Are there any plans in providing additional EW support to Tholians and/or Hydran that other races enjoy with their EW drones and plasmas?
Currently, I have no clues.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Thursday, January 15, 2004 - 04:36 pm: Edit

I remember, quite some time ago, a proposal for a Hydran fighter than could do the job (I think I remember making one such proposal).

As for the Tholians, they don't need one; they aren't a major race, they don't -- with very few exceptions -- make offensive moves, and they have, in the web, a defensive device that beats ECM all to blazes and back.

By Glenn Hoepfner (Ikabar) on Thursday, January 15, 2004 - 10:26 pm: Edit

Jessica, about your comments . . .
I'd be interested in what you recall about the hydran EW option.
And about the Tholians, nothing like be told the obvious when I should I have realized that.
Still, the mind does wonder.

By John A Schneder II (Keltner) on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 01:14 am: Edit

It would be nice to have an option for the Lyrans as well:-)

By Jeremy Gray (Gray) on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 01:23 am: Edit

Yahoo!!! Lets give everybody an EW toy! Bah humbug.

By Raymond Ford (Raymond) on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 02:23 am: Edit

Something else to consider about the Tholians are their fixed defenses. These are featured in a fair number of scenarios. Giving them an EW boost in addition to webs and the EW support of their bases is a little excessive to me.

How much does Hydran reliance on fighters complicate their use of EW? It seems to me that anything that protects the ships will only make the fighters more tempting targets and vice versa. However, I'm a little rusty with Hydran tactics.

Also, aren't hellbores more resistant to EW than most other weapons? There might be balance issues with giving hellbore armed ships another source of ECM.

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 06:26 am: Edit

I'd rather give everybody some way of removing EW toys, at around 100 hexes range and for free

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 06:34 am: Edit

That, and the fact that with most Hydran ships a good portion of their firepower is tied up in the fighters, that already have a built in EW source as small targets. I personally hate the ECM drone and EPT, but that's me. I don't use them when I play.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 07:12 am: Edit

MR:

Maybe I missed a memo ( or didn't double check the ECM drone rules before I posted ) but I was under the impression that as drones; ECM drones had even more servere small target modifiers than Fighters.


RF:

One thing to remember also is that just leaving the Hydrans with nothing becasue the Hellbore is a 2D6 weapon won't hold water because there are entirely fussion hydran battles here and there.


I'ld like to see different races have different functionalities not duplicates of each other.
So something like Hydran Carriers ( almost all hydran vessels) get to loan not just ECM but also ECCM to their fighters might be a good way to offset the ECM drone/plasma problem.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 07:51 am: Edit

Glenn,

I believe (and I could be wrong, it's been a while) that the basis of my idea was a remote-control unit in a heavilly-modified Stinger-II. Said unit could be launched from a launch tube, and would have a maximum duration of three full turns. It would have the same speed range and damage points as a Stinger-II -- 15/10 without booster packs, 30/5 with -- and could change speed to match the protected ship. ECM rules same as ECM drone.
The major disadvantage: it's slow before WBPs in Y180, and even WBPs can't hit speed 31.
The major offsetting benefit: it's a lot harder to kill without those packs.
The minor disadvantage: it's fighter sized, and thus doesn't get quite as good of a small target modifier as a drone.
The minor offsetting benefit: even with packs, it's takes a smidgen more damage to kill than a single-space ECM drone.

Many suggestions were made by many people for ECM-modes for the ESG for the Lyrans.

By Ed Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 08:27 am: Edit

While not perfect and having some restrictions the sensor drogue can be used. Maybe better than coming up with new rules try an expanded version of the sensor drogue for EW deficient races.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 08:40 am: Edit

---

Quote:

Maybe I missed a memo ( or didn't double check the ECM drone rules before I posted ) but I was under the impression that as drones; ECM drones had even more servere small target modifiers than Fighters.

---

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 09:34 am: Edit

---

Quote:

Maybe better than coming up with new rules try an expanded version of the sensor drogue for EW deficient races.

---

By Robert Snook (Verdick) on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 10:45 am: Edit

Fighters and drones have the same small target modifiers.
Hydrans have a multitude of means to support their fighters in terms of EW. They have their built in ECM and ECCM, they can carry EW-pods, which can boost them up to 6 ECM and six ECCM (they can go higher, but can only use 6/6), and the carrier can loan up their sensor rating in ECM/ECCM to a whole squadron of fighters. With that flexibility, who needs to give the Hydrans more EW support? In terms of the ship, I point to the fighters and say that any enemy who has gone through fighting the fighters with all their EW advantages will have its firepower mitigated anyways, whihc is what EW is supposed to do.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 11:22 am: Edit

Michael John Campbell said: "So something like Hydran Carriers (almost all hydran vessels) get to loan not just ECM but also ECCM to their fighters might be a good way to offset the ECM drone/plasma problem."

Response: You are kidding, right? If not, maybe you need to read the rule on lending EW to fighters a little more carefully. All carriers can already lend ECCM to their fighters. See (J4.93) and note that even the example in the rule says that the fighters can be lent both ECM and ECCM by the carrier.

The limitation is that fighters, all fighters not just Hydran fighters, cannot use more than six points of ECM and six points of ECCM (J4.91), so while they can have more ECM (from natural sources) they can never have more than six ECCM.

By Ed Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 11:56 am: Edit

Jessica, they can say that about anything in the game practically. After all it is just a game and you can create any reason you want for someone to have something and someone else not. Other than tactically fitting in with each races main weapons why cant everyone have drones. If you can build a remote controlled fighter, why not a drone. The main thing is to try not to create more rules use the ones we have, there are enough.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 10:15 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

I believe (and I could be wrong, it's been a while) that the basis of my idea was a remote-control unit in a heavilly-modified Stinger-II. Said unit could be launched from a launch tube, and would have a maximum duration of three full turns. It would have the same speed range and damage points as a Stinger-II -- 15/10 without booster packs, 30/5 with -- and could change speed to match the protected ship. ECM rules same as ECM drone.
The major disadvantage: it's slow before WBPs in Y180, and even WBPs can't hit speed 31.
The major offsetting benefit: it's a lot harder to kill without those packs.
The minor disadvantage: it's fighter sized, and thus doesn't get quite as good of a small target modifier as a drone.
The minor offsetting benefit: even with packs, it's takes a smidgen more damage to kill than a single-space ECM drone.

---

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 02:20 pm: Edit

One of the differences between a fighter and a drone is that one is much more expendable than the other. Even in SFB there is such a thing as economic cost.

A drone has, compared to a fighter (or even an admin shuttle) virtually no cost. It will be used once, and then be replaced.

Fighters often do not survive in combat (true), but are built to conduct multiple missions. Even though that Stinger-2 (or Stinger-H, or Stinger-1, or what have you) was blown up the moment you launched it in Scenario X, prior to Scenario X it flew multiple missions. Combat Space Patrols, reconnaissance, escort, even mail delivery (cargo pod on the pod rails) to name a few. The upshot is that it is designed from the ground up to be used over and over.

Converting it to a one-shot EW module is economically not a good idea.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 07:58 am: Edit

Well, I suppose one could tractor the thing at the end of its three-turn life and drag it into the bay to be later re-"armed" (not within the same scenario...or, depending how you wanted to use the rule, within the same scenario). As it would be in the same hex as the protected ship, it wouldn't be much of a job to do so...and the thing might even have a better chance for survival than a normal Stinger-II (self-protection, proximity to the supported ship, and all that).

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 01:12 pm: Edit

It could be rearmed by popping off all the EW pods and putting new ones on.

We can put a few disincentives in there for other races that won't inconveineince the Hydrans too much.

To loan to ships a ECF is even further cut back from an EWF. Gat-armed fighters are reduced to 2xP-3 and non-gat fighters lose all phasers. it should still be able to act as a EWF for a squadron if and only if it is replacing the squadron's EWF.

Suggest a ECF can commit 1 or 2 pods to its job. The first pod loses 1 point of EW and it can only lend ECM to non-shuttles.

A ECF can only defend the ship it was launched from. You can't spread them around they way you can ECM drones or EC Plasmas.

Any true-carrier (which includes abut half the Hydran fleet) could carry one in place of a fighter, be it EWF or combat, but never more than one.

In addition, any Hydran can replace *1* admin shuttle with one of these.

naturally, ECF EW does not combine with ECM drones and EC plasmas.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 05:06 pm: Edit

Some Comments:

Sounds a little like a Hydran mini-SWAK in a way.

Alternatively, I would think that after long obsevation of Klingon use of the ECM drone the Hydrans would take a hint as to the obvious value.

Answers: Specialty drogue?

A new shuttle unit that is RC controlled only. Takes fighter damage (10) has fighter speed ( 15 + can have WBP) and supplies 4 ECM to target ship (lent from outside source restrictions apply). BPV would be pretty high.

By John Smith (Johnsmith) on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 12:27 am: Edit

I didnt really like the idea of the ECP anyways. To me, the 3 ECCM plasma gets offsets the 3 ECM from the drone, making the two equal. Drone using races cancel out when fighting each other, and races with neither drones nor plasma usually have something that ignores EW (i.e. the web and the ESG). The only other two races are the Andros (who definately do NOT need an EW upgrade), and the Hydrans, whose hellbores and fighters are slightly resistant to EW.

I thought things were fine before the ECP, but now that plasma races have free EW I suppose I can see why everyone else is clammoring for one. I liked it better when the races were all different, tho.

By Glenn Hoepfner (Ikabar) on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 01:44 pm: Edit

Why can't the Andros have some EW thingy?
Perhaps a satship that takes up hanger space designed to produce EW support. No, I'm not talking about an Anaconda or smaller varaint. Something that the mothership itself can use for its own uses as a scout ship and its own sensors. It can be very expensive and large.

By Jeremy Gray (Gray) on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 02:06 pm: Edit

Glenn, sounds like a scout pod. I think I'd rather have the Anaconda. Unless of course the EW thingy is not going to be blinded by the own ship's weapons. While the mothership certainly has more power to play with, the Anaconda can focus on providing EW support while the mothership fires its weapons freely, without worrying about blinding channels.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 04:13 pm: Edit

I agree. Andros are covered or can be if they want to be.

I'm not convinced the Hydrans need anything either but that won't stop me from weighing in on on how they should be set up IF they're going to get something.