Wait a second. The Fed Cadet CA only has 2 photons and the Klink Cadet D7 only has 2 disruptors. How was the Fed player alternating photons and using 2 each turn?

Did I miss something here?

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Friday, July 03, 2015 - 10:24 pm: Edit

I was thinking that the ships were the full size versions in the Cadet rules so almost Fed CAR versus almost D7. Shield reinforcement is not permitted until switching to the full size ships.

Brick: is about 20 on a CAR doing standard load photons (8 to photons, 4 to HK, 4 to TAC, possibly slightly different because of specifics of Cadet Rules).

The player has reached one of the flaws of the Cadet Rules. The fix is to start moving them to the full SFB rules which will give the Klingon opportunities to beat the Fed.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandor) on Monday, August 29, 2016 - 07:35 pm: Edit

Any body can give me thoughts tactics for Klingon disrupter fighter,s.

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Monday, August 29, 2016 - 10:05 pm: Edit

What opponent are the Klingon fighters facing?

Fire disruptors at range 10 and try to cripple stingers.

By Mike Strain (Evilmike) on Tuesday, August 30, 2016 - 08:54 am: Edit

Klink disruptor fighters.

.......

What Rich said.

Don't worry, they probably won't live to get a second shot.

By Michael Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Tuesday, August 30, 2016 - 02:28 pm: Edit

how well does the range 10 disr vs fusion trade compare?

Because disruptors should gain a lot at range 8 while fusions have to get a LOT closer to work...

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Tuesday, August 30, 2016 - 02:49 pm: Edit

disruptors on fighters do the same at eight as at ten, assuming they can fire at all.

If I recall, the Z-D has one disruptor, which does not really compare well to two fusion beams.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandor) on Tuesday, August 30, 2016 - 05:16 pm: Edit

Actually my problem is I am playing Jindarians in the campaign. I get fighters on my asteroid ships. They are armed with 1 light rail gun. About the same fire power as having 1 disrupter. A bit better at range 5 same at ranges 6-10. I was asking about klingon Disr fighters as a base line of how I can use the Jindarian fighters.

Should i lead my ships in are follow them to perhaps get a shot into a damaged shield? Mind you more likely will be against Lyran are FEDs are even Romulans.

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - 12:51 am: Edit

Keep them close to the ships and use phasers defensively. Take advantage of the single ranged shot with the LRG to cripple some opposing fighters especially the EWF if it strays forward. Not enough firepower to go it alone.

A risky gambit would be to have the fighters follow the ships. If there is a close pass and shields are knocked down, fly into the shuttle bay and let the prospecting charges do their thing. Prospecting charges will otherwise be nearly useless unless the opponent is very cooperative.

Consider adding chaff pods.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - 09:51 am: Edit

Are there any Jindo fighters with both prospecting charges and LRGs? I thought the early fighters had the prospecting charges and they were replaced by LRGs on later fighters. Am I misremembering?

Gregory - Klingon disruptor fighters aren't a good model for Jindo fighter tactics anyway, since they also have drones. The Jindo fighters, on the other hand, are faster and more durable, if you're talking about late-model fighters.

Tholian is a better comparison - disruptors and phasers versus LRGs and phasers. But the Tholian model also breaks down in that only half the fighters in a Tholian squadron will have disruptors where as every Jindarian fighter in the squadron, except the EW fighter, will have LRGs. This means the Jindos can shoot at longer range about twice as effectively as Tholian fighters can. I'm not saying they should shoot at range-10. That kind of decision would depend on the specific tactical situation. But it is a more viable option for the Jindarians.

Note also the timing issues with fighters firing their LRGs. It's not a fatal weakness by any means but it is something the Jindarians do need to pay attention to.

You already noted the LRG superiority to the disruptor at range-5. An oblique pass to fire at range-5, then turning away and staying out of range-4, followed by a similar attack next turn to fire the other LRG, is good against some opponents. In fact, if you have late-war Meteor-3 megafighters you can make a total of 4 such passes per fighter. And the fact that the Meteor-3 has above-average durability for a single-size fighter means that a good number of them should survive to make multiple passes, though that again depends on the opponent and the over all situation.

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - 02:26 pm: Edit

The Meteor 1 and 2 fighters have a single LRG and 2 prospecting charges. The Meteor 3 has 2 LRGs.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - 03:04 pm: Edit

Ahh. Then I hadn't quite remembered the fighters (other than the Meteor-3) correctly.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandor) on Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - 05:31 pm: Edit

Well I did get more of a response then i thought i would. The only problem with keeping them with the ships. IS using the ships rail guns in defensive MODE. Yes the prospecting charges are not that great but if the enemy ships are stopped are going slow.. are a base. Then It is like having a phaser-G

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - 09:53 pm: Edit

Using rail guns in defensive mode involves time. The opponent needs to launch enough seeking weapons to be worth a rail gun shot. That gives the fighters several impulses to get clear while the ship moves continues its movement. You may want to practice a couple of simulated attacks to get the interaction down before playing against a live opponent. Still easier than ESG planning.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Friday, February 14, 2020 - 07:28 pm: Edit

From a background perspective, it's been said that the RKL was deemed to be something of a failure: the Klingons lacked the kind of logistical support for the SparrowHawk base hull which the Romulans had built up for the Kestrels - though it is noted that the three KDRs which ended up on the other side of the "exchange" were in turn problematic, as the D5 base hull used few of the components which the Romulans had stocked up to support their other KRs.

But on a purely tactical level, do any Klingon players here have any thoughts on how useful, or not, this ship has been for them?

As it happens, there are distinct RKL ("classic") and RKL+ ("Mongoose") minis in both 3788 and 3125 scale over on Shapeways. For example, if you click the 3D view option at this link, you can rotate and zoom in to see the Klingon trefoils which have been added to the hull!

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 12:03 pm: Edit

Posit you have a klingon heavy RTN hunter. So the base hull has already lost something to install some Special Sensors.

SCS, CVA, B10 (Insatiable?), C7cvs, C7 BCS, whatever.

Would you think that having a SFG is better than what gets ripped out of your ship to install a SFG also?

NOTE that you are a solitary hunter, and almost certainly will be the lone base for repairs/ drone reloads for your attrition units. At least until your X/ Fast squadron support comes...

And yes, I know there is a limit to the number of SFGs you can have. 1 per year is what the F&E guys say.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 12:09 pm: Edit

An RTN Hunter that cannot destroy the base on its own is not a very good RTN Hunter I should think.

SFGs cannot place into stasis things that have positional stabilizers, like RTN bases.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 12:27 pm: Edit

SPP,

But as I noted earlier today in the "Federation Special Heavy Carriers" topic, Module X1R describes several ships that don't have special sensors but were used as RTN hunters, specifically backing up the scouts that found the nodes. The example I cited in that post was the Federation HVX Advanced Technology Heavy Fighter Carrier. But the module includes several other examples. I believe some of the larger Andro bases couldn't be taken down by single-ship RTN Hunters (well... maybe the Kzinti SSCS...) and could really only be attacked by a "scout supported by a dedicated attack force" approach.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 05:56 pm: Edit

Alan Trevor:

I have briefly checked, and the references to hunting down RTN nodes while somewhat sloppy, for ships without special sensors applies to the "back up" forces. No ship without special sensors hunted, but ships without special sensors were in the back up forces to respond to a found base.

It is the same as with non-X ships. A scout finds a base, and if the base is weak enough or the scout has enough firepower the bases is destroyed, unless it can be succored by Andromedan units. When the base is found and the scout is to weak to kill it, a call goes out for a task force to destroy it. Task forces are standing by to attack bases, but they take time to run up on the newly found base (which may have detected the scout looking for it and so be in the process of getting out of dodge). So X-ships filled out the squadrons because they were faster than non-X ships and could reach the base faster.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, June 05, 2020 - 06:23 pm: Edit

SPP,

I agree. I don't believe even an X-ship can find the RTN node without special sensors. If anything I wrote implied that I did, that's my bad. I do believe that ships without special sensors have a role in the overall RTN hunting campaign as the scout will call them in if it finds a base too large or heavily defended to tackle on its own.

It seems to me that we should distinguish two cases.

Case 1: The RTN node is "small". The scout needs to be able to attack such bases by itself because such small bases can be very quickly and easily re-deployed by the Andros. It can't call for a reinforcing squadron and wait, because the base will be gone by the time the squadron gets there. PFTs and Scout Carriers are particularly useful here because the attrition units they carry greatly increase the scout's firepower.

Case 2: The RTN node is "large". The scout can't destroy the node by itself and has to call on reinforcements, Fortunately for the Galactics, it takes the Andros longer to re-deploy these "large" bases so there is a decent chance of th reinforcements arriving in time to kill it, especially if they are X-ships.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Saturday, June 06, 2020 - 06:23 pm: Edit

I would posit that the Andro reinforcements are either close or not.

And you never know which is the case.

OBVIOUSLY, you want a bad arsed killer scout doing your "sniffing" With attrition units to help is nice.

BUT, you work with what ships you have. So you MIGHT have to search with light scouts and just accept that some are single use minesweepers, that likely will die even if most of the Andros are fairly far away.

From the SVC discussion, this "sniffing" process is like you wandering around in the dark with your flashlight. When you get to your search area, you light up the neighborhood to see if you can see the bad guys. UNFORTUNATLEY, the bad guys know when you hit them with the beam...

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Sunday, October 18, 2020 - 10:17 pm: Edit

Played a FFV squadron battle tonight. 225 BPV, Y180.

He took the Hydrans. So a Frigate Carrier, plus a FFA. Stingers.


I took Klingons, F5v plus E4E. Converted my 8 fighters to 4 ZHB, 2 with Megapacks and 2 with WBP. the EWF as the second Megafighter. All Type VI converted to RALADs.

Launched early and cruised over to the center at speed 24 (22 for the F5) with the fighters and escort stacked. Dumped a SP targeted on the escort with 6 type I, set to pop at range 20. He was going slowish (around 18).

He launched his fighters the impulse after my fighters fired one IF drone each at the escort. They are speed 31 (all ace pilots). So now he has 10 If drones closing on his escort.

End of the turn, we are at range 4 (I miss timed it) so I fire the fighters P2 at his fighters (he has WBP turned on, so 2 die, 1 is crippled), he moves on imp 2 straight at me, I slip so we are at range 3. All 4 fighters fire a Ralad, the Escort fires all 4 ADD. Kill fighters dead, cripple one. Next impulse, I keep to range 3 and kill his last fighters dead with ADD (escort) and P3 fire (fighters).

Fighters fire 8 disruptor shots and hit with 5 out of 8 at range 4 on his escort.

He resigned.

1) I had really good ADD rolls. Hit with 10 of 12 ADD shots at range 3.

2) He apparently didn't review the EW rules. I hAD a ton of defensive EW on my four fighters (the EWF rule really rocks for Heavy fighters), and he never even announced any.

3) And He split his escort from the fighters, allowing me to zork them one at a time.

4) I forgot to fire the two (regular) Disr I paid for in EA turn 1 even though I had him in FA at range 6 before my F5V turned out. OOPS.

5) I mistimed the whole drone launch thing from the fighters. I SHOULD have waited until he launched fighters then launched my Starfish drones. Instead I messed up the timing and I never even got to fire them.

6) He apparently never read the fighter tactics manual (is this still a thing?). I think he should have gone for high speed at the end of the turn with tractors allocated. Ship just holds me for the Fighters to kill...

This is a really odd Price point for Small Carrier groups. Probably should have gone to 250 or down to 200.

Next game I am a Fed and he gets to be any historical neighbor, probably Y180, and he chooses the price point. he hinted BCH levels... Which Fed BCH would you choose?

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, October 19, 2020 - 12:25 am: Edit

---

Quote:

Next game I am a Fed and he gets to be any historical neighbor, probably Y180, and he chooses the price point. he hinted BCH levels... Which Fed BCH would you choose?

---

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, October 19, 2020 - 01:47 pm: Edit

Mike Grafton:

Just so you know, Size Class 4 Carriers canNOT operate Size-2 Fighter (heavy fighters) unless they are able to operate full squadron of six (the only exception to this is a heavy war destroyer operating as a carrier which might have fewer than 6 heavy fighters, e.g., it chooses to use the weapon options as weapons (only 5 heavy fighters in this case). Or it chooses to use one of its large options as something (four APR* as APR, or Battery, or the Four None Weapon Options as Hull or lab or etc.), in which case it will have Four heavy fighters. Or it chooses to have one of the large options and the weapon options as weapon options and what ever, in which case the are three heavy fighters.

But an F5V cannot operate heavy fighters because it cannot carry a full squadron of six. Note that this only applies to size-class-4 carriers (and technically smaller carriers, i.e., Fi-Cons cannot carry heavy fighters), not to size-class-3 carriers which can carry heavy fighters even if not able to operate a full squadron (e.g., a D6V can carry a squadron of Five Heavy Fighters in place of its ten size 1 fighters).

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Monday, October 19, 2020 - 07:02 pm: Edit

Ok. The main reason I choose ZHB was that one of them is cheaper than 2 ZYC.