Also keep in mind that in general the Lyran SC (based on the DD hull) was superior to both the Hydran SC (based on a FF hull) and the Kzinti SF (based on a FF hull) before the general war.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Saturday, July 18, 2020 - 01:41 pm: Edit

I cannot explain the Hydran Scout Frigate, but the Kzintis are explained by the invention of the ECM drone. Any Kzinti ship could have ECM drones, and a Kzinti scout could use its own drone racks to provide ECM drones. Any Kzinti ship could provide an ECM drone to another Kzinti ship. This was why the Lyrans went with a larger Scout initially, and why that larger scout evolved into the CWS. The Lyrans did not have ECM drones.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Saturday, July 18, 2020 - 02:22 pm: Edit

SPP,

But unless I'm mistaken, the Lyrans can use ECM drones once they start fielding carriers and fighters. Of course, they don't deploy carriers in anything like the numbers some other empires do. And they were late enough to the fighter game that I believe DWs had already been in use for several years.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, July 18, 2020 - 02:41 pm: Edit

I don't see much need for a Lyran FFS but it is technologically possible. I don't mind if Steve P creates one for some future product (R14 is in the works and that would be an easy kill). I do NOT see adding them to the F&E Order of Battle (well, maybe ONE as the failed prototype that basically gives them a single cheap DWS conversion; the ship description might say it was the only survivor of three built for tests at the end of the 4PW, and no, they don't add to THAT order of battle either, you'd have to build them yourself). Only an F&E player would care and he would never build them, only convert ones that existed earlier.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Saturday, July 18, 2020 - 02:42 pm: Edit

DWS year in service is Y168.

CVA Year in service is Y175

BCV Year in service is Y181

CV Year in service is Y172

NCV Year in service is Y176

CVL Year in service is Y171

DWV Year in service is Y174

PV Year in service is Y170

Pal-V year in service is Y171

P-H5 year in service is Y171

P-V7 Year in service is Y177

Al of that seems to support your theory, except

LCV Year in service is Y167

In any case, yes, fighters can use ECM drones, but yes fighters are pretty rare in Lyran service. Which I (and I apologize for this) am completely missing your point. The Lyrans in most engagement, whether with the Hydrans or the Kzintis or the Orions, or the LDR, or the WYN do not have ECM drones.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Saturday, July 18, 2020 - 04:43 pm: Edit

I forget the YIS of the Lyran CL carrier, don't remember when bases started getting fighters either.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Saturday, July 18, 2020 - 06:56 pm: Edit

Lyran fighters popped up in the Y167-168 period with maybe an SAV (or a Klingon SAV [or plans of]) slightly before. Could have been part of the Klingo-Lyran treaty which included the K-pods (KTP/KSP) and other accessories (DERFACS/UIM/ECM drones) ...

Lyran CLV is Y169 (CL #46)

By Shawn Gordon (Avrolancaster) on Monday, July 20, 2020 - 05:43 pm: Edit

What the heck is the deal with the BATSW?

If I'm not mistaken it's just the BATS with the webcaster refit.

Here's what the R7.R2 note says on the topic of bases:

---

Quote:

Bases: One web caster replaced two disruptors in some modules of some starbases (R1.1)/(R7.70) sector bases (R1.47), and battle stations (R1.2). Each such change increases the BPV by three points.

---

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, July 20, 2020 - 06:07 pm: Edit

Some of the phasers, obviously, the ones that replace the disruptors on the baseline/standard generic base.

By Shawn Gordon (Avrolancaster) on Monday, July 20, 2020 - 09:06 pm: Edit

The generic bases don't have disruptors though, they have W1, W2, W3, and W4 slots. Some other races put disruptors in the W1 (Klingon, Lyran) slot, and some put them in the W4 slot (Kzinti).

The ambiguity means that they can either replace Ph-3s (W1) or Webs (W4).

By John Wyszynski (Starsabre) on Monday, July 20, 2020 - 10:02 pm: Edit

The Tholian SB in Module R1 show the Web Casters. Without the refit, the WC are replaced by Ph-4.

Module R1 does not show a Web Caster refit for the BATS.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, July 20, 2020 - 10:42 pm: Edit

I always thought that web casters on Tholian bases was a bad idea. They should have phasers and web generators, but the casters should be reserved for mobile fleet elements.

But I was never able to convince SPP of my position. Nor was he able to convince me of his.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, July 20, 2020 - 10:51 pm: Edit

It's probably moot most of the time; I don't imagine that the Tholians actually did that refit often.

By Shawn Gordon (Avrolancaster) on Tuesday, July 21, 2020 - 01:56 pm: Edit

After comparing the Tholian SBW to the generic SB I'm pretty sure that the Web Caster is intended to replace a phaser-4 rather than two disruptors.

The BATSW is still a completely open question however. If it replaces a phaser-4, as in the SBW, then the BATSW has one fewer phaser-4 than all other bases in every refitted module (which is fine I guess, it just makes the base much much weaker). If it is simply what slots into the W3 slot (the empire-specific weapon on each module) then it replaces the web generator, which makes it a very powerful base compared to the BATS.

Either way, the next revision of C2 should probably fix R7.R2.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Tuesday, July 21, 2020 - 09:56 pm: Edit

Shawn:

To be clear, the standard Tholian SB (in the Milky Way) has 18 phaser-4s, 12 phaser-3s, 6 web generators. It has no disruptors. The web caster refit (which is the standard Tholian starbase in M-81) has 12 phaser-4s, 6 web casters, 12 phaser-3s, and 6 web generators.

In my opinion, this is a poor design in M-81 and an awful design in the Milky Way.^* Unfortunately, ADB doesn't see it that way.


^*At least in M-81, the Tholians have the ability to deploy web casters in large numbers. So the "W" version is weaker than the 18 phaser-4 version. But at least it doesn't reduce the number of web casters available to the mobile fleets. But in the Milky Way, the Tholians can only deploy limited numbers of web casters. So the "W-refit" to the Tholian SB not only makes the starbase itself weaker, it also reduces the the number of web casters available to the fleets elements. So it's a more expensive starbase that simultaneously weakens both the base itself and the fleets. I just don't understand that design at all.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Tuesday, July 21, 2020 - 10:07 pm: Edit

Although it's a much less important issue, I also think that the 12 phaser-3s are a mistake on a Tholian starbase. Replacing them with 6 phaser-1s would be better. A base surrounded by web is not in a lot of danger from seeking weapons^*, and a phaser-1 is better than two phaser-3s for targeting ships on the outer and middle web rings. Due to the damage reduction for firing the phasers through the middle ring, the phaser-3s do no damage to an enemy ship on the outer ring. But even with that reduction, a phaser-1 averages 1.5 points. This isn't a big deal. The phaser-4 issue is far more important. But it's one more minor ineffciency in the base design.

^*And why would bases in M-81 want phaser-3s in any case?

By Shawn Gordon (Avrolancaster) on Thursday, August 06, 2020 - 06:47 pm: Edit

Triaxians don't have generic units, right?

By A David Merritt (Adm) on Thursday, August 06, 2020 - 07:59 pm: Edit

The Gorn units work well enough.

By Shawn Gordon (Avrolancaster) on Thursday, September 24, 2020 - 12:04 am: Edit

There are two units in G3 under the Vudar section that are listed as being in F2, but I'm not seeing them in F2.

Specifically the SR, CC are listed as being in F2, and having reference numbers R17.37 (same as the DCS), and R17.38, but the F2 R17 section only goes to R17.36.

Am I missing something or is there a misprint?

Also, what's the situation with Vudar bases? They have a BATS SSD, and a BATS entry in the R17 section of F2. Do they not get BS, and BSC? Do they use Klingon versions of any of those? The Vudar BATS has a YIS of Y178, before that were there no Vudar BATS or orbital bases of any kind (other than the MISS three years earlier in Y175?)

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Thursday, September 24, 2020 - 12:51 am: Edit

My 2005 Edition Module F2 does not have the CC or SR listed, perhaps a new Edition F2 will have them (the Vudar CC and SR at a guess would be in a Captains Log).

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Thursday, September 24, 2020 - 08:15 am: Edit

The Vudar CC is rule (R17.A1) and the Vudar SR is (R17.A5), both found in Captain's Log #32.

By Shawn Gordon (Avrolancaster) on Thursday, September 24, 2020 - 10:16 am: Edit

Thank you very much.

Anybody have an answer re: Vudar bases?

By A David Merritt (Adm) on Thursday, September 24, 2020 - 11:12 am: Edit

Vudar Bases
IIRC they only list the BATS due to those being the only available bases once the Vudar become independent, and they have limited space in the Modules. (Remember these were released when they were printed.)

By Shawn Gordon (Avrolancaster) on Thursday, September 24, 2020 - 12:02 pm: Edit

Thank you, I figured that was the case, I was just looking for confirmation.

I understand that they can't throw an infinite amount of stuff in each module, but usually there's a note somewhere saying one way or another that a generic unit is available or not. The F1 module doesn't mention Base Stations, or Civilian Base Stations, and so I wasn't sure if I was just missing the reference to them, or if the Vudar simply didn't have access to them.

I was expecting to see something like "use Klingon BS and BSC until Y175, at which point the Vudar use MISS and ISS for this strategic role." or "use Klingon BS and BSC until Y175, at which point the Vudar replace W1 with XYZ and W2 with UVW, etc."

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, September 24, 2020 - 01:44 pm: Edit

When Module F2 was first done, the books were perfect bound which put limits on their size.

When we shifted them to the Binders, we were able to add pages, and later copies included the Command Cruiser and the Survey Cruiser.

The Vudar do not have access to drones or plasma-Ds, and the Ion pulse generator is not going to be deployed on such a base, so basically a Civilian base of the Vudar would be identical to the Hydran base.