Archive through June 13, 2013

Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Federation & Empire: F&E PRODUCTS: F&E Future Products (Near Term): F&E WARBOOK: Warbook Update – Fighter Operations (FO) : FO - Section 600 Reports – Scenarios and Options : (607.0) Four Powers War - Scenario Reports: Archive through June 13, 2013
By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, June 07, 2013 - 03:58 pm: Edit

FEDS: Updated 4PW v3.6 posted at 1230.

I will lockdown any further changes at 1200 PDT on 8 June to enable the players to begin Origins playtest set up and planning over the weekend.

By Charles Shevlin (Chass22) on Friday, June 07, 2013 - 08:40 pm: Edit

two other variations.

1. the Th enter the war on the Kz and Hy side in f159 after they start bulding there Ca. do the Th have a early ca that jest goes by the letter C that is a 7-8/3-4 that is not listed on the sit. I think it is in the scen wher the Rom are hurssing the thol.

the second could be added to any Th involved game.
The Sel did not make the web braker some one else did and the Sel are forced to flee with there masters. add 3 hive ships to the thol cap. one over each of the now ex Kl planets. The majer poduces 20ep each miner 10ep for a total of 40ep to the Thol income.
add sel fleets 1cl 2dd 3ff to th home fleet 1dd and 2ff to all 3 others.
buld rate is the same for single hive ship. how ever down grade all ca builds to cl. (yes the largest ship they can build is a cl. slave race and all). all thol ships must be built and max repare to thol ships must be done befor any selt ships can be built or repared.
Th ships must be in command. if only selt ships left in hex they must retreat to Th base or fleet.
selt ships are not limited to 2 hex resriction can be added to the few ships th is allowed past the limmit. as long as there are Th ships to command them they are fine.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, June 07, 2013 - 09:39 pm: Edit

Mr Shevlin:

With all due respect sir, is it possible to spell out what you are attempting to communicate? I gave up attempting to read your post about half way through because I found I couldn't follow what you were attempting to say.

Respectfully,
Chuck

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, June 07, 2013 - 10:11 pm: Edit

For some reason he doesn't want to spell out empire names. Th is Tholian (I assume), etc etc.

Let me translate.

Two other variations.

1. The Tholians enter the war on the Kzinti and Hydran side in Fall Y159 after they start building their CAs. Do the Tholians have an early CA that just goes b the letter C that is a 7-8/3-4 that is not listed on the SIT? I think it is in the scenario where the Romulans are harassing the Tholians.

The second could be added to any Tholian involved game.

The Seltorians did not make the web breaker, someone else did and the Seltorian are forced to flee with their masters. Add three hive ships to the Tholian capital, one over each of the now ex Klingon planets. The major produces 20 EP and each minor 10 EP for a total of 40 EP to the Tholian income.

Add Seltorian Fleets: CL 2DD 3FF to the home fleet, 1 DD and 2 FF to all three others.

Build rate is the same for single hive ship, however downgrade all CA builds to CL (yes, the largest ships they can build is a CL, slave race and all). All Tholian ships must be built and max repair done to tholian ships must be done before any Seltorian ships can be build or repaired.

Tholian ships must be in command. If only Seltorian ships left in hex they must retreat to a Tholian base or fleet.
Seltorian ships are not limited to 2 hex restriction and can be added to the few ships Tholians are allowed past the limit as long as there are Tholian ships to command them, they are fine.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Friday, June 07, 2013 - 10:20 pm: Edit

EDIT: Richard beat me to it.

I believe Charles is referring to The Eagle Spreads its Wings, from CL36. I don't recall off-hand if it has stats for the Tholian C in it or not, however.


For what it's worth (which is usually very little), I do like the idea of an early Seltorian arrival, but as a Tribunal force instead. In which case, they could be obliged to make do with the home galaxy designs they knew how to build at the time, as opposed to the "war" hulls built with Klingon assistance historically.

I'm not all that sure if it would work well as a variant for the Four Powers War in and of itself, but it might make for an interesting option for what the Eastern fleet (and/or the TBS, in a variant sending the Vudar to the Hydran front in its stead) could be getting up to while its sister fleets to anti-spinward are prosecuting the 4PW proper.

By Charles Shevlin (Chass22) on Friday, June 07, 2013 - 10:43 pm: Edit

Mr Strong

I will try to do as you ask. But typing is dificult. The kemo really f... messed with my hands and conentration is dificult. (I am constantly looking up simple words, from the dictionary.)

Richard

You got it. Thank you veary much for cleaning up my incohernt mess.

With thanks
Charles

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, June 07, 2013 - 10:49 pm: Edit

I don't think most people know which way spinward is Gary. I don't.

Perhaps use east and west, which most people (I assume) do understand.

By Charles Shevlin (Chass22) on Friday, June 07, 2013 - 10:54 pm: Edit

Gary

Yes I think that is the one. Could not remember the name. Captain Logs in other room. Will not make my wife fetch and carry.

Charles

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Friday, June 07, 2013 - 11:07 pm: Edit

Richard, I guess it was some of my recent exposure to BattleTech seeping in there. I've been getting a bit too used to spinward and anti-spinward, rather than east and west, when looking "down" at maps set along the plane of the Milky Way galaxy.


Charles, if it helps, there is an index of articles from older issues of Captain's Log over on this page.

By Patrick Sledge (Decius) on Friday, June 07, 2013 - 11:23 pm: Edit

(607.246) 'any diplomats exchange between' should be 'any diplomats exchanged between'

(607.569) Consider adding a reference to (441.1) in this section to point to the 'full' PGB rules.

(607.562) Can Police Flagships be called up as part of the five allowed ships? (I suspect the intent here is no, but it's probably worth specifying)

(607.35) Since concession is listed as an 'instant victory' condition, its separate inclusion here is redundant.

(607.432) The E4J entry cuts off awkwardly. Suggest to conclude with: "another E4J using the rules in (528.0)"

(607.152) This rule states to remove MMGs from play if their associated module is not in use, but this scenario as-written does not indicate any MMGs in use to begin with.

(607.56) No rules regarding prime teams or command points are presently outlined in the scenario. These were previously outlined in Q1802F of CL18. Was this a deliberate omission?

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Friday, June 07, 2013 - 11:28 pm: Edit

Also, I probably should have noted this before:

(607.26) The opening sentence currently reads "In Y159S the Klingons began the activation and transfer of mothballed ships to the Romulan." It might be worth changing the ending to "the Romulan Star Empire", or perhaps to "the Romulans" instead; and to put a comma after Y159S.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Saturday, June 08, 2013 - 05:25 am: Edit

FEDS: Updated 4PW v3.7 posted at 0200.

I will lockdown any further changes at 1200 PDT on 8 June to enable the players to begin Origins playtest set up and planning over the weekend.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Saturday, June 08, 2013 - 05:29 am: Edit

The version posted still seems to be v3.6. edit - And just after I posted, it was updated to v3.7, so ignore this.

By Patrick Sledge (Decius) on Saturday, June 08, 2013 - 09:26 am: Edit

(607.421) Enemy's Blood fleet indicates a total of 19 line ships, but currently only has 18 listed.

(607.721) The Vudar Fleet indicates a total of 10 line ships, but currently only has 6 listed.

(607.565) "The LDR receive three diplomats and deployed them to each" should read "The LDR receive three diplomats and deploy them to each."

Kzinti FH: In the notes column, "Limit one per turn by an means." should be "Limit one per turn by any means."

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Saturday, June 08, 2013 - 02:00 pm: Edit

Hey Chuck, the 2xMB from the original scenario are missing from the Hydran home fleet.

Did Tony fall on them? Are they stuck to his behind? That could explain his pain.

Email sent.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Saturday, June 08, 2013 - 04:48 pm: Edit

FEDS: Updated 4PW v3.8 posted at 1330.

This updated scenario is locked-down for playtest use at Origins. There will be no material changes to the scenario until after Origins. Major omissions or errors will be addressed as needed here or on-site.

Origins players of this scenario are free to begin set up and planning.

By Charles Shevlin (Chass22) on Saturday, June 08, 2013 - 08:03 pm: Edit

Richard

Would you mind me copying and pasting your rewright of the Seltorians non rebelion to miner empires where it belongs.

Charles

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Saturday, June 08, 2013 - 08:08 pm: Edit

Yes, you can copy and paste it. It is yours, I merely edited it into something more readable.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - 02:37 pm: Edit

>>(607.15) MODULES USED: This scenario assumes usage of the following modules: Advanced (AO), Fighter (FO), Combined (CO), Planetary (PO) and Strategic (SO) Operations. Portions of Captain’s Log’s #46 and #47 are needed to use scenario variations until F&E Minor Empires (ME) becomes available.>>

Here is what I would suggest on this front--the 4PW is a perfect game for learning how to play F+E; it is short enough and small enough in scale to be manageable but long enough to be interesting. If it were set up in such a way that it was inviting to newer/less hard core players of the game, it would likely lure a lot of people into playing. The General War is a *really* significant undertaking to start out with, and designing this scenario so that people just starting or fairly new to the game could pick it up and play a reasonably sized, balanced scenario would be a great benefit to the game as a whole.

To this end, rather than structuring the scenario so that it assumes the use of all those expansion sets (which is a great way to scare off newer players), why not structure the scenario so that it can be easily played with just the basic rules, and then have information for upgrading the game to use of expansions?

All the older scenarios are written with fleets by virtue of what rules you happen to be using (i.e. "Here is the Home Fleet. If you are using CO, add these ships; if you are using FO, add these; if you are using AO, ad these; etc.) If this one were written like this (i.e. "Here are the basic fleets; add these ships if you are using expansions"), it would likely be a much more inviting scenario for newer players (which it has a great opportunity to work for), rather than simply an alternate scenario for people who are already invested in the game.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - 09:31 pm: Edit

Eh, I prefer it structured to use all expansions, with instructions on what to do if you aren't doing so. This way expansion rules are (imo) more likely to be addressed, which is a real problem with some older scenarios.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Thursday, June 13, 2013 - 08:23 am: Edit

I have no problem at all with the scenario being structured to use (and consequently address) all the expansions, but it seems like it wouldn't take much effort to structure the fleet layouts like they were structured in all the previous versions of scenarios, i.e. "Here is what ships you use if you are just using the basic set rules; here is what you add on if you are using Expansions...".

It strikes me as a lot more inviting to newer players to have a scenario that says "Here is how you play with just the basic set" as opposed to "Here is a scenario that uses all the rules you don't know, I suppose you could play it without all those rules if you really had to, but you are gonna have to figure out how to set up the fleets on your own..."

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Thursday, June 13, 2013 - 08:30 am: Edit

Ok, so far, two things have jumped to mind, re: this scenario working off hand:

1) Admirals. The Hydrans are planning on attacking the Lyrans on T1. That is the best possible time to attack them in this scenario. Why is the one Hydran Admiral stuck in the Home Fleet? When *not* using Admirals, the Hydrans get to attack the Lyrans on T1 with 2 command points, and the Lyrans have none to respond with (good for the Hydrans!). When using Admirals, the Hydrans get to attack the Lyrans on T1 with 1 command point and an Admiral that can't get anywhere important while the Lyrans get to respond with an Admiral in a reserve fleet (bad for Hydrans!). At the very least, the Hydran Admiral should be available to put in any fleet on T1.

2) Electronic Warfare. The Hydrans are totally hosed on this front. The Klingons, Lyrans, and Kzintis have numerous 2 point scouts. The Klingons and Lyrans get 3 and 4 point scouts on T4. The Hydrans start with nothing but 1 point scouts. They get some 2 point scouts in the middle of the scenario. If using the Survey Ship rules, they have access to a few very expensive SRs. The Hydrans are going to be at a significant EW disadvantage the whole war. This is a very questionable situation, game balance wise *and* makes no sense with the established history of "Well, at the start of the General War, the Hydrans were baffled that their little HN SCs weren't sufficient! And they needed to quickly and hurriedly build up their EW force!", as in the 4PW, they are going to spend 5 years discovering that tgheir little HN SCs aren't sufficient. Other than, like, ret-conning the YIS date of the DDS or PGS, I can't really see a good way to fix any of this.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Thursday, June 13, 2013 - 09:21 am: Edit

You can move the admiral by blockade run when using full rules.

The PGS is Y160 I think, so that should help a bit.

I personally think the CLS should possibly be made a 2 pt scout - as a 3 pt scout it's kind of weird that they don't have any at the beginning of the general war, imo.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Thursday, June 13, 2013 - 10:04 am: Edit

>>You can move the admiral by blockade run when using full rules.>>

The Klingons get to have their Admiral as a General HQ unit (i.e. they can put him wherever they want at the start of the game). You'd think that if the Hydrans were planning to launch a war against the Lyrans, they'd let the Admiral be somewhere useful when they launch said war. I'd suggest making the Hydran Admiral a General HQ unit.

>>The PGS is Y160 I think, so that should help a bit.>>

Maybe? y160 is, what, Turn 6 of an 11 turn game. The Klingons and Lyrans get 3-4 point scouts starting on Turn 4, and are building multiple 2 point scouts a turn from the start of the game. By the time the Hydrans get a few PGS into play, the Coalition are going to have reliable lines of 10+ EW points.

And again, full well realizing that the background is being retroactively (and reactively) created, why the 4PW would happen (where the Hydrans and less so the Kzintis [who will mostly be fighting defensively over bases and PDUs and have 2 point scouts to build] are clearly at a significant EW disadvantage from the get go) and then they'd just happily revert to fleets with nothing but little 1 point FF scouts by the time of the General War again makes little sense. I mean, yeah, I realize that the YIS dates of the various scouts in the game were created way before F+E even existed, but now game balance in F+E is being hung on these arbitrary YIS dates that were created without F+E even existing. Although, again, other than, like, retroactively changing the YIS date of the Hydran DDS to, like, y158 (and then having some in the Hydran fleet at the start of the GW) or something, I can't really see a good solution.

By Douglas E. Lampert (Dlampert) on Thursday, June 13, 2013 - 12:37 pm: Edit

I think the obvious fix to Peter's problem would be to declare that the 4PW is fought with the basic scout rules rather than EW points, i.e. you either have a scout or you don't and scouts give a 1 point shift.

Yes, this would be a change in the dynamics and mean not playing with the full rules for the 4PW, but it nicely explains thinking 1pt frigate scouts are adequate.

The GW is then explained as having taken place after some otherwise minor improvement in special sensor tech or doctrine improved them between wars.

"Surprises" comparable to "our scouts are totally inadequate" usually happen when the combat implications of a tech improvement aren't noticed by some future combatants during peacetime.

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