Archive through July 04, 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 July 04, 2013
By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, June 23, 2013 - 08:30 pm: Edit

Chuck wrote:
>>In all the years of playing 4PW prior to this revision, why is it that no one reported the problems with the Count's Fleet release conditions? Or am I missing something here?>>

In the original scenario published in CL9, in the fleet release schedule, the Count's Fleet is released on T4 regardless of all other factors (the T4 Kzinti Fleet Availability scedhule says "All except Marquis Fleet", and then gives conditions under which the Marquis Fleet was released, including the Capital being attacked or a SB being destroyed). So in the original scenario, the Count's Fleet was released on T4, even if the Lyrans never attacked.

In Carrier War, the release schedule is the same (i.e. the Count's Fleet is released on T4, regardless of what the Lyrans do).

In Fighter Ops, it says the same thing.

Apparently what you (and, well, all the rest of us proof reading the scenario) missed was the in all existing versions of the scenario, the Count's Fleet is released on T4, regardless of what the Lyrans do :-)

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, June 23, 2013 - 08:33 pm: Edit

Jason wrote:
>>Comparing the E3 to the E4 and the G2, I'm thinking reasonable stats for the E3 might be 2-3 / 1-2.>>

A ship that has 3 defense uncrippled and 2 defense crippled isn't generally reasonable. As it then has the best damage absorption ratio in the game (otherwise reserved for 12 point BTs and the "it was so good that we decided to change the factors" Fed ECL).

Just make it a 3/1, and it is simple and at that point arguably obsolete when compared to the E4.

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Sunday, June 23, 2013 - 08:43 pm: Edit

The E3 might be better off as 2-3/1 unit. Jason makes an excellent point for the 2-3 factors on the non-crippled side.

By Adam Hickey (Ahickey) on Sunday, June 23, 2013 - 09:11 pm: Edit

I think 2-3/1 for the vanilla E3, and 1-3/0-1 for the E3A is probably correct. In the general war, I do think E3s should be in the starting OOB, and maybe some in mothballs, but I'm generally in favor of saying that they are obsolete, and therefore no new builds are allowed.

I think this is a case where the F&E model is actually breaking down, and not representing "real life," so to speak. No sane procurement officer would waste resources on a new E3 by Y168. But as Peter points out, an E3 in F&E is almost as good as an E4 at fighting (which for both of these ships is to be avoided), just as good at pinning and province raiding, and is cheaper to boot. So, in F&E terms it is an attractive buy when it really shouldn't be.

My suggestion for the General War is to give the NR, SR, and Home fleets each 3xE3, put six in mothballs, replace a few E4A with E3As, and prohibit new construction. This should provide little to no balance problems, add some cool Klingon flavor, and prevent scads of the things being built.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Sunday, June 23, 2013 - 09:12 pm: Edit

Yeah, I argued that before they posted the revised stats (for the uncrippled side), but they didn't go for it. I think 2-3/1 is probably too weak though.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, June 23, 2013 - 09:21 pm: Edit

I think at 3/1 for 2 EP, it is enough worse than the E4 to justify it being deemed obsolete.

At 3/1, you are paying 2 EPs for 4 total defense, or 1EP for 2 defense.

An E4 at 4/2 for 2.5 EPs is 1EP for 2.4 defense, which is better (conversely, if the E3 is 3/1-2, it is 2EPs for 5 total defense, or 1EP for 2.5 defense, giving the edge to the E3).

If it is introduced into the GW (which, given that it will exist in the 4PW, is completely reasonable) with completely arbitrary limits on production (to represent it being considered obsolete and politically unpopular or something; maybe "may sub 1xE3 for 1xF5/E4 once per turn" or something), it'd be fine. Or something like Adam suggests would be cool too (i.e. a few left over in some fleets, some to un-mothball, and just say all the factories were shut down).

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Sunday, June 23, 2013 - 09:37 pm: Edit

Yeah well, they're still in production during the general war according to the notes in SFB, so if that stays the case they cannot be obsolete for purposes of being 'unbuildable' during the general war, at least for a few years.

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Sunday, June 23, 2013 - 10:11 pm: Edit

While E3s are still being built in the General War, they may have been limited to convoy escorts, POL equivalents, etc. and not necessarily available for fleet use.

By Lawrence Bergen (Lar) on Sunday, June 23, 2013 - 11:49 pm: Edit

Being able to down-sub to an E3 in the GW should be adequate. I cant see adding a production slot for them. Maybe you can build a MSY for one (if you really want it) but I cant see that being worthwhile either. These ships were so bad even the Romulans didn't want them...the WYN do though. .

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, June 24, 2013 - 05:16 am: Edit

Ok, rereading the SFB rule, it says production actually ceased at Y160. The ISF refitted it's remaining E3s to E3Es about when the general war started and relegated the remaining E3s to convoy duty at Y173.

So that corrects some things I said, and I would be ok with it being an obsolete unit during the GW.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Monday, June 24, 2013 - 09:46 pm: Edit

In light of the historic end of E3 production at the close of Y160, I will be adjust the Klingon 4PW scenario production schedule to reflect the upgrade to an F5 slot to get the schedule closer to the historic GW schedule; Y161S will see the change.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, June 25, 2013 - 08:10 am: Edit

Hows about the Kzinti Count's Fleet release situation?

(see: my Sunday the 23rd at 8:30pm post)

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Tuesday, June 25, 2013 - 08:20 am: Edit

They have to stay in defensive posture in case the WYN attack.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, June 25, 2013 - 10:28 am: Edit

Turn #4 will be revised to read.

Kzintis: All fleets are released to attack the Coalition except the Marquis Fleet; the Marquis Fleet detachment may move freely after any Coalition units enter Kzinti territory. The balance of the Marquis Fleet is released if any Coalition unit enters either of the two provinces adjacent to the Federation Neutral Zone.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, June 25, 2013 - 12:36 pm: Edit

Excellent. So the Kzinti can attack the Lyrans on T4 if the Lyrans haven't yet. Thanks!

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Tuesday, June 25, 2013 - 12:40 pm: Edit

We'll go with that in our game Peter, if you agree.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, June 25, 2013 - 04:40 pm: Edit

I do and let's. Yes.

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Tuesday, June 25, 2013 - 11:26 pm: Edit

REVISED AND UPDATED DRAFT OF THE 4PW SCENARIO v3.9 WAS POSTED AT 2030 PDT 25 JUN 2013.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Wednesday, June 26, 2013 - 05:16 am: Edit

Some things I noticed while skimming through the updated rules:


(607.561) "Once the stockpile or free, base fighters..."

should probably replace 'or' with 'of'.


(607.441) "The entire fleet is released if any Coalition unit enters either of those provinces or the capital. " should probably be
"The entire fleet is released if any Coalition unit enters either of those provinces (except hexes 1705 and 1805) or the capital. ".

(607.621) As (607.65) says that the D6N and D7N are removed from play if not using SO, the requirement to send a D7 from the home fleet should probably be removed. If this is done the rule should probably be modified to include the line 'ignore this rule if not using (SO)'.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, June 28, 2013 - 08:14 pm: Edit

Note: While the Coalition has the "first player-turn" they skip their player-turn on Turn #0, which includes only the Alliance player-turn.

This is in backdraft in the Scenario Schedule section. Would it be possible to also put this note in this scenario (with Turn #0 replaced with Turn #1).

I know I've mentioned it before. Normally I don't continually bug you about changes, but I feel particularly strongly that if the intent is that the coalition doesn't get to act on the first turn that it needs to be explicitly stated.

However, on the chance that you do feel differently, this will be the last time I bring up this particular change.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Sunday, June 30, 2013 - 11:03 am: Edit

(607.263) Should probably list a penalty for failure to deliver a TGB to the Romulans.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, June 30, 2013 - 09:53 pm: Edit

Quick Question:
>>(607.34) TURNS #4, Y159S

(607.341) Events: The war continues through the end of Y162.

(607.342) Forces Released:
Hydrans: Same as Turn #3.
Lyran: Same as Turn #3.
Klingon: Same as Turn #3.
Kzintis: All fleets are released to attack the Coalition except the Marquis Fleet;>>

Is the intention here that the Count's Fleet (and the reserve that is part of it) is released at the *start* of T4 (i.e. during Coalition T4, so that the Count's Reserve can reserve move during Coalition T4) or during Alliance T4 (so the Count's Reserve can't move during Coalition T4).

Thanks!

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Sunday, June 30, 2013 - 11:31 pm: Edit

The Count can set up a reserve fleet at the end of Turn #3 ***within the Count's set up area*** that will be able to reserve during the Coalition phasing turn. Elements of the Counts Fleet can also react to Coalition movement during turn #4.

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Monday, July 01, 2013 - 09:41 am: Edit

Ok, thanks!

By Peter D Bakija (Bakija) on Thursday, July 04, 2013 - 03:01 pm: Edit

For purposes of Victory Conditions, do FRDs count as:

-Mobile units with an AF of 1 (i.e. .1VP).

or

-Something else (which I don't think they do, but maybe they should?)

Thanks!

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