I am guessing that penal skiffs are the answer. Endless drudgery in one system.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, July 14, 2021 - 04:20 pm: Edit

James Cain:

I have looked at the history, and your basic query is correct. There is no ISF Penal ship between Y105 and Y139. The service dates for the G2 and E3 make them unlikely candidates in any case, and the E1 is not much better given its class history. I am not sure anything can be done, short of as noted using Q-ships (early Q-ships are in service from Y70) and Skiffs (from Y72). The ISF does not operate more than one (1) cruiser hull, and that is its flagship so D3s, D4s, and D6a are out (I found no reference for an LD4J, but I did. not look for it as again, cruisers are not available to the ISF except for its flagship).

By John M. Williams (Jay) on Saturday, August 21, 2021 - 04:28 pm: Edit

I've been able to find multiple references that say that the first Andromedans (an Intruder) appeared in Y166. Is there anything specifying where they appeared/which empire saw them first?

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Saturday, August 21, 2021 - 05:15 pm: Edit

John M. Williams:
'
Other than the year, there is not really anything. Note that the year would be when the Federation first encountered one when it first appeared. But given the development since that time, there would be no reason that other empires did not share information on when they first encountered the Andromedans so that intelligence could put together a time line to help in finding RTN nodes. But not definite data and location is provided in the known history.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Sunday, August 22, 2021 - 11:23 am: Edit

Or that there were encounters where the "Alpha" guys didn't survive to make a report.

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Sunday, August 22, 2021 - 06:11 pm: Edit

Or a pre-Y166 encounter might have been very brief, mischaracterized or misreported.

--Mike

By Steven Zamboni (Szamboni) on Monday, August 23, 2021 - 01:57 pm: Edit

Dark spots on the map with the note "Don't go there".

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Saturday, September 11, 2021 - 01:23 pm: Edit

Ok, someone in the General Discussion topic mentioned the YIS dates for the two Vulcan ships included in Module Y1 is listed as "1". This should obviously be "71" like all of the other initial national fleet ships. The reason I say "obviously" is because the history clearly states the Terrans/Alpha Centaurans developed tactically warp in Y62. (OK they developed it before then, and launched the first ship in Y62, but it's the date we have.)

I think I remember this being discussed before, but I see nothing mentioned in the Y1 errata, the errata included in Y2, and G3Y still lists the YIS as "1". So ... where is the corrected date listed? Or was it decided that the Vulcans did indeed have tactical warp from Y1 despite the established history?

Either way, this is a discrepancy I thought had been addressed long ago, but I can't find it. I only ask because some people won't believe it until it is officially printed somewhere.

By Mike Dowd (Mike_Dowd) on Sunday, September 12, 2021 - 03:04 pm: Edit

Copying my reply to the discussion here:

I don't see why they can't be the same ship. NTW can be achieved by Impulse power in "jumps", or that was the way that I had read it, with a maximum speed of about warp 2 point something-or-other over a distance, but were completely incapable of sustaining a low warp field useful for tactical combat.

It's *entirely* possible that the Vulcans could have done this prior to Y62, but never thought of it. Their ships were certainly much faster at high warp than NTW was at this time.

Ergo, you don't *need* a separate entry in the MSC for essentially the same ship. Vulcan doctrine was to slow to impulse to conduct battle, albeit with much higher power reserves and devastating phaser weaponry.

Good thing for the galaxy that they were pacifists and explorers...

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Sunday, September 12, 2021 - 03:40 pm: Edit

Historically there probably would have been 3 versions of each of the basic Vulcan hulls:

A "Q" version (YIS Y1) with only NTW (impulse engines) and weapons only capable of engaging sub-light targets. These fought in the 1st Romulan War.

An "S" version (YIS Y62) with "warp-targeted" weapons capable of engaging ships moving at tactical speeds but still having no tactical engines of its own. These existed because there was a gap between the Terrans inventing tactical warp (Y62) and its adoption (in Y71) by the Vulcans and other Federation member states.

A "Y" version (YIS Y71) which has both warp-targeted weapons and tactical warp engines.

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Sunday, September 12, 2021 - 04:23 pm: Edit

The Vulcans can't have had tactical warp before Y62 or the published history doesn't work.

The entire Federation was under threat from Romulans and (to an extent) Orions. The two ships in Y1 were acknowledge as being special scouts, and most ships were actually combat ships like shown in later Y modules. The Vulcans would have, at the worst, used their superior ships to defend the Federation, and more likely shared the technology. The history would be markedly different.

That didn't happen, ergo the Y1 date is wrong. Given that all of the other national ships, including the later Vulcan ships, have a YIS of Y71, it seems pretty obvious that Y1 should be Y71.

Now, maybe Y1 is when they introduced that type of ship with NTW. But, those would not be the ships published in Module Y1. They would only have impulse (NTW) engines, lasers instead of phasers, and no transporters.

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 10:20 am: Edit

Let me re-ask the question.

What is the YIS date for the YVC as published in Module Y1?

What is the YIS date for the YVD that was intended to be published in Module Y1? (The ship actually published is the VDI and its YIS is Y80.)

This is an important piece of information that deserves to be answered. The implied date is Y71, but it could be anything as early as Y62 or Y63. It will still be good to know what it is.

Thank you.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 11:50 am: Edit

Mike West:

The Year in Service for the Vulcan YVD and YVC is Y1.

The Fact is that they were not capable of COMBAT at warp speeds.

If we ever get around to working on "Q" we will resolve the issue with rules then, and as stated before there may be an eventual refit that installs "Tactical Warp," but no change is currently needed for the entries for these ships.

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 12:57 pm: Edit

But isn't that a departure from how year in service is treated for other ships converted to tactical warp? Usually a warp-refitted ship is treated as a separate ship class from the NTW version of the same hull.

For example, Paravian EY sublight ships have a YIS date of Y66 while Paravian warp-refitted ships have a YIS date of Y70. They are treated as seperate ship types and are listed in separate sections on the MSC (with differing BPV and other characteristics).

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 01:18 pm: Edit

Douglas Saldana:

The Vulcan history is that they had warp and had warp when they encountered Earth. We defined the warp as NON TACTICAL. Please read the introduction to the Vulcan ships in Module Y1 just before (YR2.12).

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 03:48 pm: Edit

SPP:

I asked the question wrong. Let me try one more time:
When do the YVC and YVD gain the ability to operate at tactical warp?

I don't care what this date is called, I just want to know what that date is. There is a specific point in time where they go from not using tactical warp to using tactical warp. What is that date?

Thank you.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 05:04 pm: Edit

Mike West:

Given the Technology Milestones say the Humans developed "non tactical warp" in Y1 leading to their meeting the Vulcans, and launched the "first cruiser capable of tactical warp" in Y62, and the Vulcan introduction before (YR2.12) says "The Vulcans appeared truly astonished when Earth invented tactical warp drives" I have little choice at this juncture but to say it was probably sometime between Y1 and Y62, and perhaps as late as Y67, perhaps later. There is no decision or hard dare at this time. Again, (Y0.0) says it provides rules that cover then period of Y80 to Y120 and can be adapted to cover from Y67 to Y135. Short "Q", there are no rules for Y1 (or -Y10, or -Y200, or -Y1000 and so on).

Once again, there is no hard date. There is indication in the rules that prior to the development of tactical warp by Earth that Vulcans did not have it (thus they were "astonished"). There is a flat rule that the Vulcans had warp powered ships prior to that date (and no telling how long they had such prior to Y1), but did not have tactical warp.

Note that other empires had warp in that period. The Old Kings for example, who bequeathed an Empire to the Klingons. Let's not forget the Leopard Kings and the Lizard Kings.

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 05:29 pm: Edit

I think there might be a typo in the above post. Surely the Vulcans could not have had tactical warp prior to Y62?

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 06:00 pm: Edit

Douglas Saldana:

There is no hard date for when Earth invented Tactical Warp. The Y62 date is when the FIRST CRUISER capable of tactical warp appeared. There could have been other test ships prior to that (say a Free Trader). The Vulcans could have been able to "adapt" the drive to their ships faster. Again, the point is that this is a history that has to be written. The only firm date is for the first EARTH CRUISER WITH TACTICAL WARP. That is all it says. As an example, can you tell me when the Germans first flew a Jet? And when was the first Jet Squadron activated? That is why Year In Service in the Master Ship Chart is "Service dates are the beginning of series production. One or more prototypes may have existed 1-2 years perviously."

So, YES, the Vulcans could have had tactical warp prior to Y62. The History is not written, decisions on how the technology evolved and was applied have not been made.

As a thing to think about, we have been looking at X1, and notice that Frigates to text the technology appeared first.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 06:28 pm: Edit

Except for the Feds who did it with a CA/CX conversion (their FFX is three years behind) ...
[that may be subject to change]

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 09:59 pm: Edit

Well, prototypes could have been up to two years earlier than Y62. I'm gonna assume that the Terrans would have had to demonstrate the capability with a live demo to gain acceptance. So, that puts a lower bound of Y59 or so. I would be very surprised if they waited to upgrade the YVC or YVD until after their combat ships, so that gives an upper bound of Y71. Given all of that, I'm going with Y63. That allows the Terrans to still "be first", but shows that the Terrans had shared the tech already and the Vulcans were playing with it for a couple years. Again, it could have been earlier, but they just chose not to do it any earlier.

I know that isn't official, but it is apparently as close as I'm gonna get. So, it'll have to do.

By Shawn Gordon (Avrolancaster) on Sunday, September 19, 2021 - 08:21 pm: Edit

I have Captain's Log #38 and the supplemental. The MSC excerpt lists a Federation OCA (R2.A30), and there's a FC ship card for the OCA in that issue, but there's no OCA SSD. The Module G3 Annex likewise lists the publication location as CL38.

Was the OCA SSD actually published anywhere?

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, September 20, 2021 - 11:18 am: Edit

Captain's Log #38, Page #118. The SSD is a combined one. The right side of the page is a ship card version, but the left side covers all the things provided by a Commander's SSD.

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Friday, September 24, 2021 - 01:05 pm: Edit

All this work on Module R4J has forced me to notice something very, very odd. Let's just forget R4J and focus on the standard history and the venerable (vulnerable?) Snipe.

The BPV of the Snipe-A is 65. The BPV of the Snipe-B is 75. However, the Snipe-B adds 2 warp boxes, 2 Pl-F (with swivel), and two Ph-3 (with 180 degree arcs). All for the bargain basement price of 10 BPV? The two warp boxes should be 10 BPV alone. So, is the Snipe-B drastically underpriced? Or, (more likely) is the Snipe-A way overpriced? Either way, that is one heck of an upgrade for just 10 BPV.

Another way to look at it is to look at the Snipe-A with the rear phaser refit, which is at 69 BPV. Now the Snipe-B sets the price for 2 warp boxes and 2 Pl-F (with swivels) at a mere 6 BPV. There are a lot of ships that people would love to apply that refit to!

Also, does this mean no one has actually ever paid attention to the Snipe? I mean this has been sitting around since Advanced Missions and no one has tried to use the Snipe-B refit on another ship anywhere?

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Friday, September 24, 2021 - 02:27 pm: Edit

It has been said by the designers (SVC/SPP, don't remember if it was on the BBS here or in a Why? or similar question in Captain's Log) that the BPV of a unit is not a simple "Count each type of box and multiply them by a number and add all those together" operation, but includes some judgement and analysis of the unit's capabilities as an organic whole.

Two warp, two plasma-F, and two ph-3 on, say, a Federation CA gets it most of the way to being a BCF and clearly is worth more than 10 points because the ship can much more effectively *use* those additional systems in play. The Snipe-B will struggle to rearm more than one plasma torpedo at a time, especially if it's trying to do anything else - it only has 7.5 power after housekeeping. And while it has excellent shields for a frigate, it crumples like wet tissue once damage gets in. Those plasma-Fs are effectively one-shot weapons in most situations, and the extra warp takes it from "very anemic" to "still pretty anemic".

And yes, I know we do use a box of X costs Y for things like option mounts - but that's because trying to weigh and evaluate them at the point of a player picking option mounts for a scenario that is just the practical approach - and its fair to presume the base BPV of the ship has those more organic factors in mind. So while a given weapon costs the same on an Orion LR as it does on a BCH, the latter's BPV gives more weight to its option mount boxes.