PROPOSAL K2-001
Mike Grafton
Police boat
No booster packs, add two APR?
Fewer weapons, add transporter and shuttle.

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

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, March 25, 2026 - 03:55 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-002
Mike Grafton
Prospecting PF.
Few weapons, no boosters, equipped to do prospecting, possibly a post-war use of existing cast-off gunboats.

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 - 03:59 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-003
Mike Grafton
Passenger PF
For use inside a system to moving mining and remote crews where they need to go.
no packs, few weapons, passenger accommodation, might have to pay life support.

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 - 04:10 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-004
Mark Baluda
Flusher pack, replaces warp booster pack, would provide no power but cleaning for longer range operations.
Possible issue, PFs are too small and cramped to go anywhere far enough away that this would be needed.
John Trauger proposed a similar extended-range thing, (How about something like a megafighter pack that give PFs the ability to hang out in deep space for longer periods of time? )

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 - 04:12 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-005
Spinoff from Mark Baluda
Power pack with one APR that replaces booster pack but doesn't cause explosions or burnout.

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 - 04:14 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-006
Mark Baluda
Recon PF
Replace heavy weapon with passive sensor.
Possible other changes. Replace something with LAB?
Idea of larger engines was rejected with extreme prejudice.

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 - 04:18 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-007
Obvious development
New Heavy Cruiser converted to PFT.
Possible ideas
A: carries more PFs
B: No weapons, 12 PFs
C. Scout version for andro base hunting

When replying to an actual proposal make a separate reply for each proposal and include the reference number. In this case, K2-007A etc.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, March 25, 2026 - 04:20 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-008
Mark Baluda
Special Ops PF
Might include a transporter and PF and be a variant of leader.
Stealth was rejected with extreme prejudice. Go buy an Orion privateer.

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

By A David Merritt (Adm) on Wednesday, March 25, 2026 - 05:20 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-004, Flusher pack.

I could see this being a spin off of X-Tech that keeps Gunboats commercially successful in non-combat use.

SVC feels there is also a combat use.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, March 25, 2026 - 07:55 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-009
Obvious development
The full raft of versions for the Interceptors.
Consider this one locked in.

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 - 07:57 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-010
Scott Tenhoff
Carrier resupply versions of PFs, might carry inoperable fighters on mech links, no weapons, internal cargo for drones, chaff, etc.

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

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, March 26, 2026 - 07:56 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-009
Obvious development
The full raft of versions for the Interceptors.

I am curious about how this would work.

Is it

A. Supplemental to PF deployment, perhaps at a lower cost for both Star Fleet Battles BPVs and F&E Econ Points values for interceptors and a higher cost for PFs?

B. Replaces PF deployment totally, meaning no PF’s for the player choosing interceptors.

C. Limited interceptor deployment such as one interceptor Flotilla of six units produced per production phase (in F&E) or some similar limited production capacity for SFB’s campaign home run campaigns?

If it were up for a vote, I would support option C. That would allow VERY limited Federation production of interceptors (perhaps at a specified cost…) an example of which might be any interceptor production counts against the annual limit on carrier production.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Friday, March 27, 2026 - 08:48 am: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-009

I'd go for option B. That the "full raft" of interceptor versions would be a conjectural run for a universe where full-sized PFs proved unworkable.

By A David Merritt (Adm) on Friday, March 27, 2026 - 11:45 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-009

The full raft of versions for the Interceptors.

I see two waves of these;

1) Initial design; some empires may make specialized early test versions, i.e. Hydrans and Fi-Cons, likely everyone tried all phaser versions, particularly the Tholians.

2) Second wave; given that smaller units, i.e. Pols, and heavy Pols cannot carry Gunboats, perhaps they can carry INTs, they may also work on planets that can't afford full gunboats.

By John Wyszynski (Starsabre) on Saturday, March 28, 2026 - 09:06 am: Edit

Re: PROPOSAL K2-001 (Police PF)

Suggest take Workboats, swap 2 cargo to 2 barracks, and upgrade PH-3s to PH-1 or PH-2.

Police Interceptors would be INT-W, swap 1 cargo to 1 barracks, PH-3 to PH-1 or PH-2.

By John Wyszynski (Starsabre) on Saturday, March 28, 2026 - 09:16 am: Edit

Re: PROPOSAL K2-003 (Passenger PF)

Suggest PFC with Hull replacing Cargo.

By John Wyszynski (Starsabre) on Saturday, March 28, 2026 - 09:25 am: Edit

Re: PROPOSAL K2-008 (Spec Op PF)

I see this as a Leader version of PFG. Transporter to insert commandos. Tractor to grab onto something.

SVC: THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL SAID THAT ALREADY.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, March 28, 2026 - 10:34 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-009: versions for the Interceptors.
I see this as happening during the second half of the interceptor period, before real PFs, with limited interceptor production including versions continuing well into the Y180s for second-tier uses. They are cheaper, maybe easier to maintain, there might be a factory somewhere not worth the cost of converting.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, March 26, 2026 - 11:30 am: Edit

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Thursday, March 26, 2026 - 12:27 pm: Edit

K2-003 Passenger PF

I might sooner suggest referring to this as a "passenger boat", and essentially making it a Workboat variant with C hull boxes swapped in for cargo boxes. Perhaps with a special note limiting the number of passengers it can carry, relative to a "full-sized" passenger transport variant.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Thursday, March 26, 2026 - 12:32 pm: Edit

K2-002 Prospecting PF

Perhaps this could be classed as a "prospector boat", to be made as a variant of the Workboat. In-universe, it might be interesting to have this variant be developed first by the Jindarians in the Alpha Octant, with the various "sedentary" empires (and the Orions) adopting it for their own purposes later.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Thursday, March 26, 2026 - 02:31 pm: Edit

K2-007A

Of the three options, this is the one I find most interesting, in part due to “how to make the rules work”? I think allowing for larger formal flotillas would be a no-go, but maybe something like 8 mech-links carrying a formal flotilla of six PFs and two casuals with the bonus of its casual PFs don’t count against command limits. Maybe have FLAG boxes but don’t increase the CR of the ship to account for the additional control and coordination facilities - this would help explain why smaller ships don’t gain this capability (too small and killable) nor do larger ones (BCS and SCS already have FLAG doing other stuff). Could even extend the “causal PFs don’t count against command limits” to include up to X total casual PFs in the force. Some kind of “Flotilla Coordination” ship.

However it shapes up, something like this would bean excellent tentpole class for the module.