Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	Archive through May 30, 2003	25		05/30 05:41pm
	Archive through May 18, 2006	25		05/18 08:35pm

OK, let me get this down straight.

A Klingon force of D7C, F5V+E4A, 5F5, F5M attacks a Kzinti BATS w/ FF (Turn 2). Pretty standard anti-BATS force, or so.

The Kzinti have: 12+6(BATS)+4(FF)+12(Minefield, Klingons choose 4)=34
The Klingons have: 9+10+25=44

The F5M does "1" damage to the Minefield, the minefield takes "1" damage from being in combat (this is similar to the X-Ship anti-fighter property).

Now question/comments:
1) Any Minesweeper shouldn't have to take damage after the 1st round. How am I supposed to record that this is the 3rd round of battle and my F5M has taken 2 damage? Damage, on ships, isn't recorded in F+E.
2) Minelayers this has to be on the battle line to repair 1 Minefield point per round? This will cause any base with a CWM to have a MUCH heaftier cost in assaulting, as the CWM will stay out (go ahead burn 22 to destroy it), for the 9-12 COMPOT per round.
3) The costs for assaults in F+E shall now skyrocket. This effectively adds a heavy unit everywhere (well a degrading CC to DN) to every significant installation.
4) SBs vs BATS w/ Minefields. It's just the number of Minefield Packages, the standard ammount of mines for 75(?) BPV that each has. SBs have upto 6 (any place really), and smaller targets (BS/Minor planet) 1-3 usually.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 04:27 pm: Edit

In this case notes are kept on the side. If a mine ship is crippled it can no longer serve its function. IF not crippled the damage is ignored after the battle (repaired by other means). Yes this means that the enemy will, at some point, direct on the mine ship to cripple it.

Mine Field records are discarded after the battle.

I'm not relating SFB packages to F&E mine fields directly. If the base compot is high it can be reduced. A mine fields compot reduces per round and a minesweeper speeds that up. Against a single field a sweeper can eliminated from the battle in four rounds; eight without a minesweeper. Faster using more sweepers and/or a scout.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 04:36 pm: Edit

I just can't support such a thing. Minefields are part of the factors on the base counters already.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 07:41 pm: Edit

Well, that is the thing, isn't it?

Still, if mine fields were to be a separate factor...

By Jason E. Schaff (Jschaff297061) on Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 08:35 pm: Edit

I'm not a fan of this for 2 reasons.

First, I suspect it will be seriously unbalancing. The coalition will take significantly higher losses in the initial assaults on the Kzin, Hydran and Feds, leading to a much weakened mid-game position for the Coalition.

Second, as CFant pointed out, minefields are already factored into the base counters. A BATS in F&E is rated as combat equivalent to a DN, but a BATS in SFB does not really have DN firepower. The reason for the F&E equivalence can be argued (quite viably, I think) to be the minefield around the base.

Cheers,
Jason

By Chuck Strong (Raider) on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 02:39 am: Edit

'I just can't support such a thing. Minefields are part of the factors on the base counters already."

I concur with Chris.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 04:04 am: Edit

Well, I got interesting in how Mine Fields could be used in F&E and they've certainly been discussed long before my version.

Still, a DN's only advantage over a BATTS is its mobility. If a BATTS could move it would take out DN's for lunch and come back alone. A mine field can be a tough nut to crack and there is disparity from SFB reality. In all seriousness, no BATTS stands a chance against a Fed fleet with a good scout (which they have the best for base assaults; the SC). Fed can take down a BATTS from R30 and ignore the mine field altogether. No other race can do this. Every other race has to deal with the mine field directly and a well planned mine field can do a lot of damage. Given the factors and compared to other units factors I'd say the minimum mine field is subsumed at best.

Would anyone be interested in a rule allowing you to add extra levels of mine field?

The mine sweeper and Mine layers would have some effect on any planets or bases compot. I have an idea that works with the already subsumed mine field thing. I'll post something this weekend.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 01:38 pm: Edit

Loren, As I understand it, minefields (and technically Minesweepers) are subsummed into the F&E factors.

(to restate what I think you mean), are you suggesting that there should be a F&E rule for cases when there are significantly higher densities of mines present?

Say that the current F&E factors assume a single "package" of mines (see SFB rules on mine fields, rule M.0 something)... and that under specific (I presume limited) conditions two or more mine packages are encountered that the "normal" F&E factors do not (or can not) address.

I wouldnt want to see Mine sweeper counters for F&E, but I could see a role for using the "Ship#" counters where the factors could be recorded and that Ship# counter represents one or more specialized units for dealing with extraordinary mine field defenses.

It would require a set of rules, but one would think it could be handled.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 02:33 pm: Edit

I got an idea that would do something like that. There is a serious inconsistancy between F&E and SFB (which is tied to F&E's Command Point system) in that if I bring a mine sweeper to a base assault (in SFB) it counts against my Command limits but in F&E it is subsumed. It is therefore not possible to replicate a F&E base assault in SFB.

I don't have much time right now but they system will be simple. I'll get it done this weekend.

By James Chou (Jchou) on Friday, September 15, 2006 - 01:44 am: Edit

Mines around bases are already accounted for, however mines laid in empty hexes may be quite useful.

Effects
1. Ships pass through a mined hex has to spend twice as much movement point with scout, else it may risk being damaged by the mine.

2. For every 10 ships, roll a die, if the value is less then or equal to 1+ mine density, one ship is crippled. Owner select 3 ships and the opponent select 3 ships. The ship crippled is chosen by the another die roll.

3. mine strike is resolved in the movement phase.

4. enemy supply line many not pass through "mined" hex.

Laying and sweeping of mines
1. To lay or increase mine density, a mine sweeper has to stay in hex for one turn and spend x EP.

2. Once a mine layer spend an entire turn in a hex, it may
a) lay a mine field and declare it.
b) declare a mine field but does not lay a mine field, but the truth will be revealed the first time enemy pass through the field. EP still must be paid, but will be refunded once the scam is revealed.

3. clearing a mine field takes twice as long or twice as many mine sweeper, but it does not take any EP to sweep mines.

Note there are quite a few interesting way of using the mine field. Here are a few:
1. protecting FRD/Supply point/forward base -- by slowing down enemy fleet unless they risk damage.
2. beseiging capital/planet as no supply grid can pass through.

Another point is even a imaginary mine field is effective as a real one in limiting movement
-- unless anyone try to trip it.

As such, mine has more strategic effect than simply protecting bases and planets.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, September 15, 2006 - 02:03 am: Edit

James Chou,

I don't think that really works because, well..., space is really, really big. One light year is about 1,000,000,000 SFB hexes. An F&E hex is 500 parsecs across, or more than 1,600 light years. So that equates to roughly 1,600,000,000,000 SFB hexes. If all the Alpha Octant races devoted their entire military budgets, for the entire time span covered by SFB, to nothing but mines, they could not collectively produce enough to adequately mine even one F&E hex.

By James Chou (Jchou) on Friday, September 15, 2006 - 11:16 am: Edit

well, you are presuming mines do not move.

How about this -- there is a network of passive sensors detecting fleet entering the hex. Upon detection, the mine swarm either move themselves ahead of the fleetto ambush them, or robotic mine carriers carries immobile mines and lay the mines ahead of the fleet.

minelaying and sweeping may merely involves deploying and destroying the network of sensors
and automated mine carriers.

By Scott Burleson (Burl) on Monday, September 18, 2006 - 11:09 am: Edit

>> well, you are presuming mines do not move.

Yes, I think we are assuming that. I cannot think of a mine deployment system as you describe that would allow them to move light years to intercept a fleet.

It makes sense that you would mine "choke points", areas of space that trade routes naturally have to go through because of the presence of nebula, black holes or other hazards, or areas that if a fleet had control over an area they could force certain ships through. Unfortunately, I don't think the scale of the F&E map lends itself to this type of detail, though. You would need a map that would need to be of a larger scale (i.e. 610x190 instead of 61x19 representing the same space) to be able to come up with rules to describe these areas of space that could benefit from a minefield.

By Jeff Laikind (J_Laikind) on Monday, September 18, 2006 - 01:20 pm: Edit

>> well, you are presuming mines do not move.

http://www.starfleetgames.com/discus/messages/12031/12065.html?0

THE AUTOMATIC REJECT LIST
M–MINES:
Any form of moving mine.

By Gary Bear (Gunner) on Monday, September 18, 2006 - 02:23 pm: Edit

Not to hijack the conversation or to dispute the Auto-Reject List, but re-reading it is somewhat humorous.

While these listed below have happened, I understand why SVC/SPP don't want people to waste their time proposing these items and, instead, implement the appropriate ones at the proper time in a balanced way.

Any weapon that only affects shields.
Shield Crackers, for instance?

Warp seekers for plasma torpedoes.
Plasma-K, anyone?

Putting plasma-D torpedoes (or plasma-Fs) in scatter-packs other than fighters or MRS shuttles as already provided in the rules.
Hmmmm....like a Seeking-Weapon Drogue?

Allowing ESGs to have a direct-fire function.
Which I heard mumblings of transitioning from FC to SFB?

Andromedan PFs, interceptors, fighters, shuttles, or WWs.
Oops! There went those MWPs and Sleds.

B10s, battleships, super-dreadnoughts, etc. for other races. We have them all in Module R5.
DNHs, DNWs, and Stellar Domination Ships never happened?

Civilian Yachts: We have received dozens of such propos-als, which are always armed to the teeth "so they can defend themselves."
Like the Yacht? (Admittedly, it is properly armed for it's purpose.)

Export ships: For example, Fed NCL sold to Gorns and fit-ted with Gorn weapons.
Isn't this Brothers Of The Anarchist?

Federation proposals: CA variants (escort, drone are obvious variants).
Like the CAD and VDB?

Maulers for races that don’t have them now.
Well, R9 is "Ships That Never Were", so I guess this wasn't violated by giving everyone a Conjectural-Campaign Mauler?

Orion dreadnoughts, CVAs, battleships, monitors, survey ships, or tugs.
I've seen these somewhere....

Parallel designs (e.g., a new heavy cruiser for a race).
Besides NCAs for everyone?

Second-Generation X-ships. (Ask us in 1994.)
Guess we're 12 years too late to ask?

By James Chou (Jchou) on Tuesday, September 19, 2006 - 12:38 am: Edit

>>> well, you are presuming mines do not move.

>http://www.starfleetgames.com/discus/messages/120>31/12065.html?0

>THE AUTOMATIC REJECT LIST
>M–MINES:
>Any form of moving mine.

slight distinction -- mines done move after they are laid. Sensor net detect the fleet, then disptach the automated mine layer to lay mine on prejected path. On clear space without expected danger, ships tend to travel direct path.

some sort of mobility limitation may be interesting twist to the game, but I won't push
it.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Monday, June 22, 2009 - 08:10 am: Edit

I know this is a late, late comment.

But I only just read this, and I'm all for it. Over the last few years, fleet sizes and compot have increased vastly, and bases have therefore become progressively easier to destroy and less worthwhile to build, to the the point that it is now possible to dirdam a SB. Bases need a boost, and this is a good one.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, February 11, 2017 - 10:41 am: Edit

Very late to this discussion... but it seems to me that mines are already subsumed into the existing game.

For this proposal, the only real alternative is to account for those few/rare cases where mines are present outside of the known mine field defenses already in the game. For example, BATS and Star Bases are known to include mine fields.

FRD parks do not at present have mine field defenses. Perhaps they should have the option?

Antioch and Shilo are Federation planets that get besieged by Coalition forces. Should F&E rules allow a player to add mine field defenses to on map Major and Minor worlds? What should the cost be? How effective would mine field defenses be in aiding a PDU?

The Federation had to know that the Coalition twin invasions (Klingon,Romulan) were targeted at Earth. Earth is important enough to warrant additional defenses. So too would the Hydran and Kzinti home worlds.

Just say 'in.