pack (ideally Fast or X) for more firepower, and the logistic train.

2) Ships can't be on station 24/7 for months on end. So you need rotional groups. Say 1 group hunting and 1 in port.

3) What makes up a group will change as casulties are taken, lessons learned. more resources are available...

4) And you have to figure that the empires shared intel and resources. So the Tholians might send a WC equipped single cruiser to be part of a Fed squadron sweeping the border hexes. Klingons would join with Lyrans to sweep the remains of the LDR...

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Wednesday, June 03, 2020 - 11:23 am: Edit

SVC, I would assume that a RTN can't/ won't be built TOO close to a base with Special sensors...

But I know that ASSuming things can be a mistake.

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Wednesday, June 03, 2020 - 02:17 pm: Edit

Mike,

The question should go to SPP and when has the time he may or may not visit this proposal. Most of the information asking in your "Posit" is in X1R on page 30.

All I think we should move on to the next empire. How about a Klingon heavy RTN hunter?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, June 03, 2020 - 02:51 pm: Edit

Sounds good.

Cookie cutter approach would suggest adding 2 special sensors to a C boom.

Any empire specific changes that leaps to mind?

I am not suggesting security boxes or Stasis generators.

Some non carriers and non SCS variants carry two casual PFs. Should the Klingon RTN hunter get a PF reinforcement? The normal PF flotilla would have a LDR, scout and 4 shooterPFs. With two more casual PFs the flotilla would have 7 PFs.

Or should there be two non standard PFs instead? A mine layer? A Phaser Boat? Even though it seems a waste, how about a marine landing PF? Any other suggestions?

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Wednesday, June 03, 2020 - 03:26 pm: Edit

I will open a proposal in the Klingon section

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Thursday, June 04, 2020 - 10:20 am: Edit

I don't know how effective Klingon levels of drones are w/ an Andro opponent. I'd replace the drone racks with the Spec Sensors.

D6pft should be almost adequite.

Fear (etc) should do just fine.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Thursday, June 04, 2020 - 05:49 pm: Edit

JRC. I have always addreesed "Background" questions to SVC.

SPP is the one I ask rules questions of.

After all, their emails are "rules@... and design@..."

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 12:24 am: Edit

I don’t think that the “scout with nearby attack squadron” is not a workable business model. The ‘Droes’ woyuls see there group, infer the unseen scout, and leave.

I think published history is pretty clear on single ship RTN hunter model.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 07:09 am: Edit

SVC,

But there is also some published support for "nearby squadrons" as well. In Module X1R, the anti-RTN roles of several ships without special sensors are described. For example, (R2.212) Advanced Technology Heavy fighter Carrier (HVX) includes the following:

"Records indicate that after Y195 one or more ships of this class were paired with a scout and participated in hunting Andromedan RTN nodes, using their faster acceleration to reach and support the scout until other forces could come up and destroy the node."

I suspect that the "business model" might have varied with the size of the node. The Andros would be able to re-deploy a small node very quickly, too quickly for Galactic reinforcements to arrive once the node had been detected. These nodes had to be taken down by "single ship" RTN hunters that had both special sensors and significant firepower of their own (whether integral or because of carried fighters/PFs). But the larger, more powerful nodes were too much for any single-ship RTN hunter, with the possible exception of monsters like the Kzinti SSCS. On the other hand, it would take significantly longer for the Andros to re-deploy them once detected. So these nodes would by detected by a scout, which would then call the supporting "attack force". The race would be on as to whether the responding attackers could reach the node before the Andros could redeploy it.

That interpretation seems to me to best fit the various things that have been posted about RTN hunting over the years.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 10:54 am: Edit

Is it possible that several different approaches were tried?

For a real world example, the Royal Navy (U.K.) during the early part of WW2 tried “hunter Killer” groups as a means of combating German U boats.

The H.M.S. Courageous, (sister ship of the H.M.S. Glorious, half sister of the H.M.S. Furious) was so assigned with 4 destroyers as escorts, and operating with Swordfish torpedo bombers on the approaches to the Irish Sea south east of England. Received reports that a merchant ship was torpedoed and dispatched aircraft and two of its four escorting destroyers.

Confusing situation, but the end result was the Courageous was sunk by submarine Torpedos.

Lot of lessons learned, but one was the idea of using a fleet carrier to patrol submarine infested waters without adequate destroyer escort was discredited. The base idea was resurrected years later and an example was the U.S.S. Guadalcanal (escort carrier) capture of the German Uboat U-505. (Now On display at Chicago’s museum of science and industry. Great picture of Lake shore drive closed to traffic with a sign posted “caution: submarine crossing”.)

I imagine that the urgency (potential destruction of the economies of the Alpha Quadrants major and minor empires) led to any number of different ideas being tried.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 11:11 am: Edit

Jeff,

That's kind of my intended point. Different approaches have to be tried for different circumstances. The small nodes are fairly easy to kill but the Andros can also re-deploy them very quickly. A scout backed up by a heavy "attack force" isn't viable to kill these nodes. They will be gone before the attack force gets there.

But the more powerful nodes, the "battle stations", are typically too much to be taken down by a lone scout, even with fighters and PFs. But their size and power does mean that it takes longer for the Andros to redeploy them. The "scout backed up by an attack force" is the only viable way to destroy these heavy nodes. In this latter role, X-ships are ideal for the attack force, not only for their power but for the speed with which they can reach the newly discovered base.

An idealized RTN hunter group might consist of an SCS or CVA-based RTN hunter, which can attack small or medium bases by itself, and which also has a decent chance of surviving Andro attempts to kill it before it finds the base; backed up by an X-squadron that can respond very quickly when the SCS/CVA-based RTN hunter runs into something it can't handle by itself. The obvious downside of such an "idealized" RTN hunting group is that it would be very expensive.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 11:45 am: Edit

Alan, I guess I wasn’t clear enough.

We have used a lot of band width discussing Joe Cs heavy carrier theme.

I was seeing if there is interest in wider discussions.

For example, the Klingons equipped some ships with casual PF mech links.

They, better than almost any empire COULD deploy a number of heavy ships to the RTN hunter role backed up by a pair (in some cases more?!?) casual PFs without having to change any published rules.

I am beginning to wonder if there is a limit to how many special sensors an empire could produce in a f&E game turn. I know the existing rules have no such limit.

Should there be?

Could the B-10 battle ships go RTN hunting with a half squadron of late model fighters and a pair of casual PFs... with a E4S or F5S hunting dog?

Could the F-5S carry a PF on Mech link?

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 05:44 pm: Edit

Most ships can carry a casual PF, the main ones that can not are police ships and most heavy police ships (though the LDR MPM was reinforced to carry a PFM).

As for 'nearby reinforcements', the term is relative as 15 turns of tactical speed is 'nearby' but is it close enough when being shot at?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 05:49 pm: Edit

That depends on what is doing the shooting!

Grin.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Saturday, June 06, 2020 - 09:06 pm: Edit

And (or?) their accuracy …