Archive through September 17, 2004
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Federation & Empire: F&E PRODUCTS:
F&E Future Products (Far Term):
F&E Defensive Operations:
CL27 503.63X Neutral Planet Defenses:
Archive through September 17, 2004
(503.63X) Neutral Planet Defenses
Since the planets that appear on the F&E map are developed worlds with major economies, it would only make sense that they have their own defenses. Provide each neutral zone planet with the following:
Three PDUs, One BATS
One Monitor
Three 4-point “police frigates”.
One 6-point “old cruiser”.
Neutral planets can repair one of their own crippled units each turn and add one PDU per turn at no cost. Their defenses cannot exceed a minor planet (433.424).
I liked this rule, but recccomend following changes
BATS to a BS.
Can add 1 PDU per year (plus an additional one on the turn immiately after an attack)
Also is there a way to arrange for allowing neutral planets to add pallets to their monitors? (maybe as a gift from a neighbor race)
Or, 3 PDUs, one MB
Each turn, they can generate 1 PDU or 1 step base upgrade (MB->BS, BS->BATS, SB upgrade not allowed)
I really like the BATS. It will make them actuall hardpoints that must be attacked in force if the attacker wishes to take them.
What are the effects of this + the diplomatic ships the klingons are getting? This lets the Klingons (or their foes on a really bad roll) pick up a lot of defenses cheap.
Should there be a rule reference to the effect that once captured (by any race) the minor planets lose certain abilities such as no longer able to generate 1 free PDU per turn?
And don't forget the free repairs also!
don't bother with upgrade schedules, how many planets remain neutral more then one turn after the empire they are adjacent to goes to war?
this rule ends up being pro-alliance as the coalition is useually the ones attacking and captureing these planets so anything that makes this harder is pro-alliance
that being said I always thhought that it should bew a little harder to capture the neutrals
David Lang:
What are you suggesting? that minor neutrals should be like "miniture" capital hexes with 2 or e 3 distinct star systems?
just forcing an aggressor to follow a Capital Assualt procedure might disuade the faint of heart from taking the systems over, but I cant think of anything else you could do to make it "harder"?!?
Maybe there should be a way to convince these planets to join a major power diplomatically??
Jeff, adding a handful of ships to the neutral planets makes them significantly harder to kill.
the ships prevent the attacker from choosing the BIR and tailering his force to have exactly the proper amount of free padding (fighters and minus points) as well as increasing the amount of damage the attacker takes (both from the higher compot and the fact that it may take more rounds to kill everything)
there's no current justification for turning them into multi-system hexes, and the capitol assault procedure wouldn't help much anyway (everything goes on the line immediatly anyway, there's no decision to make)
John
Do you realise how much of an effect it would have to suddenly have a BATS + 2PDUs (or more) on your side?
Besides, read the Klingon diplomatic ships thread (they are *very* powerful, and woudl require significant balancing).
What do people think of the idea that once a minor planet is attacked by a major (or minor) race, the neutral planet immediately joins the opponent of the of the attacking race?
In most cases it would make no difference, but IF the neutral world successfully resists the initial attack, it provides base, facilities, and econ points to the side it joins. (this would include setting up a partial supply grid if isolated from the rest of the territory of the side it joined).
the result could be that an aggressor must devote enough forces to capture the planet immediately or ignore it until the invasion is successful and they have the opportunity to invest the minor neutral properly...
just a thought...
Here's why I think there needs to be a diplomatic option:
A. I don't see the Federation or Gorn's knocking off border planets there governments would always attempt to diplomaticlly influnce the planet into joining them or providing support for there forces.
B. Unless the border planets are controlled by the Swiss, I don't see any reason why they would want to fight a battle with a far stronger power if they are going to loose anyway just to remain neutral. If I was a border planet and war broke I out I would side with the people I thought would win the war or the people who would be willing to defend my planet. I could also see a border planet being influenced by money or military supplies.
Jeff:
that is currently the case if I remember rightly.
certainly you can reserve to defend a neutral planet and take advantage of the PDU's there as the rules stand.
John Pepper:
Some times minor neutral countries pick the wrong side. Even the swiss make that particular mistake! They sided with Napoleon when he invaded Russia. Not too many swiss soldiers made it back from the retreat from Moscow!
Look at the minor neutral countries between Germany and Russia during WW2. Hungary, Rumania, Yugoslavia & the Czecks all learned that lesson!
Jeff: I don't disagree,
My point is this you shouldn't have to defeat the forces of every neutral zone planet, there should be an diplomatic option as well.
Ok...I can see the possibiity...but If we're going to take that approach, there needs to be some variable...more than just a die roll.
With the Klingon diplomatic cruisers, the coalition would seem to have the advantage....unless you weight it in favor of the of the alliance and the Klingon diplamatic ships even up the playing field...
the problem there, is it almost makes putting the klingon diplomatic ships in the front line of the invasion mandatory...You know, that almost seems like it ought to be a basis for a scenario!
A neutral world, wavering between joining sides just before the declaration of war...a Klingon diplomatic cruiser on a mission to bring the neutral in on the Coalitions side...and a Alliance ship (command cruiser?!?) to provide the opposite result...and maybe an Orion player who wants an independent minor planet that has something the Orions want (ship facilities, fuel, repair and refit base?
One of the options is the Alliance targeting the diplomatic cruiser so as to cripple the Coalitions diplomacy ability.
There was one scenario in the 'Day of the Eagle' cap log (#6?)...where the Federation sent a NCL to make contact with an Orion pirate base...IIRC it had a CA, and a couple of DD's...mostly combat.
I dont recall one where the existance (survival) of a Klingon Diplomacy ship was strategically important to an impending invasion.
I think there was a SFB scenario with a Klingon Diplomatic Ship travelling along the Tholian Border to reach Romulan space to finalize the Alliance against the Federation.
But I can't recall where it was.
The alliance gets diplomatic teams also so it is not entirely one sided.
The problem is that they do not get many till Fed entry, may have trouble getting them into position, and the Coalition can start trying for Hydran and Fed boarder planets when the alliance races are not yet active and able to try to get these planets themselves.
With 6 turns to work in (2-7) does anyone think there will still be any neutral planets on the Klingon/Fed boarder come turn seven?
I think the rule should be that no diplomatic teams or ships are allowed to try for a nuetral until after the first player turn during which both neighbors are at war. Otherwise we are just giving the coalition extra planets, income, bases, and SMN along the boarders.
The two at start Klingon Diplomatic Ships are in the Home Fleet and are therefore not released until turn 4. Given the need to move to the neutral planets, that means these two ships will have 2 or 3 turns to work, giving them fewer chances to get these planets.
The third Klingon Diplomatic Ship has to be built, at a cost. So its not 6 turns.
However, its not fair that the Klingons have free reign in the Federation Neutral Zone. I think that the Federation should have one of their at start Prime Teams be a diplomatic team, which is based in the 3rd fleet area and can be used to counter any Klingon attempts at diplomacy.
This would fit with the history of the region.
In the Real world history, countries do change sides in mid war...Italy surrendering in 1943...spain changing sides repeatedly in the Napoleonic wars 2 or 3 times...and don't get me started talking about France!
if we start talking about minor neutrals & diplomacy...we should remember that diplomacy doesnt stop with the end of the invasion/occupation. There may be a GURPS PD role in getting the minor neutrals to rebel against the occupiers and join the other side when "the winds " start blowing the other direction!
I like the idea of NZ planets having these forces.
I think that the 6 point ship should be called a Light Cruiser, since old cruisers are technically 4 point ships. A rhetorical point perhaps, but at least no one would later ask to see the SSD of a 6 point 'old cruiser'.
Steverossi: Where do you find a 4-point `old cruiser' in F&E? I thought that LCAs were 6-point ships; their BPV is almost identical with that of typical DWs. The NZ cruiser is presumably a LCA not a CL. (I wouldn't expect they're local designs, but rather surplus from their neighbours.)
TK: By 'old cruiser', I think it means an Early Years cruiser. That is a Klingon D4, or a Federation YCA or similar. There has been some debate as to these being 5 point ships or 4 point ships. The only proposed 6 point EY ships that I know of are the DNs.
In favor of their being 4 point ships, YCA/D4 have limited warp power, and cannot overload their heavy weapons. There are a few other considerations as well. Otherwise, they look and feel a bit like general war Frigates.
In favor of YCA/D4 being 5 point ships, it allows for the possibility of 4 point CL/DDs, and 3 point FFs. The lack of overloads and such can be accounted for in those scenarios which have both Early Years and Middle Years ships in play. I see it as more of a BIR issue.
Although it has possibly alrady been decided, this question is not going to get to much attention prior to the development of Early Wars, and that is pretty far down the list. 
Meanwhile, whatever 'old cruiser' is designated by the Neutral Planet rule is probably a (very) upgraded Early Years cruiser.
Steverossi: There's a difference between an EY cruiser as in Module Y and a semi-modernized LCA of the type in R8. I can see actual EY ones being 4 or 5 points, but the LCAs are pretty clearly higher than that -- they can overload weapons, the Fed one has 6xPh-I, they use speed-20 drones. They are in almost every respect like GW era ships, except for being short on power. BPV-wise, they're right around 100, just like DWs. I'm fairly sure that what is being talked about here is a LCA (e.g., LD4), not a YCA (e.g., YD4).
Of course, it could also just be a CL (like Fed, Kzin, or Lyran)...