|Archive through February 03, 2011||25||02/03 02:33pm|
|Archive through February 04, 2011||25||02/04 10:32pm|
|Archive through February 08, 2011||25||02/09 12:34pm|
|Archive through February 20, 2011||25||02/21 02:19pm|
|Archive through February 27, 2011||25||02/28 12:40pm|
|Archive through March 06, 2011||25||03/07 09:09am|
|Archive through March 08, 2011||25||03/09 11:31am|
|Archive through March 17, 2011||25||03/19 01:48pm|
|Archive through March 21, 2011||25||03/22 10:53am|
|Archive through March 25, 2011||25||03/26 01:58am|
|Archive through March 27, 2011||25||03/27 04:45pm|
|Archive through March 31, 2011||25||04/03 06:01am|
|Archive through April 05, 2011||25||04/06 12:39am|
|Archive through April 08, 2011||25||04/08 12:18pm|
|Archive through April 09, 2011||25||04/09 06:14pm|
|Archive through April 10, 2011||25||04/11 12:13am|
|Archive through April 13, 2011||25||04/14 01:20am|
|Archive through April 15, 2011||25||04/15 11:46pm|
|Archive through April 17, 2011||25||04/17 02:01pm|
|Archive through April 19, 2011||25||04/19 06:12pm|
|Archive through April 23, 2011||25||04/27 04:31pm|
|Archive through May 03, 2011||25||05/15 10:52am|
|Archive through May 17, 2011||25||05/17 03:58pm|
|Archive through May 19, 2011||25||05/19 12:37pm|
|Archive through May 20, 2011||25||05/20 02:21pm|
|Archive through May 25, 2011||25||05/26 02:36pm|
|Archive through June 12, 2011||25||06/12 07:41pm|
|Archive through June 15, 2011||25||06/17 02:06pm|
|Archive through June 29, 2011||25||07/03 07:22pm|
|Archive through July 14, 2011||25||07/14 12:35pm|
|Archive through July 14, 2011||25||07/14 07:52pm|
|Archive through July 15, 2011||25||07/15 04:12pm|
|Archive through July 18, 2011||25||07/18 09:23pm|
|Archive through July 21, 2011||25||07/21 11:22am|
|Archive through July 22, 2011||25||07/22 12:40pm|
|Archive through July 22, 2011||25||07/23 01:29pm|
|Archive through August 05, 2011||25||08/05 08:41pm|
|Archive through August 28, 2011||25||09/03 12:01am|
|Archive through September 29, 2011||25||09/29 09:52pm|
|Archive through October 02, 2011||25||10/03 03:04pm|
|Archive through October 21, 2011||25||10/22 02:56pm|
|Archive through November 07, 2011||25||11/15 12:32pm|
|Archive through November 21, 2011||25||11/22 03:14pm|
|Archive through December 16, 2011||25||12/21 04:09pm|
|Archive through December 22, 2011||25||12/22 09:40pm|
|Archive through January 10, 2012||25||01/10 07:40pm|
|Archive through January 16, 2012||25||01/16 06:41pm|
|Archive through January 28, 2012||25||01/30 01:05pm|
|Archive through January 31, 2012||25||01/31 05:20pm|
|Archive through February 26, 2012||25||02/26 04:31pm|
|Archive through February 28, 2012||25||03/01 04:56am|
|Archive through March 04, 2012||25||03/05 10:10am|
|Archive through March 14, 2012||25||03/16 11:33am|
|Archive through March 21, 2012||25||03/22 02:59pm|
|Archive through April 01, 2012||25||04/02 04:01pm|
|Archive through April 04, 2012||25||04/14 10:16pm|
|Archive through April 19, 2012||25||04/22 10:54am|
|Archive through May 26, 2012||25||05/31 08:53am|
|Archive through June 01, 2012||25||06/17 09:15pm|
|Archive through June 19, 2012||25||06/19 03:58pm|
|Archive through July 04, 2012||25||07/06 07:08pm|
|Archive through July 15, 2012||25||07/17 09:36am|
|Archive through July 29, 2012||25||08/09 07:06pm|
|Archive through August 14, 2012||25||08/16 07:43pm|
|Archive through September 04, 2012||25||09/11 08:03pm|
|Archive through September 12, 2012||25||09/12 09:54pm|
|Archive through October 24, 2012||25||10/24 01:41pm|
|Archive through October 31, 2012||25||10/31 09:44am|
|Archive through November 01, 2012||25||11/01 09:45am|
|Archive through November 03, 2012||25||11/03 10:52pm|
|Archive through November 28, 2012||25||12/01 10:26am|
|Archive through December 08, 2012||25||12/16 10:08pm|
|Archive through December 28, 2012||25||12/28 05:42pm|
|Archive through January 02, 2013||25||01/02 03:36pm|
|Archive through January 31, 2013||25||02/01 04:10pm|
|Archive through February 10, 2013||25||02/12 02:36pm|
|Archive through February 19, 2013||25||02/22 04:26am|
|Archive through March 08, 2013||25||03/09 07:23am|
|Archive through March 10, 2013||25||03/11 01:00am|
|Archive through March 11, 2013||25||03/12 02:12pm|
|Archive through March 13, 2013||25||03/13 03:09pm|
|Archive through March 30, 2013||25||04/01 03:39pm|
|Archive through April 11, 2013||25||04/11 10:37pm|
|Archive through April 12, 2013||25||04/13 08:44am|
|Archive through April 15, 2013||25||04/15 10:42am|
|Archive through April 15, 2013||25||04/16 09:02am|
|Archive through April 17, 2013||25||04/26 04:38pm|
|Archive through May 29, 2013||25||06/01 11:43pm|
|Archive through June 07, 2013||25||06/10 12:39pm|
|Archive through June 20, 2013||25||06/21 09:08am|
|Archive through July 02, 2013||25||07/07 02:26am|
|Archive through July 26, 2013||25||08/02 10:48pm|
|Archive through September 13, 2013||25||09/13 04:31pm|
|Archive through September 30, 2013||25||10/02 02:02pm|
|Archive through October 15, 2013||25||10/15 08:19pm|
|Archive through November 01, 2013||25||11/01 11:02pm|
|Archive through November 04, 2013||25||11/08 05:20pm|
|Archive through November 17, 2013||25||12/16 04:24pm|
|Archive through January 06, 2014||25||01/10 12:39pm|
|Archive through January 12, 2014||25||01/12 01:01pm|
|Archive through January 15, 2014||25||01/16 09:39am|
|Archive through January 25, 2014||25||02/10 03:15pm|
|Archive through February 26, 2014||25||02/28 09:16am|
|Archive through March 30, 2014||25||04/16 03:05am|
|Archive through May 06, 2014||25||05/06 08:17pm|
|Archive through May 07, 2014||25||05/08 08:48am|
|Archive through May 11, 2014||25||05/13 09:56am|
|Archive through May 14, 2014||25||05/14 10:36am|
|Archive through May 15, 2014||25||05/15 06:23pm|
|Archive through May 21, 2014||25||05/21 01:50pm|
|Archive through June 19, 2014||25||06/29 07:21am|
|Archive through July 01, 2014||25||07/02 06:11pm|
|Archive through July 04, 2014||25||07/05 11:36am|
|Archive through July 06, 2014||25||07/06 12:55pm|
|By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, July 06, 2014 - 10:50 am: Edit|
>>So you are going to use your 2 carrier builds to gain 3 fighter factors?>>
Maybe. Depends on the situation. You have a few D5Vs sitting around. You can afford to upgrade them to D5Us after using all your FFF in the spring. Or you used 6xFFF on the last turn making something, and have 6xFFF this turn, and converting 2xD5V to D5Us is convenient and probably a better plan than another single D7V (as the D5Us get more total fighters on a single line).
|By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, July 06, 2014 - 11:00 am: Edit|
A D7V gives you one more point of compot than a D5U. That said you bring up a good point. If you do have a crippled D5V to convert during repair then you have a fairly good deal for it. But converting 2 of them in a turn, there is no way as you have too many better carriers to choose from for the other carrier you are allowed.
|By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, July 06, 2014 - 11:22 am: Edit|
Just for comparison here are 2 different Klingon battle lines. Yes, they can be better optimized, but they are a fair comparison.
Line 1: C8+ADM, 3xD5, F5Q, D5U+AD5+F5E, D6U+AD5+F5E, D6S (FS) = 97/4. This line does not violate the only 1 oversized squadron rule (318.8). The D6U counts its fighters as 2 squadrons under (318.82).
Line 2: C8+ADM, 3xD5, F5Q, D7V+AD5+F5E, D6U+AD5+F5E, D6S (FS) = 98/4.
Note PTs are not added but 2 in commando mode would 4 points of compot to push the above lines over 100.
The first line has 21 fighters, while the second has 18. The second line has the advantage because it is on the break point of scoring an extra point of damage on the 2.5 incremented combat table.
|By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, July 06, 2014 - 11:39 am: Edit|
Yeah, of the two, I'd take Line 1 most of the time (unless I had a specific need for the potential for that extra point of damage). One point less of compot, 3 more points of free damage absorption.
|By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, July 06, 2014 - 12:55 pm: Edit|
Drone Bombardment would change the calculus a little along with BIR, VBIR, and actual combat rolls.
|By Keith Plymale (Zaarin7) on Sunday, July 06, 2014 - 01:52 pm: Edit|
In terms of possible repair Line 1 is ahead using the D5U. In terms of possible salvage Line 2 is ahead using the D7V. Far more art to this game than engineering.
I've now caught up on this entire section of the BBS. Really looking for a Vassal/Skype opponent.
|By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, July 06, 2014 - 02:11 pm: Edit|
War Cruisers only repair well if you have 4 of them at an FRD or PRD where they use up all 12 points and a starbase where you still have 4 more points to repair a couple of frigates or a heavy cruiser. The 9 point command cruisers and 5 point frigates are the best ships in terms of damage to be taken when forced to actually cripple things.
Sometimes it might be better to kill a warcruiser than cripple a pair of frigates or a command cruiser.
War cruisers and DWs also repair ok at Sector Bases where you can repair 2 of them at a time.
|By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, July 06, 2014 - 03:08 pm: Edit|
>>War Cruisers only repair well if you have 4 of them at an FRD or PRD where they use up all 12 points and a starbase where you still have 4 more points to repair a couple of frigates or a heavy cruiser.>>
Well, they always repair well in the sense that they absorb 7 damage and only cost 1.5 EP to fix (.21 EP cost per damage absorbed). Which is better than an even ship (.25 EP per point) and marginally better than a CC (.22 EP per point).
If you are trying to maximize repair *capacity*, then yeah, you gotta organize where your CWs go. But that usually isn't that difficult.
|By Michael Alan Calhoon (Mcalhoon2) on Sunday, July 06, 2014 - 04:37 pm: Edit|
Blowing up war cruisers and most five defense factor ships gets you less salvage(F5 being a partial exception) than the nine factor hulls. Self-killing five defense factor ships gives your tugs and LTTs good rescue opportunities.
Crippling war cruisers lets you do interesting conversions at a discount, with the resulting ship getting free strategic movement. I'm a fan of D5 -> D5V or D5S, Lyran CW to CWS, and Fed NCL -> NCD.
Failure to plan (in regards to the repairs) is planning to fail. As the Coalition, I love sending 4D5 2F5 to a SB and then walking out with a strategic moving 3D5,D5V+2F5E,F5. Besides that park at 1407 has how many repair points?
|By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, July 06, 2014 - 05:11 pm: Edit|
War cruisers can be saved by a full sized tug. See (537.221). Another reason to think about killing one if you got a full sized tug with Mission W. But it isn't available in the base game.
|By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, July 06, 2014 - 05:18 pm: Edit|
Michael, you should do it this way. 2xD5, D5V, AD5, F5E, 2xF5. You build the F5E at the star base. The AD5 is converted there. Unless you need extra light escorts for other groups.
|By Matthew Potter (Neonpico) on Monday, July 07, 2014 - 07:58 pm: Edit|
I have F&E89, and I wish to create a map of how the galaxy historically changed. e.g. Show how it was in YNNN, take a snapshot, change things for the next year, take a snapshot, etc.. stitch them all together for discussion or animation purposes.
Question 1) Is the map in F&E89 still accurate? Is the setups for the scenarios (section 600) still accurate in terms of what territory is lost/gained? (I am not tracking units, just who owns what hex. Bases (MB->SB) *might* be tracked)
The earliest year I know can do is Y168. I would love to go as far back as possible (early years) and go for as long as I can manage.
Question 2) What resources are available to determine who owns what hex, beyond the Y168-Y173 period given in the basic rules for independant-play setting-up.
Once again, the point of this is to show what is historical.
|By Keith Plymale (Zaarin7) on Monday, July 07, 2014 - 08:21 pm: Edit|
As far as I know the standard two piece map is the same. Mine is from 1989 too. I've compared it to the map on Vassal and other than the colors and the borders it's the same.
I cannot recommend the 2010 rule book strongly enough. Also the newer supplements will have the data you are looking for and I believe you can get there rule books in pdf via E23.
|By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Monday, July 07, 2014 - 09:18 pm: Edit|
The only F&E rulebooks currently on E23 are the 2010 rulebook and ISC War. As the other expansions are brought up to date, they will most likely be made available on E23
|By Eric S. Smith (Badsyntax) on Tuesday, July 08, 2014 - 09:19 am: Edit|
I don't have a link handy, but there are hex maps that have been made of the F&E map from like Y68 up through Y168. I *think* some even had the ADB logo on them. If nobody pops any links up I can go hunt down the files and post a link.
I know I made some based on the artwork of race ownership throughout the years based on the F&E hex map, but I think they were in an app and not a PDF/Image.
|By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Tuesday, July 08, 2014 - 09:57 am: Edit|
Don't know if they are posted but I think the Y modules had these maps.
|By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, July 09, 2014 - 02:45 pm: Edit|
The F&E Map in the base game has not changed in terms of territory and bases from one version to the next. The colors have changed from the first map to the 93 version. I'm not sure about anything after that.
|By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Wednesday, July 09, 2014 - 03:12 pm: Edit|
Y1 has maps of the Quadrant in the timeline section for Y60, Y75, Y92, Y102, and Y126.
|By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Friday, July 11, 2014 - 06:44 pm: Edit|
Prior to Y168, there haven't been many permanent changes to the on-map Alpha Octant frontiers anti-spinward of Earth since around Y135 or so (when the Hydran Kingdom re-claimed its on-map provinces from the first Klingo-Lyran occupation). Well, from the Federation's perspective, at least; the Kzintis had other ideas as to who owned the "zone of influence" provinces at that time...
The main changes spinward of Earth reflect the relatively late first contacts in the region. The Federation-Gorn border area would have been less clearly defined (since neither side were yet aware of one another). For the ISC, the main distinction that arises in the modern era is the expansion into (and fortification of) the outermost ring of provinces between Y168 and Y172 (as shown in ISC War).
The maps in Module Y1 are outlines only, and no published hex maps covering the years shown have been published so far. Notably, those sketches were drawn up before the early ISC history was written up for Module Y2, so I'd wonder just how well the expansion shown for the early Concordium on those maps lines up with what we now know from the Y2 data.
To go in the other direction, ISC War includes info on the new spinward provinces founded by the Romulans and Gorns by the end of the General War, as well as accounting for the border changes triggered by the Vudar expansion. Hopefully the data we may one day see in Andro War will allow us to go yet further forward.
|By Ryan Opel (Ryan) on Friday, July 11, 2014 - 07:09 pm: Edit|
The FED-Gorn "border" was defined by the Federation borders declaration of Y102. The history of the USS Amerigo Vespucci (R2.138) it spent most of its time surveying the region of space between the Fed Capital and Gorn space.
The Feds have a lot of on map space needing exploration on map which is why I assume there is so little off map exploration done pre-war.
|By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Friday, July 11, 2014 - 07:20 pm: Edit|
The Fed side of the border may go back that far (from their perspective, at least), but the Gorns may not have fully claimed all of the space on their side until after they became aware of the need to establish a border in that direction.
|By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, July 11, 2014 - 07:36 pm: Edit|
Please use East and West rather than referring to spinward, which I don't actually know which way that is (probably the case with most people).
I think you forgot the LDR.
|By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Saturday, July 12, 2014 - 12:29 am: Edit|
I have PDFs of the early year maps with hex numbers. Just e-mail me and I will send them.
|Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only|
Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation