To clarify: should the "lost empire" Paravians and Carnivons from Module C6 be given their own equivalent unit types to the ones proposed for the "historical" Alpha Octant empires here - or would it be best to keep them aside for a potential Module C6R instead?

SVC SAYS: I COULD GO EITHER WAY.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Thursday, March 26, 2026 - 01:31 pm: Edit

In terms of new fast patrol ship tender variants: would there be the option for certain Alpha Octant empires to consider fielding PFT variants of their survey cruiser types?

I've posted before about the concept of a "dark future" Federation (or "Reflection Universe" Federal Imperium) "GPX", based on the current GVX design but with PF mech-links in place of F-111 mech links (and with four of its cargo boxes swapped out for repair boxes, with the boxes arranged similarly to how the cargo and barracks boxes are shown on the COV SSD). This could be used for raids (or anti-RTN missions) in wartime; or be assigned a support flotilla, to include a survey PF, in peacetime, akin to how the GVX historically used heavy transport shuttles in place of its F-111s when not assigned active combat duties.

Perhaps certain other Alpha empires might find similar use for a PFT-variant SR?

Or, in the case of the Romulans, perhaps a new set of SparrowHawk-type survey PF tender modules, with fewer repair boxes and more cargo boxes than what are seen on the current SparrowHawk-E modules?

For one thing, given how aggressively the "lost empire" Paravians deploy their SRs over in the various "Mapsheet P" timelines from Module C6, I could certainly see them deploying a PF tender variant of this hull for their own purposes. (But, again, this might be a topic for a future "Module C6R" to double back to.)

So, would this be a concept worth considering, at least on a case-by-case basis?

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Thursday, March 26, 2026 - 08:28 pm: Edit

Not so much a proposal as a reminder that Heavy Fast Patrol Ships were in Stellar Shadow Journal #1.

SVC: this has been mentioned before and isn’t relevant. Stellar Shadows is defined as things that did not and could not exist. Heavy PFs have been on the auto-reject list for longer than I can remember.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, March 28, 2026 - 08:33 am: Edit

By John Wyszynski (Starsabre) on Saturday, March 28, 2026 - 10:00 am: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-032

Proposal for PF to land Ground Combat Vehicles. Take a Fi-Con with mech-links for 4 GCV. Lands on surface, dettachs GCVs on surface, takes off. GCV could be any of the variants. Maybe allow a Tank to be carried on two adjacent mech-links.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Sunday, March 29, 2026 - 04:38 am: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-032
I seem to recall that the central cargo elevator on a PF was designed to carry a vehicle.I'll have to check that. My memory must be faulty or people would already do that.

By John Wyszynski (Starsabre) on Sunday, March 29, 2026 - 09:35 am: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-032
The central cargo elevator may be noted in the Klingon G1 Blueprints, but don't know that it is defined in SFB. A PFC has room for 5 GCV but how long to unload; maybe 1 per turn? (I put in the K update topic a request to define this.) I assume this does not include crews.

I was envisioning a PF able to put the 4 GCV with crew onto the ground in one turn and leave quickly.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Sunday, March 29, 2026 - 11:47 am: Edit

SVC,

I don't clearly recall where or when I had made such comments about Andromedan mobile weapon platforms. Although, depending on how long ago this might have been, much of this concept has since been superseded by the conjectural MWP (and Adder PF) data published in SFB Module C3A.

That said, there are a few Andro-related questions which might be worth answering here:

Firstly, would any "new" classes of INT or PF be matched with equivalent(ly conjectural) Andromedan counterparts?

If so, ought only those deemed to be "historical" be printed here - and perhaps keep any "threat file" variants aside for a would-be "Module C3B" product?

-----

So far as specific MWP variants are concerned, there already are a number of pre-exsting units of this type: the MCP (cargo), MTP (recovery), MMP (mine warfare). MEP (EW support - which, it should be noted, is not a scout), and MGP (ground attack),

Indeed, these five, in turn, have conjectural WBP-equipped variants provided in C3A.

Thus, there might be less of a need to create entirely new MWP mission variants for the Andromedans to make use of, when compared to new Interceptor variants for the various "native" Alpha empires.

And even then, would there be a split between posting "historical" SSDs of such variants (with no WBPs) here, and perhaps diverting any C3A-esque "WBP" upgrades to a separate product?

-----

As for Adder PF variants: simply put, any new Alpha variants (such as the proposed PF leader-scouts) would no doubt make sense as "threat file" variants of the Adder also.

But, again, the question would be whether they ought to go in Module K2, or in a separate "threat file plus" product.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Sunday, March 29, 2026 - 05:38 pm: Edit

Gary, it was back in 2009.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Sunday, March 29, 2026 - 11:32 pm: Edit

Gary Carney noted in 2018 that we could fill space with PFT variants of HDWs.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Sunday, March 29, 2026 - 11:34 pm: Edit

Richard Eitzen noted that we could build PFs with more range by trading something but there is no way we'd allow longer strikes in F&E so at that point there is nothing for long range PFs to do.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, March 30, 2026 - 02:59 pm: Edit

So, what "tentpoles" do we have to hang a K2 on?

Strike PFTs
NCA PFTs if these don't just become strike PFTs and if we haven't already done them.
Police PFTs.
Random assortment of PFTs that could have been done before but weren't.
Interceptor versions (more of a peg)
Various "targets" (prospecting PFs, passenger PFs, special ops, carrier resupply, others).
Police PFs (more of a peg)
PF Leader-Scouts (more of a peg)

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, March 30, 2026 - 03:26 pm: Edit

I would suggest Strike PFTs, and if there is interest, perhaps including a Campaign scenario for a “Strike PFT “ captains game or a rule U thingy.

Lots of options, might even consider a Short (if thats even possible…) F&E Strike PFT campaign, possibly a LDR, Lyran, Klingon & Hydran slugfest over a treasure planet discovery.

Just a thought.

By A David Merritt (Adm) on Monday, March 30, 2026 - 03:26 pm: Edit

I would say the Strike Variant, as NCA PFTs are in the game.

The rest would be nice.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Monday, March 30, 2026 - 03:50 pm: Edit

Would a Flotilla Control ship be a workable concept? Something that operates not only a true flotilla itself, but has expanded support facilities for a fleet’s causal PFs? And maybe allows a casual flotilla to be included without counting against command limits (but still counting toward the total number of attrition units)?

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, March 30, 2026 - 04:00 pm: Edit

PROPOSAL K2-031

Pursuant to our discussion at 4:07 PM and 8:04 PM on 27 March, here is a link to a proposal I made some time ago, to base a Tholian "Strike PFT" on their "Pocket Battleship" rather than a cruiser. The PBB seems a natural candidate because it already carries 6 PFs. But it has no repair, so is only a casual PFT. This proposal would turn it into a true PFT and, while nominally not as powerful as the true PFT, it is more "sustainable" and, in my opinion, more useful to the Holdfast in the long run.

Edit: I'm requesting a number be assigned for this proposal.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, March 30, 2026 - 04:17 pm: Edit

K2-033. Another possible "tentpole"; a "sustainment tender" analogous to a repair cruiser (or perhaps a pod for an LTT). Some empires might choose one option, some might choose the other. The "sustainment tender" has little weaponry and doesn't operate PFs in combat, though it might have a couple of casual PFs for self defense. What the sustainment tender does have is a very extensive PF repair capability, far more than any "standard" tender. It also has cargo space for spare parts, spare warp boost packs, expendable munitions such as drones, and PFs in "non-flyable" configuration which could be broken out "between scenarios" of a campaign, to replace losses in the combat flotillas.