I have been working on some OOBs and production sytems in an attempt to shorten the game considerably by reducing the number of ships in play. This is an attempt to complement the other efforts at increasing ship kills.

These OOBs basically include all the expansions, but variants replace vanilla ships as opposed to add to them. Most races lose a number or cruisers as a result, and some adjustments need to be made on the frigate front.

The OOBs will also severely curtail LAVs and SAVs at game start (along with some other Auxs), and reduce the starting number of carriers on the basis that carrier production was unbelivably fast. (for example, the klingons build their first carrier in Y166 - by the begining of fall 168, they have 7FV, 3D6V, 3 CVT, and 4 pods, all on a *peacetime* economy - not to mention the LAVs/SAVs).

I am toying with the idea of halving both economies and build rates (this is more controversial) - ie a "spring" or "fall" build is now an entire year's builds, with a DN only every other year. Some tweaking would have to be done on the Fed, ZIn, and Hydran build-up to max production. Conversions could only be done once/year by each SB, although one could probably allow a minor 1EP conversion on the off-turn.

No-one would get any free fighters, or at least they would be very much reduced.

All this would be an attempt to get a "vanilla F&E" feel without sacrificing the expansions. I have noted with some alarm over the years how the playing time has dramatically lengthened. Chief culprits of this are (in order).

1) Extra ships (can change)
2) Extra rules (can't do anything about this)
3) LAVs and SAVs (I am beginning to hate these units in the game, even if they do look nifty - I can explian if asked).
4) Rules that increased fighter numebrs. (again can't do much here, except with no free fighters so as to reduce them again)
5) Salvage (would not want to tweak this)

Does anyone else have these sentiments? Alot of balancing would be required, but one could end up with a much "cleaner" game which is faster to play.

This would not be an attempt to change the main game - simply an attempt to make all the rules playable for the main scenario and to shorten it - "F&E lite".

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 10:00 am: Edit

Are we talking about a "Beer and Pretzels" game version here? something that could be played in a single evening rather than 6 months at a shot?

By Jimi LaForm (Laform) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 10:13 am: Edit

I would suggest maybe something as simple as reduce fleets by half (kinda like seperating the defense forces for a capital assault), reduce static defenses by half compot (as since you only have half the number of forces, if you dont reduce compot of static defenses those reduced fleet counts will get trounced, reduce econ by half and production by half.

By James Southcott (Yakface) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 11:41 am: Edit

Hi David - Must admit I have my doubts about LAV's and SAV's and a lot of the other Aux to be honest, but what are yours?

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 12:12 pm: Edit

LAVs and SAVs prevent the Alliance from going on the offensive effectively turns 1-6.

Sounds a bit dramatic, but I'm finding it to be true. What happens is that these units tend to retrograde to or stay at vulnerable points in the Klingon/Lyran defences.

Normally, when the alliance counterattackes a competent coalition player, there is little hope of the alliance actually winning a battle in an important spot - a reserve will turn up and force them to retreat.

In previous times, the reserve didn't bother the Alliance too much. They traded 30 fighters or so and a dead ship or two from coalition dirdam, and then retreated. The colaition meanwhile took the pain, and while they got a persuit, it didn't really compensate.

Now, witth a LAV and SAV (at least) typically at coalition weak points, the coalition will have 18 fighters from these and at least 6 from bases. You end up close to equality in fighters.

This is very bad for the alliance. Either
1) Both sides Dirdam until the alliance runs out of fighters - in which case both sides lose 2-3 ships.
2) Both sides let the damage fall, another scenrio bad for the alliance as the coalition has plenty of fighters.

In either case, the caolition still gets a lucrative persuit round.

Basically, the alliance counterattacks are completely muzzled except perhaps when they have ALOT of fighters (60+) and a full CV line.

Now, you can see that I think Auxs are very pro-coalition (or at least make alliance play much more boring). The Alliance can't do the same game, as they frequently have to retreat from their destroyed strongpoints, at which point the LAVs and SAVs get trounced. As a result, the AuxVs get consigned to capital defence, another boring side-effect.

On top of all that, AuxVs basically prolong the game by introducing ALOT of extra fighters (The starting races have almost as many fighters in Auxs as carriers in initial OOBs), which simply serve as a way to throw away all that damage you have spent time to generate by forming battleforces, rolling dice, etc. I want to see an *effect* from my damage. Carriers are fine in limited quantities, and after a number of turns when compots are higher. At the start, with all those fighters, it sometimes seems not much happens.

Now, reducing fighter counts will help the alliance to counterattack, as they will still have a number of fighters anyway. But this is a complete rewrite of the OBs. It can be balanced.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 12:16 pm: Edit

By the way. I looked into this quite hard in a solo game. I tried several ways to do Zin counterattacks after the Lyrans destroyed the count's SB turn 1 for heavy losses. The Auxs made sure that every permutation resulted in a bad Kzinti loss. The same happened again for the Zin turn 2. Any chance they might get through to get to coalition bases for a raid was thwarted by these monsters.

So I was thinking "what's the point?" And it's a bad day for F&E when Zin counterattacks are rendered pointless.

By Paul Bonfanti (Bonfanti) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 12:39 pm: Edit

I've never thought of Auxillaries as anything but pro-Alliance....

David: the Lyrans shouldn't have any aux carriers on Turn 1, should they?

Using auxillaries to send fighters forward in a large battle is begging for their destruction. The 18 points to kill a LAV even 3-1 is easy for any size fleet, and the Klingons don't exactly have 16 EP's lying around to replace it.

By James Southcott (Yakface) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 12:39 pm: Edit

FWIW my feelings were much the same:

What do the alliance get to do with their AUX carriers? - they get used once and (if the coaltion player knows what he is doing) only once as they effectively can't retreat (slow retreat is pretty deadly or the coaltion can spare the ships to put a ring around them so they can't retro).

What do the coaltion get to do with theirs? Bats bust and take no damage, use them for fighter supplies in battles over alliance SB's (just make sure you are going to win the battle and they will safely reduce the damage you take). Defend the FRD park. Use them again and again, against the Zin, then the Hydrans then the Feds.

AUX's favour the attacker - yeah the alliance has its final third of the game to be on a serious attack, but by then there are so many fighters swilling around, a few from the AUX's is irrelevant.

However I'm not too worried, still fun to play.

By James Southcott (Yakface) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 12:40 pm: Edit

Sorry I mean my feelings are much the same as David's

By James Southcott (Yakface) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 12:42 pm: Edit

Paul - if you team the LAV up with carriers then you never even get the chance to direct at 3-1, alternatively you can give it escorts.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 12:50 pm: Edit

Paul. the Lyrans gained their Aux's in a recent discussion for AO. But it is listed on their newest OOB. Errata for SO, put in CO.

By Paul Bonfanti (Bonfanti) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 01:19 pm: Edit

Silly me--i forgot that you can escort Aux CVs.
That does change the equation somewhat.

I missed the Lyran updates and haven't bought CO yet. What was the rationale about that? Do the Gorns also start with Aux CVs?

By David Lang (Dlang) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 05:40 pm: Edit

if we reduce fleet size back dow to the area of vinilla F&E then I don't think we need to cut down on fixed defenses any (one problem is that as compots climb the fixed defenses become easier to kill)

remove free fighters and mauling against uncrippled ships and you have already greatly shortened the game. add a rule to encourage more ship kills, and eliminate the CEDS retrograde and things will go a LOT faster. the fun will be balancing the result

re: aux ships like all the 'in addition to' ships these are a problem, again the fun part will be deciding what to remove to balance them (it doesn't matter if you have 3xL-aux carriers at a FRD park if you don't have any good carriers to feed the fighters forward to for example)

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 06:00 pm: Edit

Ok, here is the Klingon OB for F&E lite.

FRDs and MBs the same.

Home
C8,D7C,2D7,D7A,D6M,D6V,D6,3F5Q,2F5S,F5J,2E4A,3E4,TGA,FTL,2FTS,LAV.
North and East (replace D6D with D6M for west)
D7C,FD7,2D7,D6D,D6G,D6J,2F5Q,F5S,FV,E4A,3E4,TGA
TBS
D7C,3D7,3D6,F5Q,F5S,F5J,FV,E4A,3E4,TGA
SR (replace D6D with D6M for NR)
C5,D7C,3D7,D6M,CVT,D6S,3F5Q,F5S,F5J,2E4A,3E4,TGT.SAF,SAV

PODS - 2 battle,2drone,2VP2,2troop (same overall limits, so you can build more)
3Monitors

Economy is halved. Repair rates are halved - BATS can no longer repair cruisers. B10s can still be repaired by SBs (B10s will need a modified build rule) FRDs now cost only 6EPs.

Conversion rate - SBs have only one conversion per year. On the off-turn, they can however do a 1pt conversion only. All escort carriers are 1pt conversions. Escort carriers also get a 2EP discount for fighters

No free fighters.

Subtitution limits are the same. (so in effect you get double the sub rate).

Mothballs are activated at the normal rate.

Builds.

F168 D7,5D5,F5Q,2E4
S169 C8,D7,4D5,F5Q,E4
F169 D7,5D5,F5Q,2E4
S170 D7C,D6,4D5,F5Q,E4
F170 D7,5D5,F5Q,2E4
S171 C8,D7,4D5,F5Q,E4
F171 D7,5D5,F5Q,F5,E4

etc....

Command ratings are reduced by 1. Capitals may not have more than 12PDUs. 2 bases maximum per system/planet in system. (this is to stop impregnable defences - much easier when ship counts are lower).

Now look at that, and you will start to realise a real value to every cruiser you have. Things will get a lot more personal.

BTW, don't worry, The Zin carrier fleet is also somewhat gutted in F&E lite.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 06:07 pm: Edit

Paul

The Kligons put two E4 to escort the LAV in the support Echelon. It now takes 36 just to cripple. The LAV feeds forward 12 fighters, the base another 6. Any SAVs refill the LAV or the base.

Alternatively, the LAVs/SAVs are not escorted, and simply replace the base fighters as they are lost. This does not require them to be in the support echelon as the base is supporting the fighters.

E4s are just great for protecting LAVs.

By John Colacito (Sandro) on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 07:42 pm: Edit

David and James: you're right on the money in regards to AUX carriers helping the Coalition...I was so annoyed when the stupid JGP was used as an excuse to give the Lyrans an LAV and 2xSAV with no compensation to the Alliance.

Ach, I guess this isn't the topic for this anyway. Sorry.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Tuesday, May 27, 2003 - 04:39 pm: Edit

Is there any interest out there?

Here's a lyran OB and builds. Note that all varients replace standard ships in these OB, rather than being added. It is assumed that the ships were converted or simply old ships decommisioned and replaced.
eg BC's/DNs etc replace CAs

Red Claw
BC,CF,3CA,5CW,5CL,2DD,2DDG,SC,5FF,TGC,MB,RESV
Home
DN,CC,3CA,4CW,JGP,2DW,5CL,3DD,DDG,SC,8FF,TGP,MB,FRD,RESV,SAF,SAV,FTL,2FTS.
Enemy Blood
CC,CF,2CA,4CL,2DD,DDG,SC,4FF,TGC, MB
Far Stars
DNL,CC,2CA,4CL,2DD,DDG,SC,4FF,TGP,FRD

2*mon, scout pallet, battle pallett, assault pallet.

Builds
FY168 CA 2CW 2DW FF
S169 DN 2CW DW 2FF
F169 CA 2CW 2DW FF
S170 BC 2CW DW 2FF
F170 CA 2CW 2DW FF

Then repeat S169-F170 as a 2-year cycle.

All limits for subs/overall limits are now across double the time period. 1/turn is now 1/year. 1/year becomes 1/cycle. 2/turn becomes 1/turn.

Each SB can do two 2-pt conversions/year or any minor conversion and a 1pt conversion. SBs doing more than 1 conversion/year must do both conversions on different turns.
Capital SBs can do a major and 2pt conversion per year, or two minor conversions of any type.

50% economy.
Repair halved.
battle pods/pallet maximums halved (each type, round up, but will still get a pair of KBPs).
I've decided that command ratings should stay the same.
Maximum capital defence = 12PDUs.
no free fighters.

By Jimi LaForm (Laform) on Tuesday, May 27, 2003 - 04:52 pm: Edit

Actually, yes I'm interested in an F&E lite. Might make the game finishable =). Keep em coming, when you have it setup I'll talk my FtF enemy to a game of it.

By John Smedley (Ukar) on Tuesday, May 27, 2003 - 05:02 pm: Edit

For what it's worth, I agree that aux CVs (especially LAVs) favor the coalition (especially the Lyrans).

There are several reasons:
1) Aux CVs need to be on the winning side, or have a retrograde path, to survive a battle. This means coalition auxs are more survivalable than alliance auxs.

2) The alliance has good carriers (13+ compot) already. The Coalition does not. Further, the Lyrans/Klingons have better escorts than the Kzinti/Feds - thus their escorted LAV groups are more battle-worthy.

Consider: LAV+2CWE+DWE=33 compot, 4 ships (8.25 density). This is the Lyran's best carrier group till the CV is available, and it is still good after that.

LAV+2MEC+FKE= 29 compot, 4 ships (7.25 density)
This is significantly inferior to the Kzinti line Carrier.

3) They equalize the fighter playing field. Instead of a 2:1 advantage, the alliance falls to a 3:2 advantage in ititial fighter stores. Plus, since both sides have sufficient fighters, the alliance excess means less.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 03:20 am: Edit

John

You hit the nail on the head - a very nice summary.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Friday, May 30, 2003 - 06:27 am: Edit

OK. Here's a complete OB. It's missing some details such as Fed builds, some RESV, some MB, some pods, etc, but until I tidy up, you can have a good look, as it has all the important bits done.

Note that all variants replace standard ships in these OOBs, rather than being added. It is assumed that the ships were converted or simply old ships decommissioned and replaced.
eg BC's/DNs etc replace CAs

KLINGON

Home
C8,D7C,2D7,D7A,D6M,D6V,D6,3F5Q,2F5S,F5J,2E4A,3E4,TGA,
FTL,2FTS,LAV,FRD,2MB,RESV

North and East (replace D6D with D6M for west)
D7C,FD7,2D7,D6D,D6G,D6J,2F5Q,F5S,FV,E4A,3E4,TGA

TBS
D7C,3D7,3D6,F5Q,F5S,F5J,FV,E4A,3E4,TGA,RESV

SR (replace D6D with D6M for NR)
C5,D7C,3D7,D6M,CVT,D6S,3F5Q,F5S,F5J,2E4A,3E4,TGT,
SAF,SAV,FRD,MB,RESV

PODS - 2 battle,2drone,2VP2,2troop,3Monitors

Builds.
F168 D7,5D5,F5Q,2E4
S169 C8,D7,4D5,F5Q,E4 F169 D7,5D5,F5Q,2E4
S170 D7C,D6,4D5,F5Q,E4 F170 D7,5D5,F5Q,2E4
S171 C8,D7,4D5,F5Q,E4 F171 D7,5D5,F5Q,F5,E4
S172 D7C

Mothballs and IWR are as normal. (the IWR will now be a major asset!).

LYRAN

Red Claw
BC,CF,3CA,5CW,5CL,2DD,2DDG,SC,5FF,TGC,MB,RESV

Home
DN,CC,3CA,4CW,JGP,2DW,5CL,3DD,DDG,SC,8FF,TGP,MB,FRD,RESV,
SAF,SAV,FTL,2FTS.

Enemy Blood
CC,CF,2CA,4CL,2DD,DDG,SC,4FF,TGC, MB

Far Stars
DNL,CC,2CA,4CL,2DD,DDG,SC,4FF,TGP,FRD

Scout pallet, battle pallet, assault pallet, 2 monitors

Builds
FY168 CA 2CW 2DW FF
S169 DN 2CW DW 2FF F169 CA 2CW 2DW FF
S170 BC 2CW DW 2FF F170 CA 2CW 2DW FF
Then repeat S169-F170 as a 2-year cycle.

KZINTI

Home
DN,CV,2BC,CD,CVE,CLE,CL,2DD,SDF,SF,FFK,FFG,2EFF,2FF,FCR,TGC,FRD,MB,LAV,LAD,RESV

Baron
CC,CVL,3BC,3CL,DDV,DF,SF,FFG,EFF,TGT,FRD,MB,SAS

Marquis
CC,CVL,2BC,BF,2CL,CLG,DF,SF,FFK,EFF,FF,TGT,SAD,SAS

Duke
DNL,CV,3BC,CVE,CLE,CL,DF,SF,FFK,FFG,2EFF,FF,TGC,RESV,LAS,SAV

Count
CC,CV,2BC,BF,CLE,CLG,CL,DF,SF,FFK,EFF,FF,TGT,RESV,SAV,SAD

F168 CL,DD,FF
S169 DD,MEC,2FF F169 BC,CM,3FF
S170 CV,MEC,CM,EFF,2FF F170 BC,CL,CM,3FF
S171 DN,2CM,3FF F171 BC,2CM,3FF
S172 CV,MEC,CM,EFF,2FF F172 BC,CL,CM,3FF

ROMULAN

Home
VUL,KE,5WE,FAL,SE,2KR,KRM,CE,SP,SK,2WH,2BHE,K5L,K5,K5S,3SN,3SNB.KRT,SAV,FTL,2FTS,
PWC
KC9R,WE->KE,SUP,FFH,SPB,SPG,SP,3SPC,SPF,2SKE,2K4

North
KRC,KE,2WE,FAL,SE,CE,2KR,KRM,K5L,2K5,K5S,3SN,3SNB,3FE
PWC
SHR,WE->KE,FH,SPB,SP,SKB,SKG,SKF,3SKE,2K4

West
KRC,KE,2WE,FAL,SE,CE,3K7R,2KR,KRM,K5L,2K5,K5S,3SN,3SNB,3FE
PWC
CON,WE->KE,SUP,SP,SPB,3SKE,SKF,SKB,SKG,2K4

Patrol
5WE,SE,4BH,3SN,3SNB
PWC
SP,2K4

F168 SP,2SK
S169 (4K4)(WE->KE),SP,SK F169 (4K4),SUP,SP,2SK
S170 (WE->KE),2SP,SK F170 CON,SP,2SK
S171 (WE->KE),FH,2SP,SK F171 SUP,SP,2SK
S172 (KC9R), FFH F172 SHR,SP,2SK

S173 FH,2SP,2SK,WE F173 NH,2SP,SK,SEH,SN
S174 FH,2SP,2Sk,WE F174 CON,2SP,2Sk,SEH,SN

HYDRAN

Home
LM,3RN,2LN,LNG,CR,2HN,SC,TG,LAV,FTL,2FTS,2MB,2FRD,RESV

Exp
LGE,LB,3DG,3KN,2CU,HNG,SC,TG,SAV

First
LM,THR,2RN,2LN,LNG,CR,2HN,SC,FCR,TG,SAS

Second
LB,THR,2DG,3KN,CR,2CU,SC,FCR,TG,SAS

OCS
LC,2PGS,2LN,CR,2HN, RESV

Pods – Carrier, battle, fire support, FCP, Assault, scout (1 each), 2 monitors.

F168 TR,2HN
S169 PAL (act), HR,2HN,CU F169 UH,AH,RN,HN,CU
S170 DE,AH,DG,HR,2HN,CU F170 CV,AH,HR,TR,HN,CU
S171 DE,AH,PAL (act),HR,2HN,CU F171 UH,AH,RN,HR,HN,CU,TR
S172 DE,AH,DG,HR,2HN,CU F172 CV,AH,HR,TR,HN,CU
S173 PAL,HR,LN,2HN,CU F173 RN,HR,CW,HN,2CU

FEDERATION

Home
DN,CC,3CA,2CL,CMC,3DD,SC,5FF,FFS,2TG,FTL,LAV,2FTS
PWC
(DN+CL+2DE->CVA+CLE+2DE), SWAC,2FF,2NCL (S171)

2nd
2CVL,COV

3rd
CVS,CC,CA,CF,2CL,CMC,2DD,DE,SC,FFE,4FF,FFS,TG,SAV
PWC
DN (F168), (CA+DD+FF->CVB+DE+FFE) (S169), 2FF (S170)

4th
DNL,CC,3CA,3DD,SC,CFF,2FF,TG

5th
DNL,CC,3CA,3DD,SC,CFF,2FF,TG

6th
CVS,CC,CA,CF,2CL,CMC,2DD,DE,SC,FFE,4FF,FFS,TG,SAV
PWC
DN (F169), (CA+DD+FF->CVB+DE+FFE) (S170), 2FF (F170)

7th
CC,3CA,3DD,SC,2FF,CFF

F171 CA,2NCL,2FF


GORN

Home
CC,BC,3CL,COM,4DD,DDG,SC,2TG,FTL,2FTS
PWC
DN,HCD,3BD,HDS,(CL->HSC),(2CL+DD->CV+CLE+DE)

2nd
CC,BC,CF,2CL,COM,4DD,DDG,SC
PWC
DNL,3HD,3BD,BDS

6th
CC,BC,CF,2CL,COM,4DD,DDG,SC
PWC
(HD->CM), 3HD,3BD,BDS

F168 BD
S169 HD,BDS F169 BD
S170 HD,BD F170 BD (CL->HSC)
S171 DN,HDS,BD F171 HD,BD
S172 HD,BDS F172 HD,BD (HD->CM)
S173 DNL,HD,BD F173 (2CL+DD->CL+CLE+DDE),HD,BD

S174 CC,CM,HD,2BD F174 BC,2HD,2BD,DD
S175 DN,CM,HD,2BD F175 BC,2HD,2BD,DD


All limits for subs/overall limits are now across double the time period. 1/turn is now 1/year. 1/year becomes 1/cycle. 2/turn becomes 1/turn. A cycle is a 2-year period starting on the odd-numbered years. Ships which were limited to 1/year cannot be built/subbed/converted on subsequent turns (e.g. 1. if you sub a lyran CVL fall 172, you can’t sub another until fall 17 e.g.2. you can only sub a scout for a hull once/year).

Each SB can do two 2-pt conversions/year or any minor conversion and a 1pt conversion. SBs doing more than 1 conversion/year must do both conversions on different turns. Capital SBs can do a major and 2pt conversion per year, or two minor conversions of any type.
All escort carriers are 1pt conversions.
Conversions are otherwise not limited except that they must conform to any overall limits on production, which are halved as outlined above.

50% economy.
Repair rates are halved - BATS can no longer repair cruisers. B10s can still be repaired by SBs (B10s will need a modified build rule) FRDs now cost only 6EPs.
Maximum capital defence = 16PDUs. PDUs can only be placed 2/planet/turn max
no free fighters.
Mothballs are activated at the normal rate. The IWR squadrons are NOT weakened.
Pods have the same limits, but you start with fewer of them. 1 set of pods per year.
Escort carriers get a 0.5EP discount per fighter factor
The first carrier of any new class gets a 0.5EP discount per fighter factor
Carriers on the build schedule (ONLY) get a 0.5EP discount per fighter factor if they are built or converted to on that turn only (1 carrier per turn max). This is for the Zin CV and Hydran UH/CV.
The first Hydran hybrid ship of any new class only pays 0.5EP per fighter factor. This includes ships converted to the new class if that is the first ship.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Monday, June 02, 2003 - 05:57 am: Edit

Any comments? I do need some feedback here. I'm going to try and playtest it solo.

Balance will be mainly tweaked by fiddling the Fed PWC and orginal fleets, and by fiddling the rate of release and/or strength of the mothball fleets.

There won't be a Gorn HD->CM conversion. It will be a direct build. All ship types are represented in some form.

Another general philosophy here - races built up to and maintained a "peacetime" level of ships up to Y168, where each fleet is kept at a certain number of hulls. In peacetime, fleets were improved by conversions to new variants, so much so that active D6s were rare come Fall 168 (plenty of vanilla D6s in the mothballs).
The Fed pre-war schedule retains this philosophy, where carrier groups are conversions. The Roms and Gorns wern't so silly, and started building extra hulls once the main war started in the west. The Lyrans and Klingons had started building some extra war hulls pre Fall 168 in preparation for the war.

By Jimi LaForm (Laform) on Monday, June 02, 2003 - 08:58 am: Edit

I'll overlook this fully today and give my feedback David. Was a busy weekend so havent looked at it all yet.

By John Smedley (Ukar) on Monday, June 02, 2003 - 10:36 am: Edit

I recommend that the Hydrans be given fixed costs for each ship class, if you are going to remove all Hydrid fighter factors.

Perhaps:
CC 10
CA 9
HR 7
DD 6
PAL 19

By Edward Reece (Edfactor) on Monday, June 02, 2003 - 12:21 pm: Edit

The Hydrans need their free fighter factors too much.