Dave, the Lionheart number crunching is really not that useful. No Lyran player is going to go after the cluster with only 12 ships. They will send around 100 or so, and they will win more than likely, even with these stipulations.

The WYN battle line is not going to be all that big, they are still going to take damage each round and they do not have enough to outlast a 100 ship fleet.

I do think that being able to direct more than 1 ship at 1:1 might be too much. I think the WYN should be able to direct multiple times but only the first at 1:1.

So they kill a cruiser or what have you for 12 or 15 at 1:1, then let the rest fall, or cripple another key unit etc.

By Mike Covert (Boneyman1769) on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 - 04:50 pm: Edit

I think a more indirect approach to delaying an attack on the WYN should also be attempted. Politically none of the three neighboing races wanted the others to occupy the WYN. Therefore use negative victory points, as previously suggested, as a way of showing this political pressure. The attacking power should also be at some level of economic exhaustion. This would represent an increased desire for the WYN economy and pressure to ignore political ramifications. There is also the need to consider the Orions. The occupying power should lose all mercenary Orions and the ability to use Orions in any manner while occupying the WYN. The two powers not occupying the WYN should gain an increased access to the Orions. i.e. an extra roll on the Orion mercenary table. If either the Klingons or Lyrans occupy the WYN the other power may now use its Orions to raid the occupier. This is really only an option if each power is played by a different person. I am sure someone will come up with an equally workable idea, possibly even better. Finally, a joint attack should not be allowed. The political situation would seem to warrant this addition. The Lyrans and Klingons could not even work out a plan of campaign to attack the Kzinti or Hydrans at the same time. Just my thoughts, as SVC said we are just really tossing ideas around that may have no bearing in outcome.

By John Doucette (Jkd) on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 - 04:53 pm: Edit

Letting the WYN direct on any or all disrupted ships at 1:1 seems fine; they'll kill a lot, but they won't be able to kill everything, they just won't have the points.

By KC Grant (Kcg) on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 - 05:18 pm: Edit

Mike -- So if the Klingon & Lyran is played by the same guy or two conspiring players willing to take-one-for-the-team, what prevents the Klingon from going in on one turn, attriting out the WYNs just to weaken the WYNs for the big Lyran invasion the next turn?

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 - 05:48 pm: Edit

For as long as SFB has taken submissions, and for as long as this (and previous) Bulletin Boards have been around, there has always been the problem that I cannot do everything simultaneously and immediately. If a bunch of guys start working on something they may end up wasting their time because they didn't know something or made a decision I could not support, but if they waited for me, they'd be waiting forever. Such projects as Chuck's at the very least worthwhile as a rules writing exercise and a solid starting point. Chuck can tell you that the US military spends endless staff time studying ways to invade just about any country you can name, not because we intend to, but because we need to train people in how to write invasion plans, rescue plans, intervention plans, relief plans, counter-terrorist plans, etc.

By Daniel G. Knipfer (Dgknipfer) on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 - 09:42 pm: Edit

Dave Butler,

How do you know that the radiation zone is even in depth all across the zone? It makes since to me that when you send in all of your forces the ones that get there first start forming battle forces. The ones that where not as lucky spend more time in the radiation zone and form up in later battle forces. The WYN, knowing where the easiest paths through the zone are hit the ships in those areas first. Worse, these thin areas are not consistent so only the WYN who are surveying the Zone constantly know where the easiest paths are.

The only problem I see is that the attacker shouldn't get to pick which ships come out first but it would be a pain in the a@@ to do random battle forces from the entire attacking force.

By Michael Powers (Mtpowers) on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 - 10:36 pm: Edit

>How do you know that the radiation zone is even
> in depth all across the zone?

Why would the attacker go through a deeper part of the Zone? That would mean that you'd be suffering from radiation effects that much longer, if you made it through at all. And presumably the WYN can see you coming no matter where you approach from.

By David Kass (Dkass) on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 - 10:58 pm: Edit

Remember that there are minefields on both sides of the cluster. Thus the ability to send only X ships at a time makes sense to me. You have to punch holes in the minefields and if you bunch up too much, mines will take out whole stacks at a time (ie if you send 50 ships in one bunch, you'll probably lose 35 or more of them in a pile of chain reaction explosions intiated by mines).

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Thursday, April 14, 2005 - 03:11 am: Edit

David:

You cannot even mine a single solor system let alone a 50 parsec sphere. Mines protect fixed points where you know the enemy must come to you.

By Jeff Laikind (J_Laikind) on Thursday, April 14, 2005 - 09:19 am: Edit

Both The WYN and the Lion scenario and the Red WYN Express final scenario have belts of mines outside the radiation zone. There isn't a minefield on the Breakout scenario of the Rampart mini-campaign in C3.

Is it possible that there are only a limited number of "thin" spots where it is safe to transit the zone? Those spots could also shift on an irregular basis. The outside empires would only know about the current transit points that are actually in use. The WYN would also have other unused transit points for use by Orions or in event of an emergency (like the WYN X-ship breakout). Since the outside empires know that there are uncharted exit points, they would patrol the general regions, but only mine the known points. This would also channel any invasion through the known transit points.

By Mike Curtis (Nashvillen) on Thursday, April 14, 2005 - 10:33 am: Edit

If I was the WYN and I knew where all the thin spots were in the zone and since I lived there for a very long time and those areas don't shift over time I would be mining the thinest parts first and make attacks come through the thickest parts to make the effects last longer. (Sorry for the run on sentence)

The mines would have some command control mines for safe passage of my ships and potential help from the outside. The thin spots are the easiest approaches and they should be mined as a doctorine to channel movement to a harder approach.

By Daniel G. Knipfer (Dgknipfer) on Thursday, April 14, 2005 - 10:56 am: Edit

Michael Powers,

Because you don't know where the thin areas of the zone are. You can't effectively scan through the radiation to tell where it ends on the far side.

By Mike Covert (Boneyman1769) on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 01:24 pm: Edit

KC,
In SFB History is that not what happened, except reversed and the second invasion beaten? The ongoing discussion and later rules for WYN combat need to be completed first. If all else fails keep it an alliance/coalition two-sided affair. I was thinking ahead to the day when there are individual winning conditions as opposed to allied victory conditions. Although I have never had the pleasure of more than two people in an F&E game

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 02:25 pm: Edit

Mike:

I then invite you and anyone else to come to Origins this year where there will be at least three fulle-scale games going on at once in the same room (the CloudBurst scenario is scheduled to have no less than 8 players).

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Monday, February 19, 2007 - 01:58 pm: Edit

Hi!


A question about invasions of the Cluster:

Would it be the case that any Orion ships (from the Cluster Cartel) present in the era before (or after) the WYN control of their shipyard would be on hand to add to the WYN fleet defending the Cluster?

Is there an OOB for the Cluster Cartel already in existence, or would one need to be written up alongside one for the WYN fleet?


One thing that surprised me is the relative lack of discussion of the WYN Cluster's role in the War of Return - I was under the impression that this would be the one event which showcases the likes of the fish ships and the WYN-Orion ships.


Gary

By Trab Kadar (Trab) on Monday, February 19, 2007 - 03:32 pm: Edit

Gary,

Chuck (a staffer for F&E) posted his R12 section research on the WYN OoB in this topic on March 27, 2004. He also posted a suggested dynamic OoB that keeps up with the other surrounding fleets of the General War. He also included some cool rules and a suggested SIT -- all-in-all nicely done IMHO.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Friday, March 09, 2007 - 08:07 pm: Edit

Perhaps rules similar to those in Planetary Ops for running Orion as an independent state might suit the Cluster Cartel (since it has a fixed shipyard).

Indeed, one could even mesh the concepts in 533.0 together with the main WYN rules - with one set of books for the WYN Navy and another for the Cluster Cartel, as in (533.42).


Gary

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, January 01, 2008 - 04:52 pm: Edit

Having spent a few hours on this, I'm about convinced that we'd be doing everybody a serious dis-service to publish it in CL36. It needs more work.

Attached is an updated preliminary file.

We need a lot more serious work on what the WYNs would do and under what restrictions than I have time for now. (Can you imagine what would happen if the rule was "toss a coin. Heads they join the alliance, tails they join the coalition". All those ships and all that money would knock the balance for a loop. I suppose the basic thing to do with the WYN is to invade them and fight their fleet for their EPs, but I would also wonder if you could hire WYN ships as mercenaries?

Anyway, for purposes of further discussions, here is the SIT. You guys might as well have the benefit of my labor. Maybe by the time I have time to work on this, you'll have solved all my mysteries.

MSIT-12 WYN.pdf msit-12_wyn.pdf (18 k)

By Michael Lui (Michaellui) on Tuesday, January 01, 2008 - 05:21 pm: Edit

I could see hiring 1 or 2 Wyn ships as mercenaries. They would want to test their "Fish Ships" somewhere against real enemies (read Kzinti). Maybe instead of getting EPs for selling ships a race could hire 2-3 times as many attack factors for 1-3 turns? IE: The Kzinti may only want EPs but the Klingons/Lyrans may decide to take a few extra hulls.

How about: they can get 2x as many attack factors in ships they send in as limited by current rules (closest equivalent, round down) and can keep them until they get crippled, then they "run home". IE: they must be directed upon or voluntarily crippled.

By Peter A. Kellerhall (Pak) on Tuesday, January 01, 2008 - 06:31 pm: Edit

So then, will the WYNs have BOTH AuxCVAs AND LAVs? I thought they up-gunned and up-powered just about everything they could get their hands on including the aux hulls; I just thought they were weird that way since they had the cash.

I must say for SIT purposes the standardized designators Chuck uses makes a finding units (and their variants) on the SIT very easy when alpha-sorted. All Lyran (L), Klingon (K), Kzinti(Z), Orion (O), and all small-aux-(type) (SAx), all large-aux-(type) (LAx) are grouped together by hull type and variant. It also make counter recognition and sorting easier and as I get older I don't have to remember what NAR is, but a CWM designator tells me it is a War Cruiser Mauler.

In F&E, in most cases, we have already established this standard for the LTTs, HDWs, FCRs and TGs regardless of what the SFB races (and players) call them.

BTW -- thanks Steve for working on the WYN and posting the above. I'm really looking forward to the Civil Wars module.

By Trab Kadar (Trab) on Wednesday, January 02, 2008 - 03:02 am: Edit

First off - thanks Steve for the WYN SIT.

Now, according to the WYN R-sections (R12.10) their AuxCVA is the LAV: "The Kzinti faction of the WYN Cluster built a single ship of this class in Y173. This ship is the large auxiliary carrier listed in (R1.14)...".

As to the SAV/AuxCV, the text in (R12.2) lists the WYN fleet during the General War and states that three AuxCVs were build so I cannot see how they could operate two types of small auxiliary carriers. If anything, it looks like the WYNs dropped 6 fighters off their small aux carrier SSD to allow the use of four option mounts and more power. Unless you want more small aux carriers than the three AuxCVs in the WYN fleet, I wouldn't worry to much about it and state that WYN carrier doctrine called for all their SAVs to be modified to carry added option mounts in place of some fighters.

Other than that, I agree with Peter and the pattern designations for the WYN aux cruiser hull types and variants. His point is well taken on the alphabetical SITs as I can say that on more than one occasion that I could not RECALL some of the confusing ship designators in F&E as I don't play SFB that often.

For example: I wanted to build a Federation War Destroyer Commando ship but couldn't find it on the SIT. I thought it had the same designation as the Kzinti, Lyran and Hydran: DWG. I couldn't find the ship at all. The SIT listed DW, DWA, DWS, DWV but not the DWG, so I thought that it must not be published in F&E at that time and moved on. Only several turns later did I stumble upon it labeled as "CDW" - I was very frustrated and wished they could standardized. If possible, I like to use the designators recommened earlier for the WYN by Chuck but if that violates ADB's practices then I guess that is what you must do.

Thanks again for making progress with the CW stuff and hope to see it soon.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, January 02, 2008 - 09:15 am: Edit

I don't think the WYNs need, or want, or would even build, two kinds of Aux carriers, but that is just one issue. Remember that the yellow lines are just the across-the-board everybody-gets-this and as the note says, we're not to the point of deciding if the wyns need it. It's not an all-one-way thing. Maybe they get the generic Aux commando ships but not aux carriers? and do they get FRDs? Or do they just have a lot of PRDs?

By Stewart W Frazier (Frazikar1) on Wednesday, January 02, 2008 - 11:18 pm: Edit

Hmmm, Is the WYN AuxCVL that different from the generic AuxCVL?