Like other empires the Kzinti were aware of the the development of a space control ship variant with special sensors. They modified the forward hull by adding two special sensors. Conversation was completed in Y186.

The Kzinti were intrigued by the space patrol ships that the Gorns created and highly concerned with the Lyran version. They did not have a ship available for such a conversion. Once the secret of the RTN became known the Kzinti converted the space control ship variant (heavy RTN hunter) in Y194 into the super space control ship (SSCS)

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, June 23, 2020 - 09:28 pm: Edit

Joe, we have not talked about it, but there may be a reason that the Kzinti added four special sensors to their SSCS.

For the life of me, I have no idea why.

The other empires we have discussed seem fine with two special sensors. Again, no idea why two work fine, and the Kzinti paid for double the SS... unless it was so they could power four channels and use two heavy weapons (disrupters) only blinding two channels and down firing all other phasers as phaser 3s.

Well, it might be energy... a phaser 3 costs 0.5 points of power while a phaser 1 costs 1.0 energy. Have to pull the SSD and game it out... I am doubtful that such a approach is viable.

By MarkSHoyle (Bolo) on Tuesday, June 23, 2020 - 10:15 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

Joe, we have not talked about it, but there may be a reason that the Kzinti added four special sensors to their SSCS.

---

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, June 23, 2020 - 11:21 pm: Edit

Mark Hoyle:

Your count is a bit off.

I agree there are 12 PFs, but I see only 12 single space fighter shuttle boxes and 3 admin shuttles.

Still, you failed to address exactly why the SSCS requires 4 special sensors.

Depending on the role the ship is used for, the need for Special Sensors changes.

Strike missions (typically hundreds or up wards of 2,500+ hexes away from the ship) need a special sensor for targeting and tactical intel rolls, but are also far beyond the SS range for the ship to use them for any Electronic Warfare purposes.

Unless the PFs fighters and the SSCS are operating close together (within range for EW) there just doesn’t appear to be a requirement for four special sensors.

And even if the SSCS does need 4 special sensors for combat, the power required can get Very high. Each channel needs to be powered using generally between 2 to as much as 7 points each (not counting having to pay for the SSCS full fire control energy cost.)

Assuming all four channels are powered, that means a range of 9 points To as much as 29 points (depending on how you are using the systems.). The SSCS only generates 57 points of energy (not counting batteries) so using max power on the special sensors plus active fire control is just over half of the total power the SSCS generates.

Depending on how much energy used from the batteries, house keeping etc. means the SSCS is limited to speed 19 or slower (if powering disrupters to full overloads), A LOT slower.

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Wednesday, June 24, 2020 - 12:14 am: Edit

Jeff,

I think four special sensors may have been as simple as doubling what a PFT has. The 12 fighters is a strike carrier which don't us special sensors. But that is guess on my part.

as far as tactic in using the special sensors in battle-well it is as easy as destroying an unprotected node to a nightmare of one to two mother ships, satellite ships and up to 36 MWPs.

I once saw a marine training guide titled hunting Tanks is Fund and Easy" I think the Kzinti on the SSCS Goliath would insert Andros for tanks.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Wednesday, June 24, 2020 - 01:34 am: Edit

SSCS uses the 4 special sensors to control the drones coming from their fighters used as scatter packs under remote control.

Just my opinion.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, June 24, 2020 - 03:35 pm: Edit

Not a good option as any weapons used larger than a phaser 3 will blind the special sensor.

That means no disrupters or phaser 1’s at all.

And if you are using each special sensor to control 6 drones each... you risk losing control on up to 24 drones.

By MarkSHoyle (Bolo) on Wednesday, June 24, 2020 - 04:21 pm: Edit

Just my opinion...
If a SSCS has it whole fighter wing and PFs out...
If something gets close enough to require the SSCS to use Hvy Wpns, you screwed up.....
Blinding SSs shouldn't be an issue.....

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Wednesday, June 24, 2020 - 04:34 pm: Edit

Nah. You aren't 4vening arming the darn disruptors. Phaser 1s are held in reserved.

Loan max to PF flotilla.

Launch (say) 2-4 TADSC as scatter packs every turn under remote control. You didn't bother to buy an EWF.

So you have:
SSCS drone rack launches.
PF flotilla rack launches
Admin shuttle SP launches
TADSC remote control launches
MRS (or two) behind your SSCS loaning max EW to the SSCS. Or maybe acting as "scatter pack surprise packages

And you have HOW MANY drones on the racks, in storage and on ready racks? Then you get what percentages of special drones?

I don't see the Andros surviving this density of drones. They gots no admins. So they have to use (whatever they're called) their version of PFs?

EVEN if they go max EW and temporal elevator, you still get all kinds of evil drone special types heading in.

I'd love to hear SPPs rigorous evaluation of how an Andro base defends vs that kind of attack.

SSCS never comes closer than range 15 from the base or so...And only that so the round trip from reloaded/ repaired PFs isn't vwey long...

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, June 24, 2020 - 11:36 pm: Edit

Mike, you are assuming that your opponent will do what you expect.

Namely, fight at your best range. I assure you, battles seldom turn out exactly as you (or anyone, really) expects.

If I had a generally equal force, and I see you launching many more drones than your rated seeking weapons channels limits, That would be the signal to close the range.

Particularly if you deployed large numbers of drone fighter remote controlled scatter packs.

It’s the equivalent of catching the Japanese carriers at the battle of midway island, with your hangers full (or filling) with Fighters & PFs with empty drone racks.

The bottle neck is not the ability of the SSCS and it’s PFS and fighters wing to launch drones. It’s how fast tHe SSCS can reload two full PF flotillas and a squadron of late war single space fighters.

Given the absolute limits on how many deck crews are available, the reload could take more time than you have.

And don’t try to snow me with how big a drone wave you can build. A few well planned transporter bombs can deal with that. (As well as the select use of my own fighters and PFs anti drone defenses.)

Yes, drones can be effective. Drones can also be defeated.

Heck, just moving out of range can leave you with an empty drone stock pile. Blowing the whole thing on a gamble that your opponent will cooperate doesn’t always work.

Just say’in.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Thursday, June 25, 2020 - 07:08 pm: Edit

Jeff, we are talking about attacking a BASE. Once the real heavy reinforcements arrive you are right.

Kill the base and win!

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, June 25, 2020 - 07:22 pm: Edit

Mike, we are talking about a RTN hunter that is unsupported by its normal escort group.

The possibility still exists that the Andromedans might have the strength to attack first.

In either case, the Presence of four special sensors do not increase the amount of damage the ship (SSCS) can inflict in combat.

In fact, a case can be made that it could increase the ships vulnerability. Once combat starts, using 1,2,3 or all four special sensors in the seeking weapons control channel role, as you suggested, emasculates the ship as using any weapon more powerful than a phaser 3 blinds a channel.

In combat, it appears having four special sensors amounts to four (very expensive) free hits.

As discussed earlier in other related topics, it might be better for the SSCS and other RTN Hunters to NOT use the special sensors.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, June 25, 2020 - 09:29 pm: Edit

Jeff,

The thing is, most of the SSCS firepower is in its PF flotillas and fighter squadron rather than integral to the SSCS itself. If it chooses not to fire its disruptors or phaser-1s, it can do a lot of useful things with those special sensors. Consider the following situation; an Andro ship (or ships) attacks the SSCS, which must hold them off until Galactic reinforcements arrive. It generates 6 points of ECM, loans itself 6 more points with one of the special sensors, and drops six points of OECM on the two most menacing Andro ships. It doesn't use its disruptors and can only use its phasers as phaser-3s (if the Andros get close). It can use its drone racks (the SSCS can launch 10 drones in one turn without using a scatterpack) and of course the fighters and PFs are contributing their full firepower. With all the ECM (including OECM against the Andros), the SSCS can be targeted by a lot of firepower and keep fighting. Also, if the PFS for one of the flotillas is destroyed, the SSCS can use one of the special sensors to loan EW to that flotilla. Finally, if the SSCS decides it does need to use its own firepower, it turns off the special sensors and fights with a BCH-worth of disruptors and phaser-1s, but with a lot more drone firepower and much better shields.

The arrangement of four disruptors plus four special sensors does reduce its theoretical firepower compared to 6+2. But it also increases the ship's survivability (due to all that ECM) while the PFs and fighters shoot the enemy. It's not an ideal arrangement for every situation. But it is very flexible, and amounts to much more than "four (very expensive) free hits". Your mistake (in my own opinion, for whatever that is worth) is putting too much emphasis on the SSCS's own direct firepower. That's one way for the SSCS to fight, but certainly not the only way.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, June 25, 2020 - 10:33 pm: Edit

Alan, it’s only a mistake if I lose the battle. Grin.

Sure, every tactical situation is a different challenge, but Mike did not adopt your option. He stated that the SSCS should use all four special sensors to expand the number of seeking weapons channels, as well as using the single space fighters as scatter packs.

That, by definition limits the maximum range to (at most),38 hexes. My opinion is that such a tactic had best be kept to 15 hexes or more range to force the enemy into using the less accurate range brackets on the weapons tables.

It should be noted, if Mike intends to recover the energy fighter/scatter packs, he will need time, and depending on the particular fighters used, might have to reduce his ships speed to avoid death dragging the fighters.

I was not anticipating tactics such as you suggest, just commenting on Mikes proposed tactics.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Friday, June 26, 2020 - 07:08 pm: Edit

"it might be better for the SSCS and other RTN Hunters to NOT use the special sensors."

I THOUGHT that special sensors were a requirement to perform the RTN hunting mission.

Thats a SVC kind of discussion. But that was my impression.

Basically RTN hunter moves to search area alone and under emcon.

Gts into place and waits for reinforcment group to signal that they are staged and ready to respond.

Fires up the special sensor. I call this "sniffing." Apparently, if the special sensor lights up a base, the BASE AND the RTN Hunter know instantly. I think of it like you are in a dark stadium and then turn on a flashlight and look for those glowing eyes looking back.

BINGO! Now you either zoom in to kill the base or don't.

Obviously if you are a frigate scout and the Base is a big one, you just call the cavalry. And try to survive. Either the Andro reinforceents get there in time to take the base away, or not.

If you are pretty powerful. like a SSCS, then you close and use your intrinsic firepower, attrition units and do what you can while waiting for your reinforcements. Several cases obtain:

1) You kill the base before the Andros get reinforcements. It may be that the Andros realize it's hopeless and just don't keep coming.

2) You are killing the base when the Andro reinforcements get there first. Then you try to kill the base before they kill you, OR kill the reinforcements, or just delay the Andros until your team of backup arrives. Or fail.

3) You are doing your best when your reinforcements get there before the Andros. Andro reinforcements veer off because hecause they know it's a lost cause. Or not.

4) The Base plus it's reinforcements kill you/ run you off before your reinforcements arrive. Then it all depends on your reinforcements call as to whether they are so close that they keep coming or just abandon the effort.

By MarkSHoyle (Bolo) on Friday, June 26, 2020 - 08:07 pm: Edit

Considering the BPV of SSCS with all those Fighters and PFs, I suspect the Drone Load Out will cost as much or more than the base....

Depending on when Andro reinforcements arrive and Kzinti depart the map, the chance the Andros just kill a some fighters and possibly a PF or two...
I suspect a good possibility of Andros claiming a draw or better, even losing the base??

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, June 26, 2020 - 08:41 pm: Edit

Mark,

That's not the way I would look at it. If we fight a battle and I lose twice as much as you do, but my economy can out-build yours at a rate of 3-to-1, in the long run I win the war.

Now consider the Andros. The total massed combat power of all Andro forces in the Alpha Octant is exceeded rather significantly the total massed combat power of the Galactic forces. The Andros are initially winning because the RTN allows them to strategically maneuver and deploy ships in ways that even X-ships can't match. But without the RTN Andro ships are, I believe, strategically somewhat slower than even "standard tech" warships. So the Galactic strategy is utterly dependent on destroying the RTN to remove the Andros' strategic mobility advantage.

Now I grant you that if the Galactics lose an ENORMOUS amount of their forces to take down one relatively minor base, that's an Andro victory. But this is because the Andros can probably establish a replacement base faster than the Galactics can replace all those lost ships. But attrition units are cheaper and faster to replace than ships. And drones are faster to replace even than attrition units. It seems to me that just counting the economic cost of the drones, without taking things like time, and the overall strategic situation, into account; is "penny-wise and pound-foolish".

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, June 26, 2020 - 10:01 pm: Edit

Fighters iirc get a economic discount (On the order of 50%).

The Andromedans will learn (as many F&E players learned the hard way) that trading ships and bases for fighters is a losing proposition.

This is why I was talking about the logistics trail in the heavy RTN hunter topic. If the RTN hunter support group had freighters and both fighter and drone stockpiles for multiple missions, the Andromedans lose big time.

Playing F&E rules as Richard Eitzen was endorsing, only leads to an overwhelming Andromedans victory. And we know that’s not what the history shows happened.

By MarkSHoyle (Bolo) on Friday, June 26, 2020 - 10:13 pm: Edit

Alan,

For players who just grab scenarios to play, believe it would be a big deal....

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, June 26, 2020 - 10:18 pm: Edit

Mark,

That's certainly true. Strategic and tactical considerations are often different.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Saturday, June 27, 2020 - 08:39 pm: Edit

SVC.

Wiould you please explain how the "RTN hunt" works?

I posted my impression of what I think I know above, I think there is a lot of confusion out there about the process, I could be way off the mark of course...

Maybe this would be a nice short CL article? If you could clarify the basics I would love to take a shot at it.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Saturday, June 27, 2020 - 10:08 pm: Edit

Jeff: I don't think you know what you're talking about when it comes to Andros and F&E, seeing as they aren't yet published in F&E, not even any playtest rules.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, June 27, 2020 - 11:11 pm: Edit

I have done that several times. Too much pain to do it in detail, but in general. . .

Ship with passive special sensors plows along slowly on passIve fire control looking for Andro bases. No other ships can be anywhere near or it doesn’t work. When the RTN Hunter spots an Andro base, the Andro base Simultaneously spots the RTN Hunter. ONLY the RTN Hunter is close enough to the Andro base to attack it before a major Andro fleet arrives, picks up the base, and leaves. So unless the RTN Hunter has enough firepower to kill the base, the good guys at most force the base to move.

I think Monte Haul Bandwagons are uninteresting because they produce auto-kill scenarios that are no fun to play. I think we have all the RTN hunters already in the game are all we need.

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Saturday, June 27, 2020 - 11:41 pm: Edit

I will not be posting further ideas or ships.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Sunday, June 28, 2020 - 12:51 am: Edit

Joe, that is completely unnecessary.