After Action Reports

Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: A Call to Arms Star Fleet: After Action Reports
  Subtopic Posts   Updated

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, April 03, 2013 - 09:22 am: Edit

A few line items based on the first upload of the Fleet Update #2 pdf:

*The Klingon C6 might have had four drone racks mounted on its Squadron Scale Ship Card (in FC: Briefing #2), but was restricted to only firing two of them in a given turn. To approximate this, the Drone AD should be reduced to 2. (By the time this was improved upon, any surviving C6s were being fielded as C8s or C9s anyway.) For future reference, several other Klingon ships in FCB2 have this same limitation, so would have their AD values halved in ACtA:SF terms if and when they are ported over at a later point.

*The Ship Card for the Kzinti DNE (also in FCB2) has only six drone racks, but is capable of launching all six in a single turn. Therefore, its AD value should be 6 instead of 7.

*Both the Klingon C6 and Kzinti DNE served in an era when drone speeds were slower than in the General War. (In FC terms, the drones would have been Speed 16, as opposed to Speed 24). Therefore, in both cases (and in the case of any other drone-armed ship in the Middle Years), the range of the Drone AD should probably be reduced to 24 inches, to represent this one-third decrease.

*In SFB, a number of the drone upgrade options (such as Swordfish and Spearfish drones) did not exist until the time of the General War. This should probably be reflected by restricting the appropriate number of drone options from use on the Klingon C6 and Kzinti DNE (and on other Middle Years ships).

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, April 13, 2016 - 11:13 pm: Edit

This is not the topic for deluxe edition reports.

By Ryan Opel (Feast) on Thursday, June 17, 2021 - 03:26 pm: Edit

ACTASF Reinforcements 1 AAR:

The listing for the DNW says "A prototype DNW was constructed using an NCL as a basis for construction and proved that the design would work." pg 23

The master starship book says (R2.123) "Design studies were commissioned, but it was determined that existing new light cruisers (R2.18) could not be used (due to their relatively fast production) and it would be necessary to build “standard” versions of these ships for war dreadnoughts. While this engineering work ultimately paved the way for advanced technology conversions of new light cruisers, no war dreadnoughts were built..." pg 55

What is the correct answer?

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Thursday, June 17, 2021 - 10:42 pm: Edit

Both. I have told you guys before that ACTA and shapeways stuff is not history but designed to sell minis. DO NOT ever use ACTA or Shapeways to modify SFB/SFU history. Do not even waste time reporting that stuff. For that matter, FedCmdr is full of conjectural ships described as historic.

By John Williams (Johndw) on Friday, June 18, 2021 - 07:31 am: Edit

Goodness, its not like this is a real historical record of ww2 ships or something, it is just a game. I'm fine with the inconsistencies.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, June 18, 2021 - 09:09 am: Edit

SFB is history. F&E is broad strokes history. The other stuff is just fun.

By Zac Belado (Pixelgeek) on Tuesday, June 29, 2021 - 01:05 am: Edit

Both Book 2 and Reinforcements list the Web Breaker as having the Range Attenuation 1 trait when it should be the Damage Attenuation 1/1 trait

By Tony L. Thomas (Scoutdad) on Tuesday, June 29, 2021 - 09:59 am: Edit

Zac: I've seen the numerous post regarding this issue in multiple forums / locations.

I had a family event last night and chose to avoid the computer for the evening and spend time with the kids / grandkids.

This is indeed an overlooked typo and a report will be formatted and sent to ADB.
It will be resolved before the next release of R1 goes public.

Thank you for your diligence.

By Zac Belado (Pixelgeek) on Tuesday, June 29, 2021 - 10:15 am: Edit

Like I said on FB, family time is more important. Especially after the last year

By Will McCammon (Djdood) on Saturday, February 11, 2023 - 01:40 am: Edit

ACTASF Reinforcements 1, Revision 1 AAR:

B8B Invulnerable-class Combined Dreadnought
" the rear hull of a D8 dreadnought." Should be C8 dreadnought.

B8K Invulnerable-class Combined Dreadnought
" the rear hull of a D8 dreadnought." Should be C8 dreadnought.

both, pg 39

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Friday, February 17, 2023 - 10:02 am: Edit

A Call to Arms: Star Fleet Reinforcements One, February 2023 PDF edition:

Page 121 - In the "Meet the 7000s" section, it might be worth noting the existence of this set of 24 2-centimetre round base covers for 1:7000 scale miniatures, each of which includes a full set of eight firing arcs etched into the base cover itself. (Along with a note advising players to use centimetres instead of inches if using these base covers.)

Alternatively, if it's too late to add such a note to this book, perhaps it could be considered for the "hobby" portion of Book 3?

Add a Message

This is a private posting area. A valid username and password combination is required to post messages to this discussion.

Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation