PROPOSAL K2-901
Mike Grafton
tug version of a PF
Might have no weapons, extra power, to move stuff around a shipyard or system.
NOT UNDER FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION, THOUGHT TO BE TOO SMALL TO BE PRACTICAL.

When replying to an actual proposal make a separate reply for each proposal and include the reference number.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, March 25, 2026 - 04:03 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-902
Mike Grafton
Cargo PF but actually capable of carrying real cargo like moving grain to a very nearby market.
NOT UNDER FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION, TOO SMALL, EXISTING CARGO VERSION IS A GOOD AS IT GETS.

When replying to an actual proposal make a separate reply for each proposal and include the reference number

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, March 25, 2026 - 04:05 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-903
Mike Grafton
A remote controlled Mine Laying/ Minefield tending PF. I wouldn't want to be on a PF that hit the jackpot with that NSM that was malfunctioning. Alternately a PF with a couple three remote controlled MSS and mechlinks/ controller stations for same.
NOT UNDER FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION. THE EXISTING MINE WARFARE VERSION IS AS GOOD AS IT'S GOING TO GET.

When replying to an actual proposal make a separate reply for each proposal and include the reference number.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, March 25, 2026 - 04:07 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-904
Mike Grafton
Part Sept (???) a PF with tons of Transporters carried on mechlinks of the hospital ships. Used to mass transport up injured. Alternately a PF crammed with "transporter relays" like on Defsats used to make landings on worlds with unsuppressed bases. Remote controlled? This would be nice when you really don't want to be messing around diving through the atmosphere.
NOT UNDER FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION. WOULD BE ABUSED FOR COMBAT PURPOSES. ENGINEERING DOESN'T REALLY SUPPORT THIS CONCEPT.

When replying to an actual proposal make a separate reply for each proposal and include the reference number.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, March 25, 2026 - 08:19 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-900
Several over the years including SVC
Heavy PF, PF with extra shields, X-tech PF
REJECTED WITH EXTREME PREJUDICE

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, March 25, 2026 - 08:27 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-906
Michael John Campbell
An interceptor or two with Ph-Gs would be cool for escorting Stingers into battle.

NOT UNDER FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION. STINGERS ARE THE LAST THING IN THE GAME THAT WOULD NEED TO BE ESCORTED.

When replying to an actual proposal make a separate reply for each proposal and include the reference number.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, March 25, 2026 - 08:40 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-907
Mark Baluda
Improved Lyran PF
Power pack for Lyran PF
Lyran Trimaran PF.
Mark reports that the Lyran PF was the "first and worst" and is inferior to every other PF and therefore should get some kind of improvement.

THIS PROPOSAL WAS REJECTED.

SVC: Pick anything, FF, DW, BB, and you can make a case that one of them in the worst of the bunch. So you improve it, and some other ship is then the worst so the next product improves that, then six months later another produce improved the third worst, and there is no end.

John Murphy: I'll take a flotilla of Lyran PFs against hydran, klingon or kzinti fleets. It's more flexible.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, March 25, 2026 - 08:50 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-908
General
Modular PFs for all empires.

This proposal is not under favorable consideration.

Steve Petrick: the denounced cookie-cutter concept.

Steve Cole: No, just no.

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Thursday, March 26, 2026 - 12:33 am: Edit

K2-907 Not that it's worth very much, but I'd like to express an opinion regarding the Lyran PF.

Short on power, short on punch.

But what about being LONG on numbers?

In one campaign I was involved with, the Lyrans were given an advantage ("Gimmick?") in that they were allowed to bring in more Gunboats than anyone else. This was inspired by how many of their ship SSDs showing the Mech-Links for casual deployment.

No other CA would be allowed more than two gunboats, but the Lyran Tiger could fly four.

(Mind you, the BPV cost was still there, but seeing as how the Lyrans never paid for drone speed upgrades, they had a few more points available than many opponents.)

For everyone else, standard ship squadrons could have only one formal flotilla of Gunboats and no more than six casuals (depending on squadron size; it could be a LOT less) where the Lyrans could have TWO formal flotillas (assuming the squadron was led by a DN/DNH) OR up to a dozen casual Gunboats.

IIRC, it was Soviet Admiral Gorshkov who said, "Quantity has a quality all its own."

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Thursday, March 26, 2026 - 01:25 am: Edit

K2-907: Jeff, the Bobcat’s advantage is in its sustained, longer range firepower thanks to having two disruptors each.

(S8.32) already allows the Lyrans (and everyone else) to bring up to 18 PFs, with every six or fraction thereof causal PFs counting against the flagship’s command rating. Allowing them to bring more would likely shot down on the basis of the impacts that would have on F&E balance.

What might be more workable in that vein is to say the first six casual Lyran PFs don’t count against command limits. This won’t have much of an impact in smaller actions (where command limits generally aren’t much of an issue), and in larger actions the limit on three flotillas total would apply. It would still be allowing Lyrans to have an extra 10 ComPot in F&E - though this could have a requirement similar to the Kzinti fast drone bonus, requiring a certain percentage of the battle force (say 75%) to be Lyran. It’s their specific operation doctrines that enable that kind of integration of causal PFs.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Thursday, March 26, 2026 - 04:58 am: Edit

K2-900: Was the concept of a Heavy PF rejected?
SVC: it was rejected with extreme prejudice.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Thursday, March 26, 2026 - 05:03 am: Edit

K2-900: Was the concept rejected for an "armored refit" PF that is simply more survivable due to added shielding?
SVC: rejected with extreme prejudice. It would unbalance the game and trash every PF product, SSD, and scenario forcing players to spend $100 on replacement products for no benefit or perhaps a negative one.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Thursday, March 26, 2026 - 08:24 am: Edit

K2-900: The Heavy PF concept was covered in Stellar Shadows Journal #1, and their absence from canonical use explained thusly on page 13:

"The limit on PF size was in fact the harmonic balance of the high-energy engines used by PFs, which would have induced a vibration in any larger hull that would have literally shaken it to pieces. (The somewhat larger PF leaders were possible only because of expensive extra bracing which was not cost effective for general use designs, and could be afforded only because the leaders brought to the flotilla some extra capabilities that it needed to function.) Every attempt to build a larger “heavy PF” failed, often with spectacular results, and always with a catastrophic collapse of the hull. New materials, counter-vibratory generators, improved structural integrity fields, extra bracing, different engine arrangements — all were tried, and all failed."

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, March 25, 2026 - 04:09 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-905
Mike Grafton
a PF desiged to be a rescue PF. Has cramped quarters for a freighter with issues. A a couple repair boxes.
NOT UNDER FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION. EXISTING RECOVERY PF COULD DO IT, ANY PF COULD DO IT.

When replying to an actual proposal make a separate reply for each proposal and include the reference number.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Thursday, March 26, 2026 - 02:11 pm: Edit

K2-909
John Trauger
Drone bombardment PF
REJECTED because PFs cannot reload drone racks and just don't have enough drones to generate a wave.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Thursday, March 26, 2026 - 02:37 pm: Edit

K2-910
Several
PF Maulers
REJECTED
They would explode when you fired the mauler doing no damage to anyone but themselves.