Archive through April 04, 2021
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: STELLAR SHADOWS:
Stellar Shadows proposals :
Feds Without Seeking Weapons:
Archive through April 04, 2021
The path I see the discussion is taking,
relies on taking current tech ie fighter rails
and removing drones....
It should be starting at zero on that regard....
If the point is Feds "NEVER" have drones,
there wouldn't have been rails to worry about what
is put on them and fighter weapons would have to be designed into the platform....
Mark, I would suggest that as fighter technology happened concurrently with all the empires more or less at the same time. what ever the Federation developed instead of drones has to fit along with the existing systems other empires had.
There are currently three ideas, one Mike West’s CDs(close-in Defense System.)
A second is to adopt new photon technology, such as light photons .
A third is to replace drones with single shot phaser pods that use the existing drone launch limits so a player can’t dump everything in a single salvo.
Doubtless there will be other ideas.
My opinion, is all three are moving into unknown territory. There will need to be playtesting, and that takes time. (I mean, really. How much time does Petrick really need for sleep? 
Comment/observation: If the point of this is to make the Federation like they appeared on Star Trek (the Original Series) I would note that there were no fighters, or PFs. The only thing we ever saw were ships, the only planetary defenses were "Disruptors" (Eminiar VII I think, not sure of the Roman numeral). So just strike everything but ships (Franz Joseph designed more ships).
Quote:A third is to replace drones with single shot phaser pods that use the existing drone launch limits so a player can’t dump everything in a single salvo.
You AREN'T replacing drones, as FEDs never had them....
Any weapons placement for fighters needs to start from ground up, new ideas not a swap....
As I see it, the way the discussion is going, just leads to drones, just at a later period....
SPP wrote:
Quote:Comment/observation: If the point of this is to make the Federation like they appeared on Star Trek (the Original Series) I would note that there were no fighters, or PFs. The only thing we ever saw were ships, the only planetary defenses were "Disruptors" (Eminiar VII I think, not sure of the Roman numeral). So just strike everything but ships (Franz Joseph designed more ships).
Yeah. About that ...
Believe me, that thought did occur to me. Especially since the non-drone fighters will likely suck so bad. However, then entire SFU setting is built around providing those attrition units, so taking them out would require some fundamental rules changes to be able to deal with the effects of that. I was not aiming to go in that direction.
But, also, that isn't the reason for the idea. It is a contributing factor (Real Feds didn't use no stinkin' drones!) for going down this path, but not the main one. The main driver is just to do what it says on the tin: "Make a version of the Feds that do not use drones (or plasma." This isn't meant to be a pure old-gen TOS-only Federation. It isn't meant to make fundamental rules changes (no SS or fighters). It is just to make a recognizable alternative Federation that doesn't use drones (or plasma).
Now, doing a more TOS-pure Federation would be a fun exercise that I'd gladly run through. But doing so would require a significant rework of the game by either removing attrition units from everyone else (which would be much more TOS-ish) or giving these TOS-Feds something that can more effective combat it.
"Now, doing a more TOS-pure Federation would be a fun exercise that I'd gladly run through. But doing so would require a significant rework of the game by either removing attrition units from everyone else (which would be much more TOS-ish) or giving these TOS-Feds something that can more effective combat it."
Mike, I don't see how you can remove drones from the Feds without addressing this. In for a penny, in for a pound.
On a few subjects:
On light/heavy photons. The base idea of this whole alternative is that when the historical Feds adopted drones, these Feds did not. Everything prior to that (unless we change the Andorians, too) remains unchanged. The use of light/heavy photons is something that would need to have happened from the very start of photon technology. I doubt it would be something they adopted along the way. As such, I don't think light/heavy photons really fit into this alternative. Now, I do think writing up a full light/heavy photon presentation for the Feds would be fun, and I'd be glad to work on that, this isn't that effort.
There are multiple types of photons, however. They are:
Ship Photons: These are standard photons that are used on all ships and units SC4+.
PF Photons: These are standard photons that have a maximum range of 12. Other than the maximum range, they operate as ship photons. They are used by SC5 units.
Fighter Photons: These are half-size photons that do half damage (4 points). They take one turn and two points of power to charge. They are only charged in freezers for fighters and cannot be mounted on either PFs or ships. They have a maximumm range of 12 and cannot be overloaded. They can have a proximity fuse.
On the FRA. I have to admit that I am not interested in rehashing the FRA. The FRA is the FRA and needs to stay as the FRA. While I am sure that there are ideas that could be gleaned from it, I don't think using any FRA-specific systems will help with this alternative Fed. The FRA should be itself, and this should be itself without any forced merging. I believe that they should remain their own things.
On the Close-in Defense System. I am going to stick with my original idea as the starting point: It is an 8-space rack with ammo that works like an ADD system, but can only take CDS and ADD ammo. (It just doesn't have the software needed to fire or control a type-VI drone.) It comes with two reloads and gains a third in Y175. It uses ADD rules for hit probability, range, and damage. In addition, if 1/4 of a point of power is applied to a shot, making it an energized shot, then it can be fired at a plasma torpedo warhead and, if it hits, does four points of phaser damage. This is cumulative with any other phaser damage the plasma warhead takes. An energized shot can also damage SC5 units for the same damage as done to a shuttle (1-6). Energy can be applied in EA or with reserve power.
It is introduced in Y140 without the ability to energize shots. Any Federation unit that has a drone or ADD rack prior to Y140 simply loses the weapon (for the appropriate BPV reduction) and gains this system in Y140 as a CDS refit (the refit costing whatever it saved by deleting the system in the first place). Post Y140 all drones and ADDs are replaced by CDS. (I am sure there are some exceptions, and ships with drones as the primary weapons just don't exist in this alternative history.) At some point later, maybe Y160 or so, the CDS gains the ability to fire energized shots. I'd just wrap it into the Y175 refit, but that is probably way too late.
(A nomeclature comment: When I say "replaced" above, obviously, the CDS system isn't replacing anything within this alternative history. This is just a shorthand that means "when a ship in the primary history would use a drone or ADD rack, a CDS is instead use in this alternative history.")
This is the starting point. If the SC5 thing is too much, we can pull it. If the range is too short, we can increase it. If the phaser damage needs adjusting, that can be done. But, it has to start with something and using the ADD system is as good a place as any.
On PFs. Since their fighters are not that effective, these Feds use PFs. All non-combat PFs are unchanged Thunderbolts of the appropriate type. All combat PFs have a fixed base phaser arrangement of 1xPh1-LS, 1xPh1-RS, and 1xPh3-RX. All weapons listed below are in addition to these three phasers.
Thunderbolt-A: 1xPhot-FA, 2xCDS; leader version available
Thunderbolt-B: 2xPhot-FA, 1xCDS; leader version available
Thunderbolt-E: 3xCDS; no leader version
Thunderbolt-P: 2xPh-1-FH, 1xCDS; leader version available
Thunderbolt-S: 2xSen, 1xCDS
Despite its designation, the Th-B was always intended to be the primary gunboat. But, due to production issues on making enough PF photons, that didn't work out and it is more a 50/50 split of Th-B and Th-A. Almost universally, casual PFs are Th-A (or Th-E on carrier groups) as the insufficient numbers of Th-B are reserved for formal flotillas. Typically there are 3 Th-B in a flotilla, either a leader and two standard, or three standard. Any Th-B in a flotilla above 3 means that another flotilla is making do without.
On Fighters. This will take a lot of work, so this is just an outline of intent. I'd like to see 50/50 assault/superiority mix as the pure superiority fighters are going to be unimpressive. But that might not be permissible. The assault fighters would be built on a single fighter photon tube with two charges. They'd use the Z-D as a basis, though I would hope to see speed and ability increases over the years, to keep pace with the superiority fighters. The superiority fighters would have a bunch of CDS shots attached to weapons mounts (similar to RALADs). They'd have the same evolution from F-8, to F-18, to F-18B. The CVA probably has much more impressive fighters with F-14/A-10 comparables. There would likely be F-16 and F-20 equivalents for export. Probably no F-4 or F-15 equivalents. The A-20 equivalent is likely built around two fighter photon tubes, one CDS system, and some weapon mounts (for more CDS shots). The F-101 is an up-built F-18. There is no F-111. I dunno about bombers. Work them out later.
This will all affect the Gorn fighters, so that needs to guide the development of the F-20, F-18, and A-20.
I think you just need an A18 with one photon-4 and two phaser-3s. No rails, just fighter.
As an aside, I am seeing that we are getting some really cool ideas for various alternative Feds going here. From this discussion (and one from the past), there are some fun ideas for alternative Federations:
- No drones/plasmas (the primary topic here).
- Light/Heavy photons (from P6).
- No attrition units or drones (from SPP).
- No saucers, where all the members keep their own national ships (I think Gary from a different time/topic).
The big problem with something like this is that it will be going in the opposite direction of R4J. R4J introduces multiple alternative Romulans, but they all share the same superset of SSDs. This set of alternative Federations requires separate sets of SSDs for each alternative. Probably makes such an effort (and probably all the sub-efforts) infeasible.
Quote:"Now, doing a more TOS-pure Federation would be a fun exercise that I'd gladly run through. But doing so would require a significant rework of the game by either removing attrition units from everyone else (which would be much more TOS-ish) or giving these TOS-Feds something that can more effective combat it."
Mike, I don't see how you can remove drones from the Feds without addressing this. In for a penny, in for a pound.
Because, as I just stated, this isn't my inspiration. Just because I don't want drones doesn't mean that fighters have to go.
Besides, now that I think about it more, doing this is utterly unnecessary. If this effort is worth doing and gets done, including with the fighters and PFs, then this further point is also done, and done for free. As a final part of the overall text, we simply add something like the following:
"The above alternative Federation remakes them without drones and plasmas within the context of the overall SFU limiting changes to other empires to nothing or (in the case of the Gorns) almost nothing. As a further extension of this effort, eliminate all fighters and gunboats from all empires. This will give a universe that is much more in line with the feel of the classic TV series."
If that isn't sufficient, it would not be very difficult at all to specifically outline in a few pages what has to be deleted to get rid of fighters and gunboats. That's the easy part. The hard part is what I am trying to focus on here.
SVC said:
Quote:I think you just need an A18 with one photon-4 and two phaser-3s. No rails, just fighter.
If that acceptable, then I'd go for that!
So, the fighter lineup would be something like:
A-8: one phot-4, one ph-3, speed 8, damage 8, one chaff
A-18: one phot-4, two ph-3, speed 13, damage 10, two chaff
A-18B: A-18, but speed 15
A-14: one phot-4, one ph-G, speed 15, damage 12, two chaff
A-20: two phot-4, one CDS rack, one Ph-2, two ph-3, speed 12, damage 18, other stuff.
Bombers: figure it out later.
For the most part, no other fighters. Specifically, no analogs for the A-10, F-15, F-20, F-16, F-101, F-111.
This means that the CVA likely has 12xA-14s and 12xA-18s. The CVB probably doesn't exist. Any other carrier with F-14s or F-15s in the main history get A-14s instead. No ship can have more than 12 A-14s.
Then, for the Gorns:
G-8: has one Pl-F instead of 2xPl-D
G-12: as in main history
G-18: has one Pl-F instead of 2xPl-D
G-30: as in main history
Making A-20 into G-30 is close enough. Making G-8 and G-18 are straight conversions, though it means their initial fighter groups are Pl-F heavy. The G-12 becomes their own fighter that the develop off of the G-18 using capture Romulan samples. It would have a different development path, but give them a superiority fighter that the Feds would be unable to directly provide. This means that Gorn fighter groups would change to be 50/50 in general, with the earliest groups all assault.
Hmmm, did the Feds get their initial fighter push from the Kzinti, in which case, rails would be a known thing (the question was on whether it was worth starting new drone lines for the fighters) ...
History had that guy Girard thing about stealing a Kzinti fighter and flying it to the Federation.
I can’t remember if it’s been retconned, or erased from history or if it’s still valid but it was a part of the history.
minor suggestion, don't have these "alternate Feds" use the same ?-## as the Historic Feds do.
So no A-10, F-14->18, etc.
Call it A-12+A-24, F-24->28, etc.
Just so it's easy to remember where the fighter belongs (which reality)
Ordinarily, I would agree with the premise of not subtracting from what makes the Federal Republic distinct from its counterparts back in the Alpha Octant. So while I wouldn't necessarily see a concurrent development of the SRC in a "no drone" Federation as a deal-breaker in that regard, I also respect the wish to keep that weapon unique to the Omega Octant.
However, from an engineering perspective, or perhaps from a doctrinal one, I would still suggest bearing the various limitations faced by the FRA in mind. If only to help frame what could, or perhaps could not, be possible for fighters with equivalent weapons (such as light photons) in this instance.
-----
In terms of squadron doctrine, I would prefer a "no drone" Federation to keep to the 2:1 ratio of superiority versus heavy weapon fighters used by several other empires with equivalent restrictions: not just the FRA, but the likes of the "lost empire" Carnivons in Module C6.
In technology terms, the FRA torpedo fighters have two light photons with one shot apiece. I defer to the experts as to whether the "no drone" Feds would somehow be able to mount a single launcher with two shots instead, but it might be that the engineering required prevents any empire from loading more than a single shot in a size-1 fighter's light photon launcher.
-----
As a balance option, could it be possible to limit those remaining drone-armed empires to only a handful of drone types?
To put it another way, were the "no drone" Fed concept to one day be ported over to Borders of Madness, it would then exist in a game system which already limits drones to only one type, albeit with different drone speeds in different time periods.
Perhaps drones here could be cut back also, if not quite to a similar extent. So most ships could be limited to type-I drones (or type-VII for a first-generation X-ship); fighters would be restricted to type-Is and type-VIs; drone bombardment ships would be the only ones allowed to operate type-IIIXXs; while most of the "special" warhead types would either be dropped or else severely restricted.
In such a "streamlined" drone environment, the Feds might not feel quite the same amount of external pressure to adopt drones that they faced historically, which might make it less of a issue to "only" give them fighters equivalent to those used by other droneless Alpha Octant fighters.
On a side note, I would have preferred the likes of the Lyrans/LDR and Seltorians to not have been given drone-armed fighters. Perhaps a similar "what-if" setup could speculate on those empires deploying droneless fighter types also?
Gary:
No drones means no drones. When I was first working this idea, I had wanted the fleet elements to not have drones, but the civilian and guard units could. But that doesn't work. If part of the Federation has drones, then all the Federation has drones and they will behave accordingly. So, if some of their fighters have drones, then all of their fighters will have drones because it is more effective that way. And if their fighters have drones, sooner or later their ships will have drones, too. (Lyrans and Seltorians are different, as they aren't using their own fighters. The Feds would be using their own fighters, so drones would make their way onto the ships.)
I was going to go with 50/50 assault/superiority split, but even then the superiority fighters don't get drones. They would use phasers and CDS shots. However, SVC seemed to indicate that 100% assault, with half-photons, was good, so I'm grabbing that with both hands.
I am pushing very hard for "one tube; two charges" because that does two important things. The first is that it keeps them from having a massive hammer-blow on a single turn. The second is that it gives them more staying power with two turns worth of shots. (On single space fighters. The A-20 gets two tubes, each with two charges.)
Finally, I would swear I've seen Lyran native fighters somewhere. It seems like that has already been done. Then, the Seltorians could just license those (instead of Klingon fighters) and slap in a PC for the disruptor.
To clarify, I was not suggesting that the Feds be the ones to use a more limited set of drones. What I was suggesting was that, in setup where the Feds (and possibly the Lyrans/LDR and Seltorians) used no drones at all, those empires which did still use drones (Klingons, Kzintis, etc.) have their drone usage pared back to, if not quite the same draconian measures taken over in Federation Commander, at least to a point where they are not left with quite so many advantages in play relative to their not-drone-using opponents.
Although I would be okay with the Andorians still using their distinct Early Years drones, as this is in character with their historical development as outlined in Prime Directive Federation. So long as they discard them once they swap out their "home-built" hulls with the "G-series" types being handed down from Star Fleet in the Y120s, in the same manner that the Q'Naabian plasma drones were discarded once the unified Inter-Stellar Concordium settled on plasma torpedo development instead.
The only direct-fire Lyran fighters I have seen in print are the conjectural "Snapper" fighters proposed for the LDR in Captain's Log #41; those are based on imported Hydran Stingers.
ALTERNATELY, the Feds developed a "light photon pod" that could go on what would otherwise be "special heavy rails." Max 2. So the F14 would have 2 light photon pods, 2 or 4 ralads (ADD) and a pair of phaser 3 pods...
Maybe the fighter loses a point of speed a DFR per light photon pod until the pod is fired...
Kind of like how a "drop tank" slows a 21st century fighter...
It's one thing to develop a two-space pod which can hold a charge for a fighter-mounted heavy weapon. As a case in point, the Iridani were unable to design a fighter-mounted focused energy beam which could itself hold a FEB charge; they had to store the arming energy in special double-sized pods (OJ3.36) instead. Which is not to say that there should be such a thing as a pod (of any size) capable of holding a light photon charge (for UFP or FRA fighters); but at least there is a precedent of sorts in the broader game system, if the idea were to be pursued further.
It's quite another to allow the actual weapon itself to be fired from external rails; I would not be in favour of allowing this for light photons, for either the UFP or the FRA.
Captains Log 28 The Lyran Tactical Sphere Torpedo.
There is no such thing as a "photon pod". That has been a dead suggestion for years outside this effort. They will not exist. This is well past dead horse territory, and that has nothing to do with this topic.
In addition SVC already outlined a fighter solution. Unless I misunderstood, it is honestly more than I would have asked for. I'm good with it. (As a bonus Scott gets his wish for the fighter designations.)
As for other empires' drones, I do NOT want to change any of that. Obviously Gorn fighters will be impacted by this, but everyone else should not have any effects to their own histories. Everyone else gets to keep their drone toys.
Going back a little farther in the discussion, if the Feds got fighter tech from Kzintis, that has zero impact on what the Fed fighters look like. The Kzinti got the tech from Hydrans (heck, I think everyone originally got it from the Hydrans), so I do not see that as indicator whether or not Feds would use drones.
One minor thing that needs to be figured out is what the Feds would do for a BCH in this situation. The BCG and BCF are off the table. That leaves the BCJ and I would be shocked (pun intended) if the Feds accepted that as their standard production BCH.
There is also the BC1 (R2.A31), with phaser-1s in the "gun deck"; as well as the BSC (R2.A42), with special sensors in the "gun deck".
Mike West:
So far, you have been vague about the exact proposal, aside from constantly saying “No Drones”, you have not stated explicitly what you want this proposal to be.
Just reading the posts to date, it appears to start on or about year 150.
First you will need to state definitely what your alternative MRS configuration actually is.
Second, just moving chronologically, you need to state what changes you are demanding for the Federation MS class ships. To give an example, you might want to consider adopting a ADD launcher to replace the year 158 type A drone rack. Or pick some thing else.
It’s your proposal, state what you mean.
At some point, historically, the Federation adopted bombers (historically, it was the B-36). But as you have repeatedly stated “No Drones”, there needs to be an alternative that does not use drones. What alternative do you suggest? The B-36 YIS was 162. Several of the kit bombers YIS was year 160, what alternative drone-less bombers would you suggest?
This is years before the year 165 plus refits happen, so you can’t just say this proposal started in year 165 as the Federation was already using drones.
Oh wait, didn’t some one say the GSC had a drone A rack back in year 142? Guess you need to start with year 142 in making changes to the Federation fleet.
Some one also suggested that you use different names and numbers for your proposed fighters so they are instantly recognizable as “No Drone Fed Fighters”
I am just pointing out that just saying “no drones” is not enough.
You have avoided saying it, but this proposal is huge in the depth and complexity involved.
Just looking at Petrick’s time alone, there will need to be a new weapons table added to every Federation SSD, not to mention replacing the existing drones racks on every SSD, each drone rack chart table, deleting the plus refit from every page.
The list of SSD pages for each ship includes (but not limited to):
MS,POL,FFG,FF, DD, DDG, DDL,CL,CA,CC,DN,CVA,SCS,DE,FFE,FFR,CLE,GSC,TT,TT+,SC,FEM, etc.
And those are just what I remember off hand. I suspect I missed more SSDs. Plus the tug Pods. Plus auxiliaries.
This isn’t a one page Captains Log thing.
It would replace a regular rules module.
Given the ungodly amount of Petrick’s time, you might just have bumped tos Crawford off of the unofficial ADB special Operations hit list.
When Petrick figures out that he will have to review EVERY RULE EVER PUBLISHED by ADB to determine if it conflicts with your proposed Droneless weapon system, he might just go looking for you.
(Joke, Joke! I would never suggest Petrick would take matters into his own hands! That’s what minions are for!)
Jason:
As Gary points out, there is a BC1 (or BCP) that has Ph-1s in the option mounts. Obviously the BCJ is likely present, too, but the phaser variant would be the primary version in this alternative. The standard drone racks would be CDS boxes.
Jeff:
No, this would not be a one-pager in a CL. But then, this isn't eligible for a CL in any case. It would either be several pages in a new SSJ module, or an R2J module similar to the forthcoming R4J module. If it was done as a theoretical R2J, there would likely be multiple alternative histories that get you to the same spot. They would all use the same set of ships, but give multiple paths to get there. (Yes, I have three alternative histories I could go with. Four if we include "no attrition units".)
If this were to be made, the Petrick would be fully aware of what it means and would be on board for the effort. If he isn't on board, then it wouldn't be made. Nothing happen with this without both Steves being fully on board. And if they are on board, the effort is not going to be a surprise.
Except for bombers, which I have intentionally avoided to this point, I have already answered the majority of your questions.
To recap, the key system is the CDS. It replaces what would be the G-rack in the main history. Its initial form is invented in Y140. Any ship that would have had a drone or ADD rack prior to Y140 deletes the system with no replacement. In Y140, they get the initial CDS system as a refit. At some point later, the CDS system gets its full form; this could be anywhere between Y150 and Y165. In Y175 it get it third reload.
So, any ship that uses one or more drone or ADD racks as secondary systems replaces them with CDS racks on a one-for-one basis. Any ships that use drone racks as their primary systems don't exist. (Obviously, any ship that uses plasma at all doesn't exist, either.) In the end, ship-by-ship specifics will need to be made. But, for right now, over 90% of the cases should be fairly obvious. That's good enough for this discussion. Exceptions can be identified as things progress and dealt with as needed.
Also, as long as the CDS continues to be based on the ADD and G-rack, then existing SSDs are reusable enough. Sure, the headliners would likely need new versions, but all those secondary ships would be fine based on the ones that are done.
Auxiliaries haven't really been dealt with, but should be pretty straightforward. For the most part, it's all phaser armed auxiliaries. I am sure it'd be possible to use CDS instead, but phasers are probably the main option. Maybe, in this alternative, they are willing to use PF photons (with a max range of 12). That'd be cool. But maybe not. That's a point of discussion that would have to be decided. But, while limiting, auxiliaries should be pretty clear at this point.
Fighters and gunboats have already been covered. Carriers are what they are; tenders are fine; escorts are fine, but the mix might change.
Bases will have to be visited, but nothing should be too bad.
So, the basics are already here. With the above in mind, the real question is this: are Feds without drones interesting? That's really the main question.