Xander Fulton:

It is early years. A Federation (the ship I used for explanation) has a nine (9) box forward shield, seven (7) boxes on the #2 and #6 shields, and five (5) boxes on the other three shields. A Kzinti warp refitted destroyer has only a minimum shield cost, but that gives it five shield boxes in each direction. A Klingon E1 warp refitted frigate has nine (9) box 31 shield, five (5) box #2 and #6 shield, and a four (four) box #3, #4, and #5 shield. So your interpretation that by running minimum shields the rear three shields would be stronger, the two flank shields would be as strong as before, and only the #1 shield would be weaker?

By Xander Fulton (Dderidex) on Friday, June 02, 2023 - 05:00 pm: Edit

(D3.333) covers that case, no?

---

Quote:

Some smaller ships have only five (or fewer) shield boxes. These ships can pay the minimum shield cost and need not pay the full cost.

---

By Shawn Gordon (Avrolancaster) on Friday, June 02, 2023 - 05:05 pm: Edit

Thank you SPP for your clarification of the Gorn situation. It is much appreciated.

As for the WDD, I can't speak for Xander or anyone else, but the obvious (to me) interpretation of the situation is that minimum shields provides boxes 0-5 on all shields, and full shields provides boxes 6-max.

In the case of the warp-refitted destroyer, minimum shields (according to my interpretation) is 5 boxes all around, and full shields only benefits shields 6, 1, and 2 bringing them to seven boxes, nine boxes, and seven boxes respectively.

For ships with smaller-than-five shields (such as the Andorian WNF with shield configuration S1 = 10, S2,S6 = 4, S3,S4,S5 = 3), this means that minimum shields brings the shields that are greater than or equal to five to five boxes, and shields that are smaller than five to their maximum number of boxes (for the WNF this means S1 = 5, S2,S6 = 4, S3,S4,S5 = 3).

No rule I've ever read anywhere has given me any reason to interpret minimum shields as being variable in the way you described. Could you point us to the rule we are getting wrong?

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Friday, June 02, 2023 - 08:40 pm: Edit

I'm curious about the same thing, because there's no rule (YD3._) in Modules Y1, Y2, or Y3, and no mention of such in the Errata.

Is it possible that this shielding matter was something that was drafted but didn't wind up in the products or errata?

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Saturday, June 03, 2023 - 11:54 am: Edit

The question arises because the shield cost for the early years ships is not consistent. (D3.32) is by size class, but when you look at the early years SSDs the shield cost is different. As an example, the Lyran and Carnivon WCA are both size class 3 units but have different shield costs but have similar total shields.

Empire	Type	Rule	Year In Service	Size Class	Minimum Shield Cost	Full Shield Cost	Total Shield Cost	Total Shield Boxes
Carnivon	WCA	YR19.14 Carnivon WCA Wolf Warp-Refitted Heavy Cruiser (Y64)	64	3	1	1	2	68
Lyran	WCA	YR11.2 Lyran WCA Warp-Refitted Cruiser (Y64)	64	3	0.5	0.5	1	71

I was hoping a new rule (YD3.3) would be added for early year units to show what the shield costs should be.

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Saturday, June 03, 2023 - 10:18 pm: Edit

For the record, I completely agree that minimum shields provide five boxes in each shield, or full shields if there are fewer than five boxes in the shield. Full shields provide all shield boxes above those first five. So a hypothetical ship with no more than five boxes in any of their shields has no reason to power their shields above minimum. (Unless playing extremely weird games with reinforcement.)

And, since there are no special shield rules for the Early Years, this works the same in the Early Years.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Saturday, June 24, 2023 - 01:54 pm: Edit

Is there a set number (or range) of how many BP each Barracks SSD box can hold??


Garth L. Getgen

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Saturday, June 24, 2023 - 03:23 pm: Edit

It is 10 BP per Barracks (G28.31)

By A David Merritt (Adm) on Saturday, June 24, 2023 - 03:29 pm: Edit

(G28.3) Up to 10.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Saturday, June 24, 2023 - 04:23 pm: Edit

Thanks. I thought it was something like that.


Garth L. Getgen

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Friday, June 30, 2023 - 10:09 am: Edit

Do be aware that gunboats are different. The whole PF is limited to 10 BP, not 10 BP per box.

By Eddie E Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Thursday, August 10, 2023 - 10:49 am: Edit

A question, where is the SSD for the Vudar command cruiser. MSC says F2 Rule 17.37, but 17.37 is in R11 as the DCS.

By David Bostwick (Zarquon) on Thursday, August 10, 2023 - 01:26 pm: Edit

Vudar Command Cruiser is R17.A1 in CL32.

By Eddie E Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Thursday, August 10, 2023 - 01:59 pm: Edit

Thanks, Yep I found that one, just trying to see if I missed an updated one

By David Finan (Bbanzai) on Thursday, August 31, 2023 - 09:02 am: Edit

Hi I was doing some digging and trying to find out from the annexes SSDs or really anything what the year in service is for Hanger Bay Base Augementation modules. I actually couldnt find a date listed. So that got me to thinking, is the year in service basically the year a given Nationality got its first fighters? That would make sense just trying to make sure.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Thursday, August 31, 2023 - 10:57 am: Edit

Well, that module COULD be useful in the earlier years before transporters. Chock full of shuttles,...

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Thursday, August 31, 2023 - 11:04 am: Edit

In the Early Years modules, the Romulans had sub-light fighters both on planetary bases AND on their Spacedock facilities.

HOWEVER, for people not in contact with Romulans, David, your logic is sound.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, August 31, 2023 - 03:11 pm: Edit

Hangar bay modules existed (for nearly every empire, the Romulans being a notable exception) before they got fighters. They enabled the facility, as pointed out by Mike Grafton, to have extra shuttles if there was a need for them. Basically, to give you an idea, a Prospecting Platform (R1.40) might have one or two hangar modules for additional prospecting shuttles.

By David Finan (Bbanzai) on Sunday, September 03, 2023 - 02:02 pm: Edit

Thanks for the answer so, if my premise was incorrect. What should one use for the YIS for HBM 100, 120? and would they cost less if they could only handle shuttles vs having the ready racks for fighters?

By Eddie E Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Sunday, September 03, 2023 - 06:57 pm: Edit

David I could have given you the same answer. That was one of my first questions on HBMs. If you page 20 of G3 under the early years modules Gladiator-L fighters used them as early as year 70. If you look over the note under regular modules it lists the date as early as 130

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Sunday, September 03, 2023 - 09:30 pm: Edit

David? One standard with SFB that took me a while to accept is that the cost of a Ready Rack is the same as for a standard ADMIN shuttle.

HBMs that're configured for ADMIN shuttles cost the same WITH the shuttles as a fighter support HBM does WITHOUT shuttles (in this case, fighters).

Good question to ask, IMO.

By David Finan (Bbanzai) on Monday, September 04, 2023 - 05:06 pm: Edit

Cool just wanted to make sure Now I know they are available way earlier then I thought. Thanks for all the answers.

By Eddie E Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Monday, September 04, 2023 - 07:24 pm: Edit

David thats what I thought also, I always figured they were not available until fighters came out in the mid 160s. Never used fighters that much in the regular game.

By Dal Downing (Rambler) on Friday, September 22, 2023 - 10:10 pm: Edit

Are there any other Troop Ships that are also Tugs like the F5G and D5G?

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Saturday, September 23, 2023 - 02:12 pm: Edit

Rom Sea & Skyhawk tug variants can have troop modules IIRC