I've also got to wonder about the Peladine TG build cost of 8. Maybe it should be 6 like the Klingon TGB, Kzinti TGT and Lyran TGP. Maybe even 5 because the DV is lower. With BP (whether you use the current 2/0 or the proposed 4-2/0), it never makes DN compot like full fledged TGs of other races.

By Eric Stork (Merchant) on Sunday, June 22, 2003 - 08:57 pm: Edit

And don't even think of asking about how I figured out all the different Barbarian compots unless I get some free time. I remember the entire day I took filling in option boxes to get them and don't have notes.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Monday, June 23, 2003 - 02:05 am: Edit

A likely story......

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Monday, June 23, 2003 - 09:39 am: Edit

Looking at the SSDs, the CVA has the same weapons, arcs and power available as the DN. So whatever the DN comes out to, the CVA should be also. The fighters use drones thereby consuming no power. At worst, maybe due to doctrine, the CVA loses 1AV, but I doubt it.
Understandable... I can dig it.

Robert Cole's Missle Ship rule: Other than the DMW (which Robert lists as the DWM) and the SMC (erratad name from SCG, should remove SCG from SIT), are there other Frax ships that have these missle racks (no CW variant)? Based on the description of the (R51.24) SMC, I might just say that the DMW and SMC get some type of mauler ability against bases like the Hydran FSP but the Frax ships suffer shock?
I have the Missile DW as the MDW... I don't see any errate on the website, and I don't know where it would be (but I'll take your word concerning the SCG/SMC [though I like SCG better ]). There are no other missile ships published to date.
I'm not sure I can see the shock rule. At worst, a Missile ship could only use its Missile ability once per turn (missile racks don't have reloads), but if we added this then I would say that the Missile COMPOT is free (instead of .1 EP).

Frax SIT:
-Need symbol for BG capable ships (CW, FF, DW). STORK 22 Jun 03
Is that the "double-S" symbol? I don't have my copy of AO here at work.

-Need (7R51.0) section. STORK 22 Jun 03
I'll take any recommendations anyone might have.

Peladine SIT:
-Need symbol for BG capable ships (CW, DD, DW). STORK 22 Jun 03
See above.

-DWD is rule 42, not 48 (DDL). STORK 22 Jun 03
Fixed.

-DWD should also probably cost 1 to convert instead of 3 for same reason Scott listed regarding substitution. STORK 22 Jun 03
Fixed.

-Missing Peladine ships: SR, SRV (rules for survey ships in CL10 or 11, I believe). STORK 22 Jun 03
Hrm... I didn't include them, but they are pretty straight forward. I'll add them (though I don't know what the Survey rules have).

-Why do both the BP and DP add 2 to compot? The BP has better and more weapons and shields. BP might be better at 4-2/0. STORK 22 Jun 03
BP is indeed better, I'm not sure why I stuck with the lower COMPOT, changed.
Also, would it be too much to change the DP to 2<4>[scout]/0? The pod has 6 B-racks (same as any other DB ship). This would allow a TG to carry a BP and DP, providing a few more options (not to mention the TG+DP+DP could be a nice bonus to counteract the weak TG design).

-TP should say T-POD. STORK 22 Jun 03
Any particular reason? SSD labels for all the Pods are POD-T, -B, -PF (which I missed in the SIT), etc.

-Need (7JR1.0) section. STORK 22 Jun 03
Indeed.

I really have to question whether both the DWD and DWS should be on the SIT together. Only reason I can see is if the DWD can do drone bombardment, which it cannot.
Well, the DWS can be a 2 EW unit while the DWD is only 1 EW. There may be a time where you need the EW boost.

Thinking now, for all these races, there needs to be a (700.0) section, not necessarily fleets or (700.1) CONSTRUCTION, but at least (700.2) ALLOWABLE SUBSTITUTIONS and (700.3) PRODUCTION NOTES following AO format. And what do you call the (700.0) section for each race? Cannot number Frax (751.0), that's already an annex. (7R51.0) seems too long.
I've given the Peladine (J701.0), we could just use the J-designation for all "not real" races.

I've also got to wonder about the Peladine TG build cost of 8. Maybe it should be 6 like the Klingon TGB, Kzinti TGT and Lyran TGP. Maybe even 5 because the DV is lower. With BP (whether you use the current 2/0 or the proposed 4-2/0), it never makes DN compot like full fledged TGs of other races.
I can see 6. Their TUG really is an odd ball.

Also: I did receive your email, Eric, looking over it now.

₄₂

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Monday, June 23, 2003 - 10:17 am: Edit

Speaking of Peladine Tugs and Pods...

From the Peladine website:

---

Quote:

On extremely rare occasions a tug may carry two of these pods, the combination designated as a bombardment tug (BBT). As the plasmas on the rear pod would only be able to track in the left or right firing arcs, this configuration was primarily used in planetary assaults, with the tug in a high orbit around the planet at slow speeds, occasionally executing a full 180-degree turn to bring the off-side plasmas to bear. This tactic was also employed against bases, where the power of four plasma-S torpedoes proved quite effective.

---

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Monday, June 23, 2003 - 10:18 am: Edit

Peladine F&E Counters: whilst they are on my "things that I really should do when I get the time" list, there are one heck of a lot of things on that list already, as well as on the "things I need to do before I even think about the things I really should do" list, so if one of the experienced F&E counter-graphics veterans wants to take them on, feel free.

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Monday, June 23, 2003 - 10:32 am: Edit

SIT question:

Is the "Escort Box" normally on the crippled side of F&E counters? I'm working from the old AO drafts here at work, and it doesn't seem to be standardized on these copies. Some escorts have the box on the uncrippled side only, some on both sides.

Anyone?

Anyone?

⁴²

By John Wyszynski (Starsabre) on Monday, June 23, 2003 - 10:39 am: Edit

As I understand, all escort retain the ability when crippled. The FCR are a special case in that they only retain the escort box if they were being used as an escort when crippled.

By Tony Barnes (Tonyb) on Monday, June 23, 2003 - 12:43 pm: Edit

"At worst, a Missile ship could only use its Missile ability once per turn (missile racks don't have reloads)"
F&E turns are sufficiently long that they'd reload the missles somehow. I'd say that restriction isn't really appropriate. Maybe something like a particular missle ship can't use it's missles 2 turns in a row (but you could shuffle them in & out).

"Is that the "double-S" symbol"
Yep. I think SVC called it the double dagger

"Also, would it be too much to change the DP to 2<4>[scout]/0?"
Probably not. However, is it possible to have 2xDP on 1 tug? If so, there is no real precedence for a 8 Drone Bombardment unit. It could be changed to 2<3>[scout] or leave it at 4 DB and make it a "hook" for the Peladine.

"SSD labels for all the Pods are POD-T, -B, -PF"
The marine pods (A & T) are now listed on the AO SIT as "T-POD" & "A-POD" for the designation.

By Tony Barnes (Tonyb) on Monday, June 23, 2003 - 12:45 pm: Edit

"Should a Bombardment Tug be created? Should this combo suffer a COMPOT drop for that rear pod? The first Battle Pod would be 4-2/0, but the second might only add 2 COMPOT"
I don't recall any current ships that have reduced factors due to weird firing arcs. I'd say leave them at full factors.

I think the mauler ability against bases would be ok (since their is established precedence).

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Monday, June 23, 2003 - 01:39 pm: Edit

Robert, the escort box is normally subsumed by the crippled bar.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Monday, June 23, 2003 - 03:47 pm: Edit

Though it does depend. Many counters also have a shortend crippled color bar and still have the escort box too. All escorts can still be escorts when crippled.

Except the FCR, if it is crippled BEFORE becoming an escort, then it cannot be assigned as one.

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Monday, June 23, 2003 - 04:12 pm: Edit

Tony Barnes:

"At worst, a Missile ship could only use its Missile ability once per turn (missile racks don't have reloads)"
F&E turns are sufficiently long that they'd reload the missles somehow. I'd say that restriction isn't really appropriate. Maybe something like a particular missle ship can't use it's missles 2 turns in a row (but you could shuffle them in & out).

You mean a single missile ship can't use its missile compot 2 rounds (instead of turn) in a row? I can see that, but would that be too much to keep track of (I know some may not want the additional bookkeeping).

"Is that the "double-S" symbol"
Yep. I think SVC called it the double dagger

Thanks.

"Also, would it be too much to change the DP to 2<4>[scout]/0?"

Probably not. However, is it possible to have 2xDP on 1 tug? If so, there is no real precedence for a 8 Drone Bombardment unit. It could be changed to 2<3>[scout] or leave it at 4 DB and make it a "hook" for the Peladine.
As far as I know, 2xDrone pods would be valid. I'm currently leaning towards making the DP 2<4>[scout]/0, thus allowing a TG+DP+DP to be 8-10[8][scout]/2-3 unit. This would be a bonus for the Peladine (who probably won't get to use it much do to the limited numbers of tugs and tug units they have).

"SSD labels for all the Pods are POD-T, -B, -PF"
The marine pods (A & T) are now listed on the AO SIT as "T-POD" & "A-POD" for the designation.

Ah. Coo.

"Should a Bombardment Tug be created? Should this combo suffer a COMPOT drop for that rear pod? The first Battle Pod would be 4-2/0, but the second might only add 2 COMPOT"
I don't recall any current ships that have reduced factors due to weird firing arcs. I'd say leave them at full factors.

I think the mauler ability against bases would be ok (since their is established precedence).

I was thinking the same. Current numbers for the BBT: 12-10+/2-3, non-shocking maul bonus against bases.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Monday, June 23, 2003 - 08:01 pm: Edit

Hey, Robert, how many drone rack does a Peladine DP have compared to a Kzinti DP?

By Eric Stork (Merchant) on Monday, June 23, 2003 - 09:16 pm: Edit

Frax:
-DMW for the Missle War Destroyer is the designator in (R51.15).
-There was errata for the DMW and SMC in a CapLog, I forget which one right now.

Peladine:
-Survey ships (no fighters) cost 5EP (major) conversion from the base hull, no substitution allowed. Certain Scout cruisers can be converted to Survey ships for 3EP (D6S->D6E, SE->PE, Hyd DDS->SR, etc.). Peladine SR conversion, From CA/CC: 5. Could be converted from CV/CVD for same cost, such things are currently allowed. Might also be converted, From CD: 3. SRV is, From SR: 2+fighter factors. I cannot tell the fighters because there is no SRV SSD or description listing number of fighters carried.
-Need all posible TG & Pod combos with any that are overloaded marked.
-DP with scout abilities sounds good, it would double as a scout pod. But would it carry 2?
-BBT sounds good at 10, not 12-10. Makes it equal to a cruiser mauler. Could also get the base bonus since the TG & BP or BBT never reach a DN compot, so its compensation.

DWS vs. DWD - Both can be used at 1EW for full compot. Only difference is 1AV and 1EP in build cost. I don't know if anyone would build the DWD. If that's true, then why have it?

I don't think TGs will be limited in numbers. Due to its size, I can see it counting against CLs for substitution. But now look at the number of CA and CL variants. There are 8 CA variants (will be 10 with the SR and SRV) and only 5 CL variants. So I see the TG being subbed more for the CL than the CA. If the build schedule allows for more CL builds than CA builds, it becomes easier to replace a CL with a TG.

By Eric Stork (Merchant) on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 08:27 pm: Edit

Robert, any progress made or stalled due to whatever reasons?

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 10:23 am: Edit

Am back.

Started doing the final check over of the C4 and Peladine SITs today.

Some questions: Are CV escorts, maulers, SFG ships, troop ships, etc. eligible for Battle Groups? Should Missile Ships, Subs, SCUD Launchers?⁴²

By Tony Barnes (Tonyb) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 10:31 am: Edit

Can't be in: maulers, SFG Ships, true carriers, carrier escorts (unless operating independently of a carrier), tugs, LTTs, NCAs & larger
Can be in: Troop ships, scouts, drone ships

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 12:13 pm: Edit

Well, there is the playtest for the NCA neing allowed in Battlegroups. And then there is the Kzinti CVE being Battlegroup capable.

By David Lang (Dlang) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 12:22 pm: Edit

NCA cannot be in battlegroups (it keeps getting proposed, but is not allowed) the kzinti CVE is allowed in battlegroups as an exception to the normal carrier rule

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 12:31 pm: Edit

David Lang.........see Captain's Log number 26 315.24 It is a playtest rule to allow the NCA to replace the CWL in a battlegroup (only allowed with 2 vanilla CWs)

So, we are at least toying with it and it could be considered for what Robert is doing.

By Eric Stork (Merchant) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 06:04 pm: Edit

Since it is playtest, I'd leave it out unless it goes official.

Should Missile Ships, Subs, SCUD Launchers?

Maybe Missile Ships since they are roughly like DB. Axe Subs. I'd have to look up SCUD launchers.

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 07:37 pm: Edit

ko... I'm making a few last minute changes and then I'll upload the latest C4 and Peladine SIT this evening. ⁴²

Edit: Sooner than expected:

The Peladine SIT
The Simulator Races SIT

The C4 SIT also contains a note at the bottom of each race describing a new "hook" for each race (Missile Ships, SCUDS, etc.). Most of these were ideas put forth by Eric Stork - though I added my input to some of them. ⁴²

By Edward Reece (Edfactor) on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 09:41 am: Edit

On your Flivver BIR bonus, it would be simpler just to allow Flivver fleets to choose a BIR of 0 to 5.

Also on the Britanian, why do they not have larger attack values on the crippled side? I would have thought that the CA would be something like an 8/6-4 (also applies to Hispanolians)

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 07:00 am: Edit

I made the Flivver bonus such that it can backfire on them, though rarely.

By making the adjustment to the enemy's BIR, before BIR is announced, it is possible the Flivvers will be taking more damage / not doing as much damage than they expected.

For example: the Flivver expects his opponent to go low on BIR (1), but needs a certain amount of damage to Direct a particular target. So, the Flivvers increase the enemy's BIR by 1... then the announced BIR has them going high (4+1=5). Now, the Flivvers still have the damage to take out that unit, but they will be taking more damage in exchange.

If the 0-5 BIR option for the Flivver is better, I can change it, but I wanted the effect to reflect the fact that a Flivver fleet could "guess wrong" when allocating energy to Hoverwarp / standard warp.

As for the Britanians and Hispaniolans - I'll leave that for Eric as he's the one who came up with these numbers. ⁴²