The Andros already ignore the echelon bonus (it's in the ISC rules in CL25), so it was more about seeing whether the Feds/FRA and disruptor ships really deserve some advantage against Andros, but I can see if that would not be the case.

You know, given the higher factors many ISC ships have, do people think that their historical problems with the Andros is fairly represented in the F&E scale?

Gary

By John Erwin Hacker (Godzillaking) on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - 04:06 pm: Edit

Steve:

I have been out of the loop for some time when it comes to F&E. When is the ISC & Andromedan Modules for the game coming out?.

Just interested in knowing.

By Scott Tenhoff (Scottt) on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - 04:15 pm: Edit

ISC is supposed to be next year. I believe the schedule says April '05 currently. Bumped from Feb '05 from 3-6 months ago.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 05:25 am: Edit

Quick question

There is supposed to be two new Andro ship types in CL30 that make a big difference to all this. Can someone please post a rough outline when they get CL30? I won't have it for a while yet - my buget doesn't currently strech to CL's.

Comment

I looked at the andro ships last weekend and was left wondering why they bothered to upsize thier satships....

Basic stats
Viper:- TRL, 4Phas-2, 4PA front, 3PA rear, 4 batts.
Cobra:- 2TRL, 4Phas-2, 4PA front, 3PA rear, 4 batts.
Mamba:- 3TRL, 6Phas-2, 6PA front, 4PA rear, 6 batts.

An intruder can carry 4 vipers, 3 cobras , or 2 Mambas. 4 Vipers have more BPV than 2 Mambas, and more phasers than a cobra or mamba complement. Under nearly all circumstances I can envisage, it is better to have a viper complement. The sole exception is that it is easier to lend EW to mambas as there are fewer of them. Reading all the Andro write-ups, there is a strong implication that the bigger satships made more of a difference than just being easier to get high EW on.

Wierdly, the small satships have the same number of PA panels as the medium ones, but the medium ones require more power to run their PA panels, making the viper->cobra upgrade look even more dubious. (NB Viper BPV=70, Cobra BPV=83, 4*70=280, 3*83=269, so BPV says the upgrade is bad. Mambas has BPV130 IIRC, so they do little better).

Shouldn't the Andros progress their technology at least a little more? They have ~30 years of war in the galactic sector, and the only really useful satship modifications they sucessfully made were mauler variants. They would surely be able to at least have a stab at better satships as opposed to just larger ones.

But maybe CL30 adressed this...

By David Lang (Dlang) on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 07:55 am: Edit

the reason for going with larger sat ships is that as the firepower climbs it becomes easier to pop the small sat ships in a single volly so the maba sat ships get used.

IIRC they started out with the cobra sized ships and the vipers are more limited (the fact that they are more BPV reflects the fact that they are more expensive so you can't have as many motherships with them as you could with cobras)

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 08:36 am: Edit

The problem is that it doesn't work that way unless you are doing raiding actions.

If you are using an intruder complement, and facing 300-500BPV of warships, then the Mambas defensibility might make a difference. Any more than that, and you would be better off to take smaller satships as 6 panels will be penetrated anyway (assuming you approach to a range where you can penetrate a shield), and it is better to have more units in play. Any less than that, and you would be better of with smaller satships as they have more firepower.

Basing your entire production on meeting such a heavily defined size of enemy squadron is not a way to go. F&E wise, the only way that this production makes sense is if the cast majority of Andro actions are against convoys and small squadrons. That will no doubt happen , but the Andros cannot win a war that way - they are simply no better than the Orion Pirates.

PS
Vipers came first. Look in the book. They were deemed to be not very good, and replaced with cobras....
This may be an artefact of the doomsday rules changes. When those TRLs were TRHs, the cobra was significantly stronger. Now, it's a very poor deal.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 09:37 am: Edit

A number of factors here....

1. The new ships have zero F&E effect as they are used only in unity. I suppose their might be a scenario for unity (with its own "map") but that can be handled by a simple rule and a couple of counters.

2. Remember that andros did all kinds of missions and took whatever satships were most useful for the mission.

3. Notwithstanding #2, changing satships is something done at a major Andro base (where spare sets might be stored or brought down by infestors) and it's quite often possible that you have to do the mission with what you can get instead of what you wish you had.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 11:04 am: Edit

Thankyou Steve.

My current thinking, FWIW.

I can't see how the Andros can make any impact looking at those ships. The GW are massively stronger with recent products, and the Andros went backwards (rightly so at the time) when the Captain's edition came out. A 2-dom Andro fleet, which can only be fielded in very few locations, is simply inferior to a standard late-war galactic fleet, just on SFB BPV, let alone on current F&E thinking.
Another thing is that battlegroups, Admirals, and marine majors have all come out to increase the size of galactic fleets while Andro fleet sizes have remained static (2 Disdev ships) .

The Andros need help somewhere, and not just for unity. Is there any chance that the Andro OOB from Andromeda will see an increase in the number of ships?

By Scott Tenhoff (Scottt) on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 11:16 am: Edit

SVC has said, that the Andromedans might (or probably does) have a shipyard in the LMC.

Which, previous to Andro War F+E, has never been defined, just "these are the reinforcements the Andros receive from the Andro Galaxy per 6 month turn".

Besides the fact that all Sat Ships can be built on a planet. (Hmm, construct ship, transport into waiting Intruder and leave).

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 11:32 am: Edit

The two disdev limit is pretty much locked and can't be changed, but there are a couple of ways around it.

You can attack in waves.

You can defend by stacking up non-disdev ships at the location you want to protect.

And we can easily fiddle with the factors any way we want to.

Androwar is very different in that the andros pretty much pick their targets (so they'll always attack something smaller) and their defenses can easily evade the limit (by using non-disdev ships carried there before hand).

As for the total number of ships, that too can be anything we want it to be.

By David Lang (Dlang) on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 12:32 pm: Edit

if the motherships are too large to DD on uner normal cases then the galactic forces will just be killing sat ships until the andros run out and retreat. in this case it really doesn't matter much if the damage ratio is 1:1 or 5:1, the galactics are taking permanent damage while the andros are taking sat-ships damage (i.e. free)

this assumes that the andros are able to deal with the galactic attrition units. I seem to remember that something said that PF's were just large enough to be targeted effectivly by TR beams, and just small enough to be destroyed by it.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - 04:34 am: Edit

Oh. That's interesting Steve.

Are you saying that the Andros could have some as yet undefined but larger number of satships in a battleforce?

i.e. when defending, the Andros could field...

2 INTs + complements.
+ Z extra satships, where Z could be up to, say, 6-10 satships, depending on some as-yet undefined command limit.

That would certainly make a *big* difference.

The implication is that maybe the Andros could set up a big attack as well. For example, they could bring along 2 Doms and 8INTs to take out the LDR or a poorly defended SB. The Doms lead the battleforce with their satships, but the INTs can feed forward some limited number of extra satships (6-10 again?), rather like a carrier might feed forward fighters.

David L...

The Andromedan OOBs currently suggest that Satships are in small enough quantities that the Andros will not be able to lose them "for free". At the very least, I imagine that replacing them will be a bit like replacing PFs.
Now if the Andromedan OOBs are increased such that a set, large, number of satships can be lost effectively "for free", a bit like the Zin pre-war drone stockpile..... (i.e. they start off with many spare satships, when these are lost, replacements have to be built).
I note that the Andro OOBs given so far have deliberatly been said to be inaccurate. Steve has left plenty of wriggle room here.

Looking much better already.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - 09:36 am: Edit

Command limits and andros aren't really in the same concept.

For them to have sat shps at a location above what the mothers bring to the party, somebody had to get them there at some previous time, which basically means that there is an andro base/operation there, I.e., it's a defensive thing.

Feeding satships forward like independent fighter squadrons isn't what I had in mind although it's an interesting concept.

As for "free" satshp replacement, nothing has been decided although the original andro rules assumed this.

Basically guys....

1. It will all work out.

2. I'm too busy to figure out how right now. We have at least two or three other F&E products, and ten or twelve non-F&E products, to do before I even have to. I could just lock this topic for about two years and we wouldn't lose a single day of constructive work on the project.

3. It's more and less complicated than you think.

4. Much as you guys enjoy this topic, you're really just wasting your time once you establish what problems I need to solve for you.

By Scott Tenhoff (Scottt) on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 07:38 pm: Edit

ANDRO SITS:

Core Base: should be 0-3/1 not 3/1. As it has no weapons by itself, just 2 disdev. 5-2-05

Eliminator. Should be removed as the ELI does not have a DisDev so no independant Ops. S.Tenhoff 5-2-05

Base deployable units. Can we replace the "B" with something else as the B is on the conjectural Bomber Barges. Possibly "D" for deployable, or "T" for Tug Missions, the Andros could have a seperate list of Tug missions to deploy bases+PDUs, they do have PDUs to garrision captured planets. S.Tenhoff 5-2-05

Hurray for the Andro SITS. Keep up the good work. :D S.Tenhoff 5-2-05

By John Erwin Hacker (Godzillaking) on Friday, July 29, 2005 - 01:06 am: Edit

To Anyone:

Is there a place on the Internet or on this website where I can get "official" or "semi-official" counters for the Andromedans. I am running a local F&E campaign and I would surely like to get them.

Thank you very much.

Until next time from GHDAR PRIME..........

"THE GODZILLAKING".

By Jeffrey Hillebrandt (Darknova) on Friday, July 29, 2005 - 01:32 am: Edit

The only 'official' Andromedan counters I've ever seen were in an old captain's log along with rules for using them as wandering monster type units. Can't remember which log it was in, though.

By John Erwin Hacker (Godzillaking) on Friday, July 29, 2005 - 03:12 am: Edit

Jeffrey Hillebrandt:

Thank you very much. It was worth a shot.

Until next time from GHDAR PRIME..........

"THE GODZILLAKING".

By Mike Curtis (Nashvillen) on Friday, July 29, 2005 - 07:47 am: Edit

If you check out the SITs you will find a listing for Andros. I don't think it is going to be the final version, but it is the most recent being only less than six months old.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 10:51 am: Edit

Hi,


Now that C5 is out for SFB, could it be possible to combine a strategic map for the LMC with rules for the Magellanic races, as well as for Operation Unity?


That way, not only can the Andros have fun in the playpen when they show up, one can also play as the Magellanics, desperately trying to hold off the invaders - and when Unity occurrs, the Alpha ships can discover the worlds which once belonged to these races?


With this, a larger Andromedan War campaign could be played in four stages:


Stage 1 - Cleansing the Cloud:

The Andro player has to establish the Desecrator and wipe out the local riff-raff.

The Galactic player(s) could pick one or more of the Magellanic factions, to get their first taste of the new threat.

In this scenario, the odds should be against the Magellanics, but any delays in conquest will affect the subsequent scenario. Also, the Galactics will have some idea of what to expect when the next phase begins...


Stage 2 - Sowing the Seeds:

Having pacified the LMC, the Andros begin planting the Rapid Transport Network in the Alpha Octant (and elsewhere, but we can leave Omega and the Xorks out for now)

The Galactic players take on the roles of the Alliance and Coalition (and ISC, if you wish) while the Andro player acts like an Orion player (not using the Orion raiding pool, so one can have an Orion player too!) - except that the Andro player must also establish Satellite Bases in the octant. The Desecrator and harvested resources in the LMC contribute to what the Andros can deploy in the Galaxy, but only a portion is sent to the Alpha Octant (as the Xorks would likely get the lion's share of attention!) so all the Andro player sees in this game is the Alpha-focussed resources.

Any delays from Stage 1 delay the Andro involvement in stage 2, and the network that is established in this scenario will affect the movement options when the time for action comes!


Stage 3 - Judgement Day:

It's Y188, and bad news has arrived for the Alpha Octant!

The Andro player can cut loose, squishing those pesky Alpha races! However, while Strategic Movement is without penalty between RTN nodes, Andro ships only move five hexes per turn away from them (and if you have left a region of the Octant uncovered, you'll have to get there the hard way - or build more RTN nodes as you go)

The Coalition, Alliance and ISC players (these three players could be used regardless of whether an historical setting is used or not) have to hold off the Andromedan onslaught, crank out those fancy X-ships, and send their scouts out for any sign of Andromedan logistical networks.

Once the first RTN node is discovered, however, the Galactics know what they are looking for, and can scour the Octant for Satellite Bases... assuming they are in any fit state to do so!

And of course, all of this (may) lead up to:


Stage 4 - Operation Unity:


The Galactic players pick a route to the LMC (the ISC player could pick route 1, while the Alliance picks route 2 and the Coalition route 3) and make their way to the LMC map.

Once there, they can try and establish a beach-head over the ruins of a former race's capital (so if the ISC gets there first, a base can be set up to hold out until the Alliance and Coalition get to the LMC)

Once all three forces are in the LMC, it's time to hunt down the Desecrator - which is where the Andro player left it in Stage 1.


Naturally, the Andro player has to concern him/herself with keeping the LMC green!


At the end, the Galactic players can divvy up the spoils in the LMC - and wait a decade or two for the Xorks to invade.


Gary

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Friday, January 05, 2007 - 11:20 am: Edit

Hi.


I managed to pick up a copy of CL 11 in Toronto the other day, and had a look at the Andro rules inside.

Now, they would probably need to be updated for the new version of Fed and Empire anyway, but I seriously hope that the abstraction of SatShips into 'fighter factors' goes, completely.

I would much sooner have proper counters for the SatShips than not (and if the opponent wanted to take out the Terminator travelling with a Dominator group, they should be able to cause directed damage at it if they wished - at the moment you have to kill all of the Dom's 'factors' to get rid of it).

Also, the number of counters needed for SatShips wouldn't be all that high - a force of 1 Intruder and 1 Conquistador would need about 5, max. (Well, MWPs and Sleds are another story, but even then would be easy enough to represent.)

One thing I would hope to see in a future Andro preview would be some rules and stats for setting up the RTN, running the Desecrators and actually conquering (instead of only raiding) - not only would it be handy to have as a test in Alpha, a future Magellanic supplement (or better yet, an inclusion of the LMC in AndroWar) would allow Andro players to use the Cloud as a testbed... and the players flying Magellanic fleets could get practice of their own in dealing with M31's most bothersome empire!


Gary

By James Lowry (Rindis) on Friday, January 05, 2007 - 12:00 pm: Edit

I can understand the desire to track the SatShips, but think about it, you're already talking about a 2:5 ratio there, which might seem fine, until you think about what that would be like at the height of the Andro invasion. I would imagine a bare minimum of 70 ships (10 per empire - should be several times that), which would in turn need 175 SatShip counters.

I think it might be nice to track the "special" SatShips (the maulers, and any support ships that need to be left behind). So an INT normally has so many SatShip factors, but if it's carrying a mauler it gets a token for it, and deducts a certain number of factors (depending on the SatShip size) from its normal total until the SatShip is destroyed/transferred and the INT gets a reload of new factors. So the "normal" ones get handled abstractly, but the more important ones are called out specifically.

The same system can handle ships carrying RTN parts, and the like. (I think I remember reading that the Andros set up their bases by carrying SatShip-like parts - haven't dealt with them enough....)

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Friday, January 05, 2007 - 12:50 pm: Edit

Well, in that case, perhaps counters with, say, 3xCOB, or 3xVIP, could be added for use with bigger forces.

Also, depending on how the Andro rules get written, there may not be all that many Andro counters on the board at any given time (perhaps they would have an 'RTN pool' which simulates the lack of knowledge their enemies originally had when it came to Andromedan fleet deployments).


And it's more than just being able to track the SatShips - in my case, there's that intangible notion which steers me towards wanting the proper counters... it 'feels' more substantial, more accurate, more natural than abstracting them away into fighter factors.


Gary

By Grant Strong (Phoenix) on Friday, January 05, 2007 - 11:11 pm: Edit

Another thing that might need to be looked at is when the Andros use more then 2 ships with a displacement device, since G18.8 limits two in a given area, but G18.85 allows them(though I've never seen an SFB scenario with it happening) to bring more.
What kind of penalties would result from not being able to use a dis dev on a mothership? 1-1 directed damage?

When we're talking about assaulting a home world with an SBX(with PFs) and 20 PDUs(with PFs) it comes out to a crazy compot of 378 from fixed defences alone, plus another 180 from ships comes out to 558 Compot.
Somehow I think the Andros might need 10 motherships in a battleforce...

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Saturday, January 06, 2007 - 12:32 pm: Edit

Perhaps the penalties will be more strategic than tactical - the Andros could only get 2 Motherships into or out of a given hex by Strategic Movement per turn.

When it comes to assaults, perhaps the Andros get 2 Motherships via the RTN into each of a number of adjacent hexes surrounding a target SB, then plough in using the next available Operational Movement. Handy when the Andros have blanket RTN coverage, less so once the SatBases start to get popped.

One thing - the fluff seems to indicate that Andro ship sans RTN are slower than GW-era Alpha ships in Operational Movement, and the same speed as Magellanic ships of the same era. Would that mean that both Andro and Magellanic ships should have an Operational Movement speed of 5 hexes per turn (rather than 6)?

If so, it would make the need to rely on the RTN more acute - and show the ability of the Andros to more successfully 'make do' in a Magellanic campaign.


Gary

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Saturday, January 06, 2007 - 01:01 pm: Edit

Does anyone have rules or a writeup for how the RTN works? How to find a RTN point? ect..

I kind of envision the RTN to use a SB sized unit to transport units to somewhere else. I wrote some stuff up a long time ago.