Mike West wanted this opened. My concern is that

1. Nobody knows if alternate-timeline stuff will sell.

2. It will be months, maybe a year, before we know.

3. It will be tricky to pick which of 300 ideas for alternate timelines to pursue.

This one, frankly, doesn't interest me as a player or publisher, but if it keeps you buys busy and coming back, discuss away. We have printed a few products I wasn't interested in.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - 06:43 pm: Edit

I can definitely see a place for droneless Feds for people that want to hew a bit closer to what we saw on the show.

Mike, do you already have tech/ship proposals in hand, or is this more "get initial thoughts from the players to work from"?

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - 06:59 pm: Edit

So we're talking General War era?

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - 07:37 pm: Edit

Okay, what might some of the other aspects of this universe/timeline be?
P

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - 08:23 pm: Edit

Wait for Mike to post his plan.

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Wednesday, March 31, 2021 - 08:27 pm: Edit

I will post my ideas later tonight.

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 12:44 am: Edit

The base idea is to have an alternative Federation that doesn’t use seeking weapons at all.

Their past is unchanged. They just simply never adopt drones (and subsequently, Pl-F) at all. Instead they double down on direct-fire weapons and they come up with a different approach to drone defense. That’s the basic idea.

The reason for the idea is that there has always been a low-level complaint about how the Federation became so drone reliant, and this would be an alternative that lets the Federation NOT use drones and basically double-down on their use of photons and phasers. And, yes, I realize this likely makes them *weaker*. But then, this is Stellar Shadows, and the step down shouldn’t be too far.

They can’t just increase the drone defense with more Ph-3s or Ph-Gs. (I looked at the results of doing this, and it doesn't seem to work at all.) Instead they develop a new system that works like an ADD, but can also be “energized” in order to affect plasmas. When not energized, they basically work like ADDs, and will damage drones and shuttles like ADDs. When energized, they would do the effect of phaser damage to plasmas, but the firing mechanism is the same regardless. I worked up specifics for this, but I am not wedded to them and if they need to change, so be it. Also, I don’t care what the name of this system is.

(The specifics I came up with that are completely replaceable are: eight-shot capacity, starts with double reloads, gets triple reloads with Y175 refit. [These are effectively just a G-rack without the drone capability. This is the same capacity as an ADD-12, but takes an extra reload to get all 24 shots.] They can be energized for 1/4 point per shot; each shot does the equivalent of 4 points of phaser damage if they hit [reducing the warhead by 2 points] and are still fired like ADDs. Can be carried by fighters as RALADs. RALADS can be energized when loaded.)

Any further changes would flow from there, but it would, in theory, not actually change the overall history. The Federation still does what the Federation does; their fleet just doesn’t use drones.

Questions that would also have to be answered:
- Are civilian and auxiliary forces allow to use drones?
- How is fighter deployment changed? Do they get a Z-D like fighter for general deployment, or do they just make do with drone-less F-18s?
- Do they deploy gunboats or just use crap-tons of A-20Fs? (No F-111s here.)
- Do they still use Ph-Gs? (If they do, they don’t get more of them. Their limited production is NOT increased.)
- Can auxiliaries use photons since there are no drones? (Probably not.)

The specifics are all negotiable, but the overarching guidelines are not. Those guidelines are:
- The Feds do not use drones or plasmas.
- The Fed ship designs are fundamentally identical.
- The Fed history does not change, except for whatever minimal change required to cause no seeking weapons.
- No other empire changes as a result of this. (This means Orions still *do* use drones.)

Where the change happens is negotiable. It could happen around Y150 when that first DDG testbed doesn't work out or they don't even try, and the Feds just don't adopt drones. This means nothing happens prior to this to cause issues. Alternatively, the change could happen *way* earlier. Perhaps the Andorians didn't use drones and used something else instead. (Like maybe proton torpedoes.) With no history of Andorian drone use, they don't even bother trying drones when medium speed drones are invented. Irrespective of the change, the overarching guidelines immediately above still hold.

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 12:45 am: Edit

Also, one more point to keep in mind: This is just a general discussion for this concept. There is no implication or even hint that something like this will ever see any kind of print. This is just a working page that will probably result in nothing ever made, but I hope is still a fun thought exercise.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 01:18 am: Edit

I do want this topic to focus on Mike's idea and not a thousand counter-proposals.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 06:15 am: Edit

What about using Drones on the Minesweeper version of the old style light cruiser?

That ship/SSD has an Type A drone rack for use in clearing mines. I will have to check, but I ***think*** other Fed minesweeping ships use drones as well. I have a vague memory that that design might predate the Year 150 change in history point Mike talked about in the post at 12:44 PM.

By Jason E. Schaff (Jschaff297061) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 07:33 am: Edit

Small point of order. The Fed GSC (YIS 140) includes a type-A drone rack. Would the Feds keep a very limited deployment of drone racks on survey ships for use in launching probe drones, or would they become additional probe launchers?

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 07:57 am: Edit

Quote: "an alternative Federation that doesn’t use seeking weapons at all" .... Are not Suicide Shuttles classified as seeking weapons??


Garth L. Getgen

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 08:46 am: Edit

Jeff: No drones. The drone rack would end up being replaced with something else or deleted.

Jason: No drones. The drone rack would end up being replaced with something else or deleted.

Again, the whole point is to remove drones from the Federation fleet. If special cases are made, then they'd start using drones because they are very useful. The Y150 date was just a guideline. It can be moved earlier as needed to cover the "early adopter" ships. (Unless the main change is that the Andorians don't use drones, in which case the change is much, much earlier.)

Garth: Suicide Shuttles are fine.

I am going for "Hydran or Tholian 'don't use drones' level, not Tholian Home Galaxy 'don't even know seeking weapons exist' level".

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 11:37 am: Edit

Mike, are you familiar with the short-range cannon the Federal Republic of Aurora developed in the Omega Octant (OE20.0)?

By Mike Dowd (Mike_Dowd) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 11:48 am: Edit

Mike:

So basically, you are putting AFDs (Frax simulator tech) on Fed ships at a 1:1 replacement ratio...

So long as it does not lead to Ph-G in general use, say by making the energy component being "positron beams", it could work -- after all what we need to do is keep whatever system is devised from being a fighter-mounted weapon.

That said too, if these alternate Feds were to be able to adapt it to fighters, I can see 2-3 fighters per squadron being defensive fighters carrying this device while the remainder are phaser or photon variants for capital ship strikes...

By Eddie E Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 12:21 pm: Edit

How do you handle the loss of some special drones such as the ECM drone, or ECM plasma.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 01:41 pm: Edit

Is it too early to discuss numbers?

Going droneless (let’s face it, the number of plasma weapons in Federation service are minuscule.) will affect game balance. Prior to year 165, it’s moot.

But after that point the Plus refits and drone armed fighters and bombers expand enormously. The value of Federation Bombers virtually disappeared with the loss of drones. Yes, there are photons, but the accuracy issue still means getting successful hits with photons is not assured.

Plus, the value of the drone wall/drone stack is not just the potential damage inflicted on enemy ships and attrition units.

And that does not begin to address the value of drones as a “damage sponge”. (I mean), every enemy weapon used to attack Federation drones can now be used to directly damage Federation ships.

This will materially change Federation tactics.

For example, the use of scatter packs is now history. And apparently nothing replaces it.

Means that the BPV of Federation ships is now overstated since the Federation is markedly weaker on both offense and defense.

Analysis will have to be done, but at a guess droneless General War era ships(and later) might well be 10% out of balance, more if you account for the greater value of fast (speed 32) drones.

Carriers have been defanged. No drones means Federation fighters (and bombers, I suppose) will, more resemble Carnivons than just about any other empire.

Unless we come up with a direct fire substitute for drones, the Federation will be seriously overpowered against drone and plasma armed empires.

Yes, I Did read Mikes proposal for a energized eight round drone G black that inflicts phaser energy damage on drones and plasma torpedos.

It looks like a viable substitute for type Vi dog fight drones and ADD rounds, but it does not replace the value of federation drones being targeted by enemy defensive point defense phaser fire, Nor does it account for the impact the presence of a drone wall has on enemy movement in a tactical situation.

My suggestion is that something else needs to replace drones to account for the value that drones impart to the Federation ships.

Tough proposition, this something else has to inflict damage at about the same level that drones do in the case of a successful hit, as well as the deterrent value that a drone stack has on dissuading an enemy from moving into a hex that has drones in it.

Unless you have something like that effect, droneless Federation ships, fighters and drones are at a disadvantage.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 03:45 pm: Edit

Mnor quibble. Federation MRS shuttles are armed with drones. Their availability (MRS shuttles) is Y150. If you take the drone rails away from the Federation MRS, there is pretty much nothing to replace them with but a phaser-2 (the Lyran solution) as a photon would seem to be a non-starter..

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 04:15 pm: Edit

SPP:

Well, do note that you don't have to lose the drone rails, you just don't have drones to put on them. I would expect that superiority fighters would be making some heavy use of RALADs. (Or the fighters would be completely different. I am open to either path.)

I would not expect the Fed MRS to have a photon. Yes, using the Tholians or Lyrans as a guideline to adjust for the loss of drones is where I'd likely head. Alternatively (as I forget when ADDs are invented), giving them a 4-space ADD rack (or just four half-rails for RALADs) is possible, too.

Jeff:

Yes, I am very well aware of what the loss of drones implies. The fact that the Federation fleet will have to use new tactics and approaches is kinda the whole point of the exercise. Why do this if they just fly the same?

A few of those things will require some adjustment (up to and including the possibility of using gunboats), but something the Feds will just have to lump. The Lyrans, Tholians, and Vudar don't have drones, and they work. That's what this effort is about: Making the Federation work without drones (and plasma). Bonus points for needing the fewest changes.

And, aside from a defensive secondary weapon (whether it is the "energized ADD" or not), I don't think a whole new weapon made from scratch is necessary. The reason I started with the "energized ADD" is because it is based on existing systems already in the game and is guaranteed to not be able to break the game. Making something completely new is a complete wildcard.

And again, the point is to make the Feds fly differently. The point is to remove the clouds of drones coming from the Federation fleet. That is a feature, not a flaw.

Eddie:

You lump it. Again, the Lyrans and Tholians don't have it. The Vudar do something weird. The modern Paravians and Carnivon don't have that. It is what it is and you live with it.

Mike:

No, what I am suggesting is way worse than an AFD. An AFD is a full Ph-G and ADD-12. I suggested an ADD-8 (basically) than can damage plasma if energy is applied. And way less of them, too. (There were general four AFDs on Frax ships; there will only be one or two per Federation ship.)

And no Ph-G deployment beyond what they have historically. Great for escorts and such, but not for general deployment.

Alex:

No. No, I am not.

My suggested weapon is literally just an ADD that can also damage plasma warheads. That's it. I give it 8 rounds and a third reload to mimic Federation Type-G drone racks, instead of basing it on an ADD-12. But, despite the non-standard rack, it is just an ADD rack that can receive energy to allow it to damage plasmas.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 04:20 pm: Edit

Not so minor, really.

During fast drone era (speed 32), the twenty drone space drone stockpile (assuming all are upgraded to fast drone speeds as a result of the drone load out calculation), represents a “hidden” BPV strength available to the player.

granted, the stockpile is effectively “free” as a result of how the rule was written... but still, if a player effectively uses those drones in combat it can be decisive.

Even if not used, a MRS is clearly more effective using drones than not. The ability to launch a ECM drone should not be dismissed out of hand.

Some players might be thrilled to have a rechargeable phaser 2, but for my BPVs, I would rather have 2 extra phaser 3s instead of an additional phaser 2.

And I would still argue that the drones impart more value than either 2 *phaser 3 or a phaser2.

By Scott Tenhoff (Scottt) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 04:31 pm: Edit

So does Heavy/Light Photons from the Omega-Octant FRA get incorporated into the seekerless Feds?

(Serious Question)

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 05:00 pm: Edit

Drone armed fighters (or an MRS shuttle) have some value in attacking enemy ships. Take away the drones and, yes, they become almost purely defensive (like the Carnivons). Worse, the lack of "Special drones" makes them even more vulnerable to "Special drones" as the Klingon fighters able to use them will bring multi-warhead drones to the fight. The top-line Federation F-15 and F-14 might stand off, but the F-18 will be swept from space. Having to depend on phasers to damage enemy ships will of necessity simply make them mover vulnerable to the T-bomb defense.

You are also losing access to heavy drones (launched by drogues).

Not to mention that you lose access to Drone-Captors and Drone-DefSats.

And what are we replacing the Type-H drone racks on Starbases and Stellar Fortresses wit (I assume the ADD-30s will simply become the new drone defense system) h? Of the type-D drone racks of Battle Stations and Sector bases?

Another thing to take into account is that ADDs are very short ranged and I assume your ADD replacement has the same range, and counter drone used to be the role of the weaker drone user.

(The above are just an observation and some other points to consider).

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 05:10 pm: Edit

Scott:

That is not a direction I was particularly looking for (with one possible exception) as it would be heavily deviating from trying to keep the changes as small as possible. But neither am I completely ruling it out.

The one possible exception is fighters. Depending on how fighter arrangements are made, it might make sense to use a "fighter photon" (which is basically just a renamed light photon) that is only used with fighters. I am not sold on that either, because of how it would affect A-20s and heavier fighters. But it is always a possibility if it makes assault photon fighters more palatable or workable.

Jeff:

You are making obvious statements about how useful drones are and how important they can be. As I have already said, I know this. As does pretty much everyone else here. You keep stating why the Feds will be weaker if they don't have drones. Again, that's understood and why I hope we can talk about ways to mitigate, work around, or deal with it.

The point of the discussion isn't to detail each and every way that removing drones hurts the Feds. The point is to come up with what the Feds would look like in SFB without drones. And, in the end, if it doesn't work, it doesn't work. If you think that's not a worthwhile goal, that's fine. Just say so.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 05:10 pm: Edit

I think the heavy/light photons might be a bit too far from the baseline - though light photons could be an alternate fighter weapons.

Mike W, the short-range cannon (SRC) is an energized variant of the ADD developed by the FRA (displaced Feds that later got a few random Klingons and Lyrans) because one of the main local powers used super jumbo drones (tachyon missiles) that standard ADD's just didn't do much to. In short, they cost 0.5 energy to arm and fire (while also tracking ammo), do damage based on size-class of the target (the most to SC7 and a bit less to SC6, but are capable of doing a point or two to larger targets).

The upshot is that you are already heading down a path that has some precedent - albeit Omega precedent, but that this is explicitly ADD-derived tech by Federation expatiates that does give it pretty firm grounding. And whereas the FRA was desperately trying to bootstrap itself into a defensive position after its sudden transferal to an unknown region of space, the Federation proper would have far more resources to generate an analogue that incorporates the anti-plasma functionality among any other differences.

By A David Merritt (Adm) on Thursday, April 01, 2021 - 06:02 pm: Edit

An interesting idea that deserves serious debate.

Given that web (particularly cast web), ESGs, and the Vudar IPG give various forms of movement limitations, and/or ECM, the Tholians, Lyrans, and Vudar, have counters to the effects of drones, and the Carnivons and Paravians are seeking weapon users already. The Feds will be cheaper without drone speed upgrade costs, but I'm not sure that will cover the dynamic differences in combat.

Fighters; Perhaps, turn the F-18 into the F/A-18, and have it carry less drone equivalents, and add a light photon, and put F-16s on the various CVs in mixed squadrons, like plasma empires use. This should be a workable solution for fighters.