DISCLAIMER!!!!
What I'm about to propose is for something that would be ENTIRELY OPTIONAL. I am not, have not, and will not ever suggest this as a wholesale replacement of the existing rules, so any comments to that imply otherwise will be referred to "Disclaimer #1"

By Joe Stevenson (Alligator) on Saturday, July 14, 2007 - 10:22 am: Edit

ALTERNATE TURN/MOVEMENT SYSTEM

In order to better simulate simultaneous movement, I propose the following ALTERNATIVE system:

Reduce turns to 3 months; turns become Winter Spring, Summer, Fall.
All Movement halved (fast ships move 4, auxes move 2)
Build schedule bifurcated; DN/CC turns become Winter/Summer. 1/turn becomes 1/every other turn, etc.
Reaction remains unchanged.
Reverve movement gets reduced to 4 hexes (not 3)

I believe we'd see a lot more small battles, as forces are marshalled one turn for the actual attack the following turn.

This is VERY rough, and needs a lot of fleshing out. Just putting the idea out there for comment. If this were ever made workable, I think it would be really cool for EB.

At first blush, it feels like this would favor the defender, but I'm not so sure.

By Tim Losberg (Krager) on Saturday, July 14, 2007 - 02:06 pm: Edit

Joe, how would replacement of Fighters and CEDS repair factor into this?

By Daniel G. Knipfer (Dgknipfer) on Saturday, July 14, 2007 - 02:10 pm: Edit

Is an interesting idea, but how would you deal with retrograde movement? Would a unit only retrograde 3 hexes on one turn and then retrograde three more on the next turn? How would you keep track of which units are in retrograde? Could a ship that had begun retrograding to a base (but not made it all the way to a retrograde point) do op movement on its next turn?

And is 4 hexes of Reserve movement with the existing # of Res Counters enough? The number of locations where a Reserve Fleet can mutually support two important locations at once drop drastically.

What other adjustments to construction would need to be made? Lyran production might look something like this;

Spring Y168: 1xCA, 2xCW, 1xDW, 2xFF
Summer Y168: 1xDN, 2xCW, 2xDW, 1xFF
Fall Y168: 1xCA, 2xCW, 1xDW, 2xFF
Winter Y168: 1xBC, 2xCW, 2xDW, 1xFF

Spring Y175: 1xCA, 2xCW, 1xDW, 2xFF
Summer Y175: 1xDN, 1xNCA, 1xCW, 2xDW, 1xFF
Fall Y175: 1xCA, 2xCW, 1xDW, 2xFF
Winter Y175: 1xBC, 1xNCA, 1xCW, 2xDW, 1xFF

Spring Y180: 1xCA, 2xCW, 1xHDW, 2xDW
Summer Y180: 1xDN, 1xNCA, 1xCW, 2xDW, FF
Fall Y180: 1xCA, 2xCW, 1xHDW, 2xDW
Winter Y180 1xBC, 1xNCA, 1xCW, 2xDW, FF

Now, would each race get 1/2 of their economy each Spring and Fall with the rest received each Summer and Winter or would if all be received each Spring and Fall leaving it up to the players to save enough for the Summer and Winter turns.

And how would you handle conversions? Once per turn for each conversion facility or once every other turn? If you get one per turn per facility would you get one major per turn or one every other turn?

Millions of questions flooding my mind right now. I’m sure I’ll have more later, once I get them sorted out in my head.

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Saturday, July 14, 2007 - 06:58 pm: Edit

Under this concept you could put a ship into an available conversion facility (say in the Spring) and it could be removed complete in the next season. (No more instant conversions...except the Rom Modulars). This could bring another concept to bear instead of simply cost for certain ships/major converions you can play with the time it takes.

By Kevin Howard (Jarawara) on Saturday, July 14, 2007 - 08:36 pm: Edit

Personally I always thought that ship conversions should be done at the beginning of the turn, but then not be available until the end of the turn. Nothing major, but it does take the ship out of commission for a turn.

(That was just commentary supporting Lawrence's idea, not a specific suggestion.)

By Joe Stevenson (Alligator) on Sunday, July 15, 2007 - 12:40 am: Edit

"Joe, how would replacement of Fighters and CEDS repair factor into this? "

Hadn't decided. Most likely reduce the number of times you can replace lost fighters, OR increase the cost of fighters.


"Is an interesting idea, but how would you deal with retrograde movement?"

3 hexes on the current turn. That's all.
It would increase the need for mobile basis, OMB, supply tugs, and using the planets for supply.


"What other adjustments to construction would need to be made? Lyran production might look something like this; "

You got it! :-)

"Under this concept you could put a ship into an available conversion facility (say in the Spring) and it could be removed complete in the next season. (No more instant conversions...except the Rom Modulars). "

I like it. It would also improve the utility of Romulan modulars, which currently aren't worth all that much (only helps you avoid ADS during production.... I doubt ANYONE has EVER moved modules from one ship to another, except for maybe to a DMH)

By Michael H.Oliver (Mholiver) on Sunday, July 15, 2007 - 10:43 am: Edit

Joe
In a way this would be a Major overhaul of all the rules of the Game...Supply ranges would be 3 not 6 hexes......The Hydran would be hurt badly if the BATS in hexes 0915,1116,1217 are destroyed...stopping the Hydran run to the Fed..... the BATS in hexes 0114, 0315 and 0515 are killed the Hydran cant do a deep drive into Lyran territory..then...forward supply basees (MB) would have to be deployed , which means the Hydran to build them....and I can point out the same issue for each races using this rule

the next issue here is about the paperwork

Joe,you got to agree with me you hate the idea of MORE paperwork.record keeping ect ect.Im not trying to start a flame war here ...BUT you have been against (plus other) any proposals that has little or some extra record keeping... and with this there will be a ton more paperwork to keep up with

Tim say
"Joe, how would replacement of Fighters and CEDS repair factor into this? "

Joe say
"Hadn't decided. Most likely reduce the number of times you can replace lost fighters, OR increase the cost of fighters"

That I would love for that to happen to the fighter replacement,reduce the number or paid a cost for them , myself

Conversion facility for a minor convert would not take a whole turn, a Major convert yes a whole turn...but againt I see more and more rules being added to the game
and feel that SVC will not go along with this idea based on what he told me a month ot so ago...
Im not against this idea......I do like this.... but for your DISCLAIMER!!!! it would about redo every rule in the game... I dont see no way around that....too many rules will have to be redo or rewriten......mholiver

By Joe Stevenson (Alligator) on Sunday, July 15, 2007 - 11:54 am: Edit

"Supply ranges would be 3 not 6 hexes......"

No it wouldn't. I never said anything about supply.


"BUT you have been against (plus other) any proposals that has little or some extra record keeping... and with this there will be a ton more paperwork to keep up with "

What extra paperwork is required? Please explain.


"and feel that SVC will not go along with this idea based on what he told me a month ot so ago... "

It's completely optional, and not intended to place the existing system wholesale. You mention the disclaimer... PLEASE READ IT. I'm offering an alternative for people to mess around with. This is not as complicated as you think.

By Daniel G. Knipfer (Dgknipfer) on Sunday, July 15, 2007 - 12:12 pm: Edit

I just spotted a major problem with the idea of reducing movement by 1/2 when you spit the two turn year into a four turn year. Most SBs are more than 3 hexes from the nearest enemy starting supply point. Only 6 SBs are within 3 hexes of an enemy supply point and two of those are Tholian. Outside Tholian space the 4 SBs in range of attack if movement is reduced to 3 hexes are the Kzinti Duke SB, Lyran Red Claw SB, Hydran 2nd Fleet SB, and Romulan North Fleet SB. This makes it possible for the Klingon, Federation, and Gorn players to not even bother do defend their border SBs during an initial defense of their borders. Anybody want to fight the Fed when they get to defend all of their BATS without threat to the local SB and always get a chance to reinforce the local SB before you can get there?

I think you should make movement 4 hexes for standard warships to help preserve the threat of attack against the border SBs. This also keeps a greater difference between warship and auxiliary warship movement.

Recommendation: Aux ships, Convoys & Military Convoys move 2, Old Warships & National Guard ships (future rule) move 3, standard Warships move 4, Fast & X-ships move 5.

By Jason E. Schaff (Jschaff297061) on Sunday, July 15, 2007 - 12:24 pm: Edit

Strategic movement would need to be seriously modified under this proposal. Being able to strat move once for every 3 hexes of opmovement would have the effect of making fleets far more mobile than is currently the case. Consider the implications for the Tholian Border Squadron or the elements of the Fed Fifth Fleet released when the Klingons attack.

That being said, this sounds like a neat idea. It would take quite a while to digest all the interactions with other rules and figure out what else would need to be modified though.

Cheers,
Jason

By Daniel G. Knipfer (Dgknipfer) on Sunday, July 15, 2007 - 01:41 pm: Edit

Jason,

I'm not sure what you mean. Strat movement is all ready one of the most important forms of movement and that wouldn't change. If it does turn out to be an issue how would you limit it? Under the normal rules even slow units can strat 12 hexes and there's no limit for warships. What would you do, limit slow units to 6 hexes and warships to 12 hexes?

By Joe Stevenson (Alligator) on Sunday, July 15, 2007 - 01:50 pm: Edit

"I just spotted a major problem with the idea of reducing movement by 1/2 when you spit the two turn year into a four turn year. Most SBs are more than 3 hexes from the nearest enemy starting supply point. Only 6 SBs are within 3 hexes of an enemy supply point and two of those are Tholian."

Dan,

This is precisely the dynamic I'm looking for. Greater realism, and more likely to get a rolling defense.


Jason,
"Strategic movement would need to be seriously modified under this proposal. Being able to strat move once for every 3 hexes of opmovement would have the effect of making fleets far more mobile than is currently the case. "

Strat would haver to be limited to 12 hexes total, and slow units limited to 6 hexes.

By Jason E. Schaff (Jschaff297061) on Sunday, July 15, 2007 - 05:23 pm: Edit

Dan:

Basically, if strat movement were not limited in some way, ships would get to the front much faster, and that could screw up some of the core offensive moves in the game.

For example, on a turn 7 (now turn 13?) Klingon invasion of the Feds:

Normally, the Klingons swarm over the border taking down lightly covered fixed defenses at multiple locations before the Federation can reinforce.

Now, The Klingons can still strip the border BATS, but the Feds get to strat in the released portions of fifth fleet, home fleet, and new production to reinforce deeper targets (SBs and planets) before the Klinks can get there. Meaning that the Klingons will face tougher fights over fixed defenses than would normally be the case.

Similar problems can be imagined elsewhere during key offensives.

Joe's comment above would definitely help alleviate some of this, although I was thinking it might be better to halve the free strat allowances. (i.e. you get 1/2 of your 6-month allowance every three-month turn.)

Cheers,
Jason

By Joe Stevenson (Alligator) on Sunday, July 15, 2007 - 05:42 pm: Edit

One other thought I had was about OpMove. Since Reaction is unchanged, I'm thinking Op should be 4. Sure, you'll get 2 more hexes every 2 turns than before, BUT, the other side gets 2 changes to react, and can basically react double the normal amount, so the extra hex of movement should counter this somewhat. It also makes it easier to deal with slow units; they move 2

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Monday, July 16, 2007 - 09:31 am: Edit

I effectively have already proposed something very similar. I kept the overall number of turns the same, but halved the economies and build schedules. It worked reasonably well, and certainly kept ship numbers down. All this proposal does that is different compared to mine is double the number of turns and slow down movement.

You should look in my F&Elite thread. It's got some build schedules there that are useful.

By Joe Stevenson (Alligator) on Monday, July 16, 2007 - 10:30 am: Edit

I'll take a look.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 - 06:05 am: Edit

Note there are two F&Elite threads - someone copied my thread Idea. Look for the one way up in the list, with more posts.