| Subtopic | Posts | Updated | ||
| Archive through March 17, 2023 | 25 | 03/17 11:19pm |
| By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Friday, March 17, 2023 - 12:24 pm: Edit |
Orion Gunboats operated by various civilian organizations in Federation space. Some questions.
What sort of weapons would be allowed in the option mounts? Civilian ships, by Federation law, aren't allowed to use Phaser-1s. What sort of other restrictions would this put on gunboats?
May I respectfully suggest that the restrictions placed on the Free Trader be placed on Orion type gunboats operated by civilian organizations?
| By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Friday, March 17, 2023 - 01:18 pm: Edit |
I believe the suggestion was that the Orion National Guard might have operated gunboats (within Enclave space). I don't think anyone was suggesting that civilians would have them (other than the workboats that they are already allowed to purchase).
Orion National Guard gunboats would likely have some sort of standard armament, not option mounts.
| By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Friday, March 17, 2023 - 06:07 pm: Edit |
Workboats would likely have Ph-2s or Ph-3s to defend with. Option mounts would probably default to Drone, Ph-3 pairing ...
| By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Friday, March 17, 2023 - 06:14 pm: Edit |
I believe the workboat has already been published. I'm pretty sure workboats only have ph-3.
| By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Friday, March 17, 2023 - 11:19 pm: Edit |
IIRC, Workboats are in R12 and yes, they're armed solely with Ph-3, to the best of my knowledge.
While the analogy may be completely wrong, I'm seeing these downgraded Orion Gunboats, when compared to Workboats, as almost a parallel to Security skiffs with Workboats serving as a parallel to Seeker Skiffs.
It's not a 100% matching parallel, but IMO, it looks close.
| By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Saturday, March 18, 2023 - 10:47 am: Edit |
If the gunboats are operated by the government, they can be equipped with whatever weapons the government chooses, subject only to what is technologically available.
| By Mike West (Mjwest) on Saturday, March 18, 2023 - 02:20 pm: Edit |
Again: If you allow "de-piratized" Orion gunboats, you now have a full Federation gunboat. If it is available, planetary navies and national guard units will snap them up faster than they can be made. I don't know if ADB is looking to open that particular version of Pandora's Box.
| By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Saturday, March 18, 2023 - 03:02 pm: Edit |
Mike West:
I hardly think my sharing of background information is indicating that I am in favor of or rejecting an idea. It is discussion, and avoiding a waste of time from a false view of the game background is simply what it is. If civilians are limited to phaser-3s, someone better arrest all those freighters who are armed with phaser-2s. Drone racks are available, and so on. there are heavier weapons available to national guards which are operated by governments subordinate to the Federation, and they have photon torpedoes. Not to mention the phaser-IVs found on planetary defense stations.
| By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Saturday, March 18, 2023 - 03:15 pm: Edit |
I think premise here is that the Orions are able operate military gunboats due either to:
(1) Some quirk of their membership treaty with the Federation (I believe the Orion National Guard already operates as a semi-autonomous police force within the Enclave), or
(2) The gunboats were built before the Enclave rejoined the Federation and were essentially "grandfathered" in.
This does not imply that it would be legal to purchase or operate a gunboat outside of the Enclave.
| By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Saturday, March 18, 2023 - 05:17 pm: Edit |
It is not to clear under what conditions the enclave returned to the Federation. One can, however, imagine that the Federation ambassadors were rather miffed with the government of Orion, and the terms under which the enclave was permitted to rejoin were more strictly defined than the original terms under which the enclave had joined before. So the enclave could avoid being "conquered." One can picture some rather annoyed star fleet officers on one side of the table negotiating with the Orions.
| By Mike West (Mjwest) on Saturday, March 18, 2023 - 07:21 pm: Edit |
Petrick:
My comments were not in response to yours, at least not directly. I in no way meant to cast your comments in any particular light. At all. I apologize for not being clear on that.
My comments are simply to reinforce that if there are "de-piratized" Buccaneers, then they will spread widely throughout the Federation. There are multiple planetary governments and national guards that would love to use them. If they were ever offered for sale, all offered would likely be purchased. (And to be absolutely clear, I am talking about Buccaneers, not workboats. Workboats are already "de-piratized" and already in the game. The new thing would be "de-piratized" combat Buccaneers.)
Does that make it an auto-reject? In the past, yes. But maybe things have changed. I'm all for it. But I am still going to point out what it really means and what the ramifications of doing it are.
| By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, March 20, 2023 - 01:28 pm: Edit |
Mike West:
There is a problem with the Federation attitude on crew losses, particularly for planets/sectors that have been "occupied/fought over." Please note that this is background as part of the discussion, not a stonewall proposed by me. Star Fleet is back and providing protection (and PDUs come with fighters, not gunboats which again feeds into the crew losses narrative). These are just things that have to be addressed in the discussion.
| By Mike West (Mjwest) on Tuesday, March 21, 2023 - 10:09 am: Edit |
Petrick:
Oh, sure! I completely understand.
It all depends on how much of a defense force is run by Star Fleet, and how much is locally provided. If the defense force is purely from Star Fleet, then probably no gunboats. However, if any of the defense force is locally provided, then gunboats definitely become an option. In most of the stories and such I have seen written, it appears that, for example, all local defense fighters (like the infamous F-20s) use local pilots. I would think those worlds would much rather use a system that is way, way more potent and effective than F-20s, even if they take 15 times the crew.
While Star Fleet doesn't like the loss of life associated with assigned gunboat usage, that likely doesn't apply to local defense. Remember, these people aren't fighting for the "Federation"; they are fighting for their home. I would imagine that in a local defense situation, gunboats would likely be filled with volunteers. Politics are local, and I can see pretty much any local defense force wanting gunboats and having plenty of crew willing to man and use them.
The other big place that gunboats would gladly and eagerly be used in the Federation are police forces. These would not be used for outright military campaigns, but would be used to fight pirates (suddenly giving them actual teeth) and augment defense forces against actual invasions. In the line of police duties, the mortality rate just isn't going to be as high (with many worlds not seeing any real losses), and when used to augment local defense forces, you get back to the "defending your home" situation where the mortality rates are going to be accepted.
So, to loop back, in no way am I (personally) looking at any of this to add gunboats to Star Fleet. It is to let governments and police outside Star Fleet use them. If that is a distinction that doesn't actually exist, then so be it. But that is the line I am trying to draw and make use of.
So, if that distinction does exist, then there can be room for a "de-piratized" Buccaneer to exist. If that distinction doesn't exist, then there probably isn't room for it to exist.
| By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Tuesday, March 21, 2023 - 11:51 am: Edit |
Respectfully, Mike, StarFleet doesn't make its own policy; it has to abide by policies dictated by the Federation Council. It is likely those politicians, not the Admirals in charge of StarFleet, who made the "No Gunboats" policy.
If the Federation Council has made the "No Gunboats" policy for THEIR defenders, then they're going to have even stricter ones for military forces that aren't defending THEM.
My reasons for thinking this would be the case are a subject that would get me fed to Alligators. 
(Ahem...)
On a personal note, it kinda shot down an idea for a possible story before I even had it storyboarded; the opening of a strict Caste culture where the leadership caste was, by its own standards, forbidden from even the most minimal of physical work (to the point of even being carried around instead of walking) but instead made all commands/decisions/gave orders. Such a culture would not allow leadership caste individuals to fly the fighters, but giving orders on Gunboats would be acceptable.
Yeah. I had thought of it as a possible satire story about how so many of our politicians are so out of touch with the people they're supposed to represent. It too may have violated the ADB, Inc. policy on remaining above politics (and the aforementioned prohibition on Federation associates operating GunBoats), but since it never really went anywhere, it's kinda moot.
Anyhow, that's my 0.02 Quatloos worth.
On a side note, if you'd like to have the Federation minor/colony worlds operate GunBoats for their own defenses in your games, talk it over with your prospective opponents; if they're okay with it, even if it is non-Canon, then it's good.
| By Mike West (Mjwest) on Tuesday, March 21, 2023 - 01:11 pm: Edit |
That's as much a supposition as mine. If that's the case, then, no, the national guard and the police probably can't use gunboats either. But, even then, the police could be an exception because they aren't going to have those losses. Again, it all depends. And it probably depends on background details that haven't really been decided at that level of detail.
Quote:Respectfully, Mike, StarFleet doesn't make its own policy; it has to abide by policies dictated by the Federation Council. It is likely those politicians, not the Admirals in charge of StarFleet, who made the "No Gunboats" policy.
Again, not necessarily. They are worried about how their decisions look on them. They are worried about "consigning thousands and thousands of crew to certain death" with gunboat assignments. They most likely give absolutely no care if someone does that, though, as it doesn't reflect on them.
Quote:If the Federation Council has made the "No Gunboats" policy for THEIR defenders, then they're going to have even stricter ones for military forces that aren't defending THEM.
| By Douglas Saldana (Dsal) on Tuesday, March 21, 2023 - 02:30 pm: Edit |
I suspect that some decisions the Federation Council makes are binding on their members (laws) while others are opt-in (treaties). Which applies here might depend on the strength of feelings on the subject. Also keep in mind that the Federation has many layers of government between the Federation Council and "Member" governments (such as regional, provincial, and distict governments) so there could be legislation or treaties at an intermediate level that are more or less restictive.
| By Mike West (Mjwest) on Saturday, March 25, 2023 - 08:15 am: Edit |
Just to finish the Orion PF conversation:
1) Doesn't matter why, it isn't going to happen. The Feds, with the exception of a handful of Thunderbolts, don't get PFs. The Star Fleet doesn't, the member worlds don't, and their clients don't. I was wrong for explaining why it could happen. I should not have done that.
2) This isn't the correct conversation for this. I apologize for contributing here. I should not have. If someone wants a "de-piratized" Orion Buccaneer to be added to the game, please make a topic for the idea in the correct place in the BBS. (Or use the existing one, if one already exists.) I am not a moderator. I do not set policy. But, even so, this specific conversation needs to be somewhere else.
| By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Wednesday, November 01, 2023 - 09:38 pm: Edit |
AFTER-ACTION REPORT: MODULE R6 SSD BOOKS (both B&W and Color)
Lyran HDW (R11.59): SSD shows BPV reduced to 124 (from 137 in the original 1995 edition). However, this is not reflected in the Master Ship Chart in the revised Module R6 rulebook.
As a note, the LDR HDW (R14.33) was *not* changed from its BPV of 147; I do not know if this was intentional or not.
Romulan FFH-K (R4.87), FFH-A (R4.87A), BHF (R4.88), and SBH (R4.89) did not receive a Sabot refit cost addition to their Ship Data Tables.
ISC CF (R13.48), HDD (R13.50), and CM (R13.53) did not receive a Sabot refit cost addition to their Ship Data Tables.
| Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation |