Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	Archive through September 01, 2022	25		09/12 11:48am

Jeff;

You don't need to apologize and certainly don't need to "Put a Sock in it." When I propose something, I most definitely want the proposal to generate discussion, including by people who disgree with the proposal.

Mike (Grafton);

How about something like this: Each WebSat (WebSat... I like it...) contains a small self destruct charge and a deadman trigger, just like deadman mines (M5.35). The signal to keep the mines from self destructing is broadcast by the Tholian ground bases. If those bases are destroyed the WebSats self destruct. If the bases are even concerned that attacking Klingons (or whoever) might be about to capture a satellite, they simply turn off the "Don't-blow-yourself-up-yet" beacon... and the WebSats self destruct.

And if something goes wrong and the WebSats self destruct due to equipment malfunction or something? Not actually that big a deal. I would never make DefSats (of any sort) my primary defense for any planet. They would be there to augment other defenses. So that mining colony would still have ground-based phaser-4s, fighters, bombers, eventually PFs. There might even be some ships stationed there to help with the defense, if the colony is important enough. Maybe not true warships (though given how compact Tholian space is, there are probably real warships patrolling fairly near by); but auxilliary cruisers and, if the colony is important enough, a monitor. So the defense is weakened a bit until new WebSats can be put in place. But it still very definitely has teeth. And maybe one or two of those patrolling Tholian warships are moved a little closer until the WebSats are back up.

Stewart;

But remember that, long term, the webs are maintained at strength-0 until a threat appears. So the Tholians detect an unidentified ship approaching. They order it to halt until they can confirm its identity. If they identify it as having legitimate business at the planet, it is given the OK to proceed. If it is hostile, or if it ignores the instruction to halt, the Tholians go to action stations, including powering up the web. Note that this does not even require the "civilian" ship to be Tholian, with a web-pass capability. We know that the Feds have limited trade with the Tholians and once the Fed is confirmed legitimate, the strength-0 webs won't hinder it.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, September 08, 2022 - 03:31 pm: Edit

There is a problem with the prposed websat, and that is the Web Spinners. There are lots of shuttles around, but they are ot web spinners. Even fighters, while some are web spinners, they majoity of fighters are not. And web spinners, while they can draw out web, the ship or base must pay the energy for the hex gained.

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Thursday, September 08, 2022 - 08:03 pm: Edit

A Tholian DefSat must be able to generate 7 points of power given the arming cost of its weapons (2 P-2, 2 P-3, 2 Disr) but even the largest Tholian fighter or bomber wouldn't need more than 3 points of power to arm all of its phasers (2 P-2, 2 P-3) and most would require considerably less (0.5 - 2).

While a squadron of fighters might collectively be able to generate an appreciable amount of power I don't think it would be cost effective to use them for web reinforcement (if it were possible). The proposed WebSat costs 2.86 BPV per point of power generated (assuming 7 points of power max) while even the most cost efficient fighter would cost 4.5 BPV per point of power provided (not including the BPV cost of the carrier or ground base) and most would be closer to 6 BPV.

So perhaps the Tholians just never considered it worthwhile to give fighters the ability to reinforce web.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, September 12, 2022 - 09:44 am: Edit

SPP,

I regret I don't understand why web spinners create a problem for the proposed websat. Web spinners create web hexes (in coordination with web generator-equipped ships or bases) but have no role in powering the web. The proposed websat has no role in the creation of web hexes, but does have the ability to power them. They are different types of units performing different functions (though both functions are related to web). I'm afraid I'm missing your point.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, September 12, 2022 - 11:48 am: Edit

Alan, I may be off base here, but at a guess, I think SPP is concerned that a proposed web sat is unable to fulfill allof the functions required to deploy and power web in the manner specified by the rules set.

Again, I could be mistaken, but I think there needs to be some means to lay web for a web sat to power it.

A tholian ship with the ability to deploy web can maneuver while deploying web.

A Web Sat cannot.

It might just be that SPP is pointing out that there needs tobe a web spinning unit available to lay the web for a web sat to power.

Of course, I could be wildly wrong.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, September 12, 2022 - 12:10 pm: Edit

Jeff,

I had been assuming that when the colony defenses were established, Tholian ships would lay web around the planet. When the Defsats are placed in orbit around the planet (usually placed in a constellation of 5 satellites per R1.15) some of the satellites would be the "Websat" versions rather than more conventional weapon-armed Defsats. The nominal reduction in firepower would be more than made up for by the other benefits of web, including better survivability for the ground-based phaser-4s and any fighter or bomber bases. But the web itself is laid by the Tholian ships that are setting up the defenses in the first place. The satellites have nothing to do with that function. They exist to power the web when attackers show up, which might be long after the ships have departed for other locations.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, September 12, 2022 - 04:39 pm: Edit

Alan Trevor: Rule (G10.8) establishes the existence of Web Buoys which maintain Zero Strength web. It also establishes that these web anchor buoys cannot function during a scenario (but can be used before a scenario bgins to raise full strength web (provided they are globular or achored). No rules are provided for destroying these web buoys. Given that the defense satellites must be placed in orbit I do not see anything in the ruleset for them (R1.15) that would allow them to add power to a web or be designed to perform such. They obviously are designed to not be trapped in web (have poss through ability built in) so as not to be accidentally destroyed by web laid in their orbits, and just as obvoiously to fire through webs (with their phasers).

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, September 12, 2022 - 05:16 pm: Edit

SPP,

I'm aware that there's nothing that allows any currently approved Defsat to power a web. But I can't see any "engineering" reason why the Tholians couldn't build such a satellite. Based on the weapons a Defsat carries, and the power requirements for those weapons, there would seem to be room to build a satellite such as proposed, if you removed some of the weapons.

Of course, I'm not the person who gets to say what is, or is not, possible in the SFU... There may well be some reason why this doesn't work. If that's the case, then so be it. And it's mot like the Tholians would be crippled if this version is disallowed.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, September 12, 2022 - 11:36 pm: Edit

Because web anchors cannot move and Defsats have to move?

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Tuesday, September 13, 2022 - 01:13 am: Edit

I don't have a dog in this fight, and I don't even really have an opinion on this idea. Honestly, I'd probably "vote" against it because I don't think Tholians planets really need more help.

That said, if I may ...

This proposal is not suggesting that this defsat is a web anchor or a web spinner. This defsat cannot lay web, anchor web, spin web, or do anything that a web anchor or web spinner can or would do. Likewise, a web anchor or web spinner cannot do what this defsat can do.

Rather, this defsat would do something uniquely all its own: it can add power to an already established web. That's it. It removes its heavy weapons and all it gets in return is to be able to power a web that it is next to or in. (And note that powering web does not require immobility; only proximity.)

Alan's confusion on the comparison is simply because this proposed defsat literally has nothing in common with a web anchor or web spinner. The anchor and spinner do stuff this defsat cannot, but this defsat does something they cannot. So, to be quite frank, I understand his confusion. They don't do the same thing, at all, so what about the comparison invalidates the idea of this defsat?

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, September 14, 2022 - 09:51 am: Edit

Mike,

Yeah, that's pretty much it.

Also, I can understand why you would "vote" against the idea. To me, this version of the DefSat does make sense for the Tholians. But it's certainly not something they desperately "need". Prepared defense of a fixed position is not exactly a glaring Tholian technological weakness.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, September 14, 2022 - 10:16 am: Edit

It has been said, that just because something is possible, does not necessarily mean that it would be good for the game.

The Holdfast does not need this.

Small, less developed locations such as mining colonies or science outposts do.

Not every location can afford a full blown PDU with two planetary defense battalions, fighter squadrons, bomber squadrons or PF flotillas and a full set of Def Sats.

Cant determine exactly how such an innovative change will impact the game until the exact rule, and characteristics are set.

Other empires would love to have this kind of protection available for early colonial development, but it would have to be limited.

The Seltorians might understand the technology. Certainly, no other empire would have it.

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Wednesday, September 14, 2022 - 07:45 pm: Edit

I like this proposal. If offers a fresh take on the tactical challenges of a web assault (given the unique characteristics of Defense Satellites) and there are trade-offs built into the proposal so I don't think it's in any way overpowering. Remember that pre-set web costs BPV so there is a cost to the defensive advantages offered here.