Richard: I don't see how they have to be careful with mines at all really. They just stick most or all of them along the outer layer of web with the captor mines being further out.

Basicly just have the minefield be an effective 4th web layer. Thats is a reasonably dense field if it's 5 hexes or less across with even one mine package.

I don't have access to SH110 since my rule book is behind things (I pulled the above off a file I have), so I don't know what the minefield looks like in that.

If the minefield has the captor mines anywhere but 1 hex from the outermost web, or outside the web, than to be brutally honest, thats just plain stupid and not tacticly wise. If it is like that it's the scenero designer trying to give the bugs a chance. No offense really intended to who ever wrote it; but it is silly to have phaser captor mines have to fire through more than one layer of web.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Sunday, September 19, 2004 - 12:54 pm: Edit

A frequently overlooked mine rule.

M2.441 Basically one move can only activate 1 mine. (there are exceptions)

But a one web layer defense is more than sufficient when times are peacefull. Also each point of web strength equals a BPV point. So any base/sphere would be heavily out manned by mobile units in an even battle.

So those webs that are just sitting there are fairly cheap/weak.

By Daniel Knudtson Thompson (Brezgonne) on Sunday, September 19, 2004 - 01:29 pm: Edit

Ken: your assuming a bit to much I think in terms of "well, there is only one layer of web". Only one layer of web provides basicly zero defense.

And there is no way in hell that a sphere would only have one layer of web around it. Same for a starbase.

Even if the inital web may be weaker than max (Something I doubt if they see the attacker coming) I think it's unlikely that they don't maintain web around their bases.

And the rule is one mine per impulse. Not total. And thats not counting command mines either.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, September 19, 2004 - 02:25 pm: Edit

I'd point out that if you have web anchors you can cast web between them and get web up REALLY fast. But you have to have casters.

By Daniel Knudtson Thompson (Brezgonne) on Sunday, September 19, 2004 - 02:49 pm: Edit

Every Tholian base in the THG is, I believe, supposed to have web casters.

They use the BATSW and the Neo Starbase.

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Sunday, September 19, 2004 - 10:43 pm: Edit

My mistake on the anchored web segments. Problem of checking the rule book too early in the morning.

DKT: There needs to be a seperation to prevent the automatic mines from triggering on the ships reinforcing the web. That can significantly impair the placement of captor mines in relation to the main belt.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Monday, September 20, 2004 - 06:31 am: Edit

"But a one web layer defense is more than sufficient when times are peacefull. Also each point of web strength equals a BPV point. So any base/sphere would be heavily out manned by mobile units in an even battle."

BPV is a nonsence in these kind of battles. The bottom line is that the tholians would have at least some web up at a SB/dyson sphere, and would probably be able to crank at least 1 layer up to 35 before the Selts get to work. At either of those locations, there will probably be a fleet of at least 6 ships, in which case they will probably need only 1-2 turn's warning to pump all layers of web up to maximum strength (assuming one or two web tenders as well). Given the sensors on a SB/sphere, you would expect more warning than that.

Really, the only way I can see the Selts winning the rebellion is if those 6 ships were mostly Selt. The rebellion is simultaneous across the entire galaxy, and as a result, most of the tholian bases are pretty much instantly busted from *inside* the web.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, September 20, 2004 - 08:58 am: Edit

Actually, each aggregate web strength point at the start of the scenario is .25 BPV, not one BPV. A 30 hex globular web at strength 35 would have 1050 aggregate strength points and would therefor cost 262.5 BPV in a BPV based scenario.

Dave Slatter;

I agree with you about BPV being "nonsense" for this kind of battle. We know from the standard web rules that webs around permanent installations are usually kept at zero strength by special buoys, and then reinforced when ships are detected approaching. The key factors for determining web strength in a battle that is part of a campaign (or a historical batle) are how much time passes between detection and the beginning of the assault, and how much excess power above HK the Tholian ships or PFs (not in the Home Galaxy, of course) have available to put into the outer rings. (The base itself can reinforce the inner ring very quickly.)

Everyone;

The "Beginnings and Endings" scenario in Module C2 (the initial Seltorian assault on a Tholian starbase) includes a Tholian SB with all three rings at strength 35 at start, but it only has 12 large command controlled phaser-captor mines. It does not have a standard minefield. This is probably typical of the state of Tholian defenses at the start of the revolt.

By Daniel Knudtson Thompson (Brezgonne) on Monday, September 20, 2004 - 09:00 am: Edit

David:

Given the Tholians paranoid nature I rather doubt they allow Seltorian ships inside of a web defense.

Using them for auxiliries is one thing. Letting them inside the Tholians primary weapon is quite another. And I think it's virtually certain that the bugs are never allowed near a dysons sphere.

Besides, 6 ships aren't enough to destroy a starbase quickly enough, much less a sphere.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, September 20, 2004 - 09:04 am: Edit

P.S.

I've never been sure whether those buoys that maintain the webs at zero strength long term are standard web anchor buoys or not. The rules don't say, but I've always assumed "not" is probably the answer. The rules do say that these special maintenance buoys don't function in combat. Web anchors buoys of course do function in combat, but the function is very different from web maintenance. All they do is serve as an anchor. Some other unit has to provide maintaining/reinforcing energy. So my best guess is that these zero strength maintenance buoys are probably something different than web anchor buoys, and not represented directly in SFB. But it is possible that it is in fact a separate and previously undescribed function of the standard web anchor buoy.

By Daniel Knudtson Thompson (Brezgonne) on Monday, September 20, 2004 - 09:07 am: Edit

Alan:

I disagree on the minefield. To me it seems sorta silly to only have captor mines around a starbase and the lack of explosive mines makes me think that, that particular feature of the scenerio was done that way to give the bugs a chance in hell. Having to deal with mines more or less makes the Tholian base invincable.

Even if that is the case, it takes basicly no time at all, and less points than a frigate, to setup a minefield once the first attack is known.

Eee... got to get to class. I'll post more after I get back.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, September 20, 2004 - 09:14 am: Edit

Daniel;

It doesn't matter whether you disagree. I'm telling you what the scenario rules say. You may think the scenario was poorly written, but that is what the Tholians have for mines at that starbase.

Now if you're saying that the Tholians would quickly increase the minefield strength at their surviving bases after they realized a revolt was in progress, that's another matter. But at the instant the revolt starts, most Tholian bases apparently only have nominal minefield protection.

By Frank DeMaris (Kemaris) on Monday, September 20, 2004 - 11:38 am: Edit

I'm not at all surprised the Tholians have trivial minefields at the beginning of the rebellion. After all, mines basically exist the protect the base, but with web nothing can threaten the base. Ergo, any mines are an additional and unnecessary expense to lay and maintain. This is especially true when we consider the psychology of such a massive and dominant empire as the Tholian Will. Nothing has seriously challenged the Will in, what, millenia? The THG is fully explored, there are no other empires in the THG who can challenge the Tholians. The Tholian fleet need only be large enough to ensure that the Most Favored Subject race is kept in place, because anything more is also a waste of money. Seltorian ships conduct boarding operations against rebellious ships, not Tholians. Likewise, Seltorian, not Tholian, ships conduct operations on the surface of rebellious planets. The Seltorian fleet should comprise the bulk of the forces available to the Will, while the Tholian fleet should be only as large as absolutely necessary, plus a small (possibly zero) paranoia factor.

Remember, the Tholian Will went completely through the chain Confident-Cocky-Lazy-Dead. They can be as lazy/sloppy/overconfident as they need to be to keep the history straight. The paranoia of the Holdfast is obviously an overcorrection in response to the downfall of the Will.

By Daniel Knudtson Thompson (Brezgonne) on Monday, September 20, 2004 - 11:43 am: Edit

Alan: Not quite what I ment. I wasn't disputing what the scenerio says.

Just that, that base seemed to have a very weird mine deployment and it was probably written like that so that the Seltorians had a chance in hell and my not nessicarily be a good indicator of whaty the fields are like around their bases normally. Or it could. Just dunno either way really.

To me it just seems very odd for there to be no explosive mines.

Sorry if I was unclear. I was pressed for time when I posted.

Yes, I belive the Tholians would bump up the minefield around their bases once the revolt started. It only takes a mine layer like 20 minutes or less to setup a field of automatic mines so I can't see it being a diffcult task.

By Gary Plana (Garyplana) on Monday, September 20, 2004 - 11:50 am: Edit

Ever since they arrived in our galaxy, things have not been peaceful for the Tholians, courtesy of the Klingon Empire.

The Tholians have only one place to live, their dyson sphere. There isn't a Klingon ship captain alive who would not like to attack it.

The cost of keeping a three-tier web around Tholia is trivial compared to the cost if they don't. It may not have defsats and mines, but you can bet it has web around it all the time.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, September 20, 2004 - 12:32 pm: Edit

Maintaining 0 strength web is very cheep and can be automated.

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Tuesday, September 21, 2004 - 04:48 pm: Edit

One thought on rapid minefield deployment, yes a mine field can be placed in less than half an hour, IF you have the mines, and production set up to make them, and thier minelayers.

ADM

By Daniel Knudtson Thompson (Brezgonne) on Tuesday, September 21, 2004 - 07:36 pm: Edit

When not in use I understood that minelaying ships are kept near starbases or capitals.

I think.

By Frank DeMaris (Kemaris) on Tuesday, September 21, 2004 - 07:59 pm: Edit

Minelayers are, at least in this galaxy, converted freighters. As such they will certainly not exist in large numbers, and possibly not at all, during peacetime because each one sitting at a SB or capitol represents some small but measurable loss in economic activity which the civilians won't tolerate. Particularly not civilians who are members of an empire that has dominated all of its galaxy for centuries or millenia and which has no threats to protect itself against.

By Daniel Knudtson Thompson (Brezgonne) on Tuesday, September 21, 2004 - 08:43 pm: Edit

Frank:

There have to be minelayers even if it's just to repair and maintain exsisting minefields.

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Tuesday, September 21, 2004 - 10:00 pm: Edit

Yes, but four would severly limit the ability to fortify all there bases.

ADM

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Tuesday, September 21, 2004 - 11:08 pm: Edit

Another idea for "fixing" Web Breakers, Perhaps the table on the SSDs is for use against free standing web, when anchored the "wave harmonics", or some other Handwavium, causes the damaged to be increased by some multiple, 1.5 to whatever is needed to make bases vulnerable. just a thought on an EASY quick fix.

ADM

By Daniel Knudtson Thompson (Brezgonne) on Tuesday, September 21, 2004 - 11:30 pm: Edit

ADM: It would also require a more drastic rules change than just using X, Y, or Z ship.

By Chad Carew (Blackhawkckc) on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 05:03 am: Edit

I think it would be much easier to make a web breaker class ship variant as proposed above than change existing rules.

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 09:49 am: Edit

Fair enough, as a one to three point rule change, and no new SSDs I thought this might be more attractive, but if not so be it.

ADM