The proposed unit is a Tholian variant of the DefSat which sacrifices most of the weaponry for a web generator and additional power. These were sometimes placed in orbit around important colony planets to maintain protective webs. (Note that per R1.15G, DefSats can only be placed in standard orbit around planets or moons.)

The DefSat SSD contains a single Ph-2, 2xPh-3s, and one web generator. If it does not fire any weapons in a turn, it may put up to 8 points of reinforcing energy into an already-existing web. If it fires any weapons, it may only put a maximum of 6 points into the web. It cannot lay web or be used as an anchor. They can never act as a snare.

Any impulse in which it puts reinforcing energy into a web counts as the DefSat firing for purposes of attackers gaining a lock-on. Note that per G10.2121, any individual unit can put a maximum of 4 points of power into a web in a single impulse. So a DefSat that wanted to put more than 4 points into the web would have to "fire" on two separate impulses.

Since Web Generator DefSats have very minimal weaponry, they are usually either part of a set of 5 satellites, some of which are "Weapon DefSats", or they are deployed over colonies with significant ground-based phaser firepower.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, August 27, 2022 - 09:56 pm: Edit

Alan, I need to review the def sat rules... but my initial reaction is that this is a huge advantage to Tholian defenses.

Def sats can be difficult to target, iirc.

Game
Play balance might need a minor tweek,

Technobabble wise, perhaps the power transfer from the def sat to the web can be detectable in some manner.

Otherwise, i can’t see why all tholian bases shouldn’t be located in close orbit of a planet or moon to take advantage of this.

By Jeff Guthridge (Jeff_Guthridge) on Saturday, August 27, 2022 - 11:01 pm: Edit

While a DefSat is not a mine, there is an entry on the Auto-reject list for mines with web.

It sounds like it would add to the usual pain of assaulting anything Tholian.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Saturday, August 27, 2022 - 11:19 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

Technobabble wise, perhaps the power transfer from the def sat to the web can be detectable in some manner.

---

---

Quote:

Any impulse in which it puts reinforcing energy into a web counts as the DefSat firing for purposes of attackers gaining a lock-on.

---

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Sunday, August 28, 2022 - 09:33 am: Edit

Nope, sorry, missed it.


I should know better than to post when tired!

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Sunday, August 28, 2022 - 09:52 am: Edit

I think instead of tracking energy if weapons are fired you should just split the difference and say 7 energy and not worry about whether weapons were fired. One less thing to keep track of.

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Sunday, August 28, 2022 - 11:43 am: Edit

Maybe I ought not post until I can phrase things clearly, but if I'm remembering the rules for normal web strength degradation correctly, I think there may be problems with ths proposal.

If the energy that these DefSats put into the Web is below a certain threshhold, the web will never amount to anything more than a zero point structure unless there's another unit that assists in powering it up. If that's the case, then these units will be little more than an assistance to slowing standard web degradation, but using them as that instead of (presumably, since they're being used behind web) standard phaser armed DefSats will reduce Tholian counteroffensive firepower.

If, on the other hand, they're ABOVE that threshhold, they'll strengthen web ad infinitum until the web reaches the aggregate strength of 35 per hex (if I remember the maximum correctly); something that makes them an automatic game winner for the Tholians.

Again, this is premised on me actually knowing something about the game, so PLEASE take it with a grain of salt...

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Sunday, August 28, 2022 - 03:31 pm: Edit

I would assume that the webs are normally maintained at strength 0 (like those around bases) so the actual strength of the webs at the beginning of a scenario would depend on the defender's weapons status and the normal BPV costs for web strength would apply. I think maximum orbital radius for DefSats is 3 hexes so there could be a maximum of two rings of web, probably at a radius of 1 and 3. That's 24 hexes of web to maintain. Probably not practical prior to Y161 or Y175 web improvements and would probably require at least 3 of the 5 satellites to be of the web type (assuming a single set of satellites). Still it might be worth it just to slow down the enemy until help can arrive.

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Monday, August 29, 2022 - 05:38 pm: Edit

I think perhaps the DefSat is to small of a unit to have a web generator.

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Tuesday, August 30, 2022 - 12:20 am: Edit

They same has been said for the other weapons they carry.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, August 30, 2022 - 01:14 pm: Edit

Too small...

You mean too small to have phaser threes?

Oh, and a number of models of Def Sats have phaser 2’s.

You mean that Def Sats can’t have the equivalent of ship mounted weapons?

Like in your estimate, does that mean a Def Sat can not mount a Disrupter?

Or what about the Def Sat that has a photon Torpedo launcher?

What about the power generation capacity to reload various phasers, and a empire specific heavy weapon type (such as a disrupter or a Photon Torpedo)?

The technology in a Def Sat is really amazing in that it crams in so much equipment into an unmanned unit.

The volume normally associated with such systems (phasers, power generation equipment, heavy weapons such as photons or disrupters) is comparable to the space/volume required by a web ssd box.

We can note your objection, but it must be recognized that the proposal specifically mentions removing similar published systems to replace with a web generator.

And note:the energy required to power such systems is within the amount required to power and maintain a web.

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Tuesday, August 30, 2022 - 02:12 pm: Edit

The standard Tholian DefSat had 2 Ph-2, 2 P-3, and 2 Disr so it must be able to generate at least 7 points of power a turn. The Plasma DefSat might be able to generate even more power since it has 2 Ph-2, 2 P-3, and 2 Plasma-F which would require 9 power if they all fired on the 3rd turn of the plasma arming cycle. So, Alan's proposal for how much power could be devoted to the web generator seems plausible and it's hard to believe that the web generator would require more space than that required for the Ph-2 and 2 Disr that it replaces.

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Tuesday, August 30, 2022 - 06:35 pm: Edit

True, DefSats have a lot of weapons for the small size (seekers only launch one a turn).

"Fire" web generator in orbit on impulse 31 (or any impulse blink on, power up, and blink off will make it more difficult to deal with Tholians defenses.

The web generator DefSat is fine if Tholians need it.

By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Tuesday, August 30, 2022 - 09:08 pm: Edit

And yet there is no plasma-G Def Sat, even though that is a "one space weapon", so there may be some cut off point were a web generator won't fit.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Tuesday, August 30, 2022 - 09:34 pm: Edit

The Arachnid PF has two disruptors, two phaser-1s and two phaser-3s. The W version swaps the two phaser-3s for web generators.

So we have a PF-sized hull that includes two disruptors, two phaser-1s, two web generators, as well as generating 16 points of power (assuming WBPs) with two points of reserve power, as well as all the other electronics and life support systems necessary for the PF to function. This is not really consistent with the notion that a web generator takes up a lot of space...

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Wednesday, August 31, 2022 - 12:44 pm: Edit

DefSats, like fighters, are unable to operate Ph-1s*. Also like fighters, they don't have "Energy Allocation**" and are unable to overload weapons***.

While it is true that DefSats are able to reload energy based heavy weapons where fighters are unable to do that for themselves****, IMO, rules similarities for what they can and can't do are numerous enough that I feel comfortable using them interchangeably.

Two Tholian fighter types, the Spider I and Spider III, are able to serve as Web Spinners. IIRC, this enables them to help string zero strength webs that can be energized, but NOT when the fighters are serving as anchors for them.

Were this characteristic be transferred to a DefSat, it would lose firepower, likely a pair of Ph-2s (which are a part of the active defense) for less benefit than a Web Anchor Buoy (I think they're called), which can serve as an end point for an energized web.

(*Exception: Omega Octant fighters.)

(**Exception: Omega Hiver fighters.)

(***Exception: Omega Hiver... This is getting repetitive... )

(****Excep... Sigh...)

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, August 31, 2022 - 02:01 pm: Edit

Jeff,

Maybr I'm missing something... but I just don't see the relevance of your latest post to my proposal.

I'm not advocating that the Tholians have web spinner DefSats, or that they could anchor webs. In fact, in my original proposal I specifically stated

---

Quote:

It cannot lay web or be used as an anchor.

---

---

Quote:

While it is true that DefSats are able to reload energy based heavy weapons where fighters are unable to do that for themselves....

---

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Wednesday, August 31, 2022 - 02:44 pm: Edit

SVC, correct me if I misremember, nut IIRC in the historical fiction it is noted that the Tholians thought that duplicating a web generator would be impossible without a captured example..

So why risk this on a defsat? You close in raid at a place with reasonably low defenses with an overwhelming force and "harvest" the defsat web generator at your leisure after the base/ planet goes down... Sounds like a perfect job for a prime team. Or even the legendary Special Team 1!

Just wondering.

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Wednesday, August 31, 2022 - 03:05 pm: Edit

Is there some rule that would allow you to capture defense satellites? I'm not aware of one.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Wednesday, August 31, 2022 - 06:39 pm: Edit

Silly question, since a DEFSAT requires a planet to orbit, wouldn't an active web interfere with civilian traffic on said planet??

By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Wednesday, August 31, 2022 - 07:09 pm: Edit

I don't think G10.53 makes any distinction between military and civilians ships. All Tholian units have the ability to pass through web.

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Thursday, September 01, 2022 - 03:09 am: Edit

For purposes of this discussion, I suggest calling it a WebSat.

--Mike

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Thursday, September 01, 2022 - 07:23 am: Edit

yes

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Thursday, September 01, 2022 - 11:14 am: Edit

DSal. No rule allows you to capture Defsats.

Nor lay captor mines, emplace defsats, etc.

Like I said, "at your leisure." Which might take 100+ turns... Involve some Minsweeping shuttles, or maybe a tractor beam over several turns, hand waveium, etc

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Thursday, September 01, 2022 - 01:05 pm: Edit

Alan, I'm thinking we might have a miscommunication as well. As someone AS, I often get preconceived notions about things that I can't escape, so it's pretty guaranteed that the problem is on my end.

Also, since it is YOUR idea, I'd like to apologize and, in the common vernacular, "Put a Sock in it."

(and from now on say little more than "Mff, Mrff, Hnmff.")