Federation Commander Forum Index Federation Commander
A NEW fast paced board game of starship combat!
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Omega Playtest Feedback

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Jean
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Sep 2008
Posts: 1283

PostPosted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 11:40 am    Post subject: Omega Playtest Feedback Reply with quote

Please place your feedback here.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rick Smith
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 02 Sep 2008
Posts: 266
Location: Silver Spring, MD

PostPosted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for starting this thread, Jean.
_________________

UPFY
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nerroth
Captain


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 1556
Location: Ontario, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As moved from the other thread:


My own errata, v1, 29 October 2010


Please note that for whatever reason, I'm having trouble typing Greek letters, over on the BBS at least; the omega symbol in the rules I'm referring to is replaced with an O as a stopgap.


*Throughout the document, there are references to 'races' as opposed to 'empires' or 'species'; this is most likely an inheritance from the SFB Omega document Richard drew from for the background profiles. In keeping with the current preferred terms, this might need to be revised for later use.


*Similarly, the calendar dates should probably be modified in a later revision to follow the Valkenburg Chronology, as opposed to using SFB Y-dates.


*The empire descriptions have a number of ship entries that are, for the time being at least, somewhat superfluous; the Mæsron DN, CL, DD and OB; Trobrin DSN (which is listed as the DN in the file), CC, FF and SS; and Probr DN, CL (which does not as yet have an SFB SSD, though I would most definitely welcome one), FF and LB can be removed.


*I would recommend this addition to the FRA section, to go alongside the CLA entry; if only to add an already-published ship to the list of ships player might consider for playtest purposes:

Quote:
Raider Cruiser (CR): When the Orion raider Throne of Ozymondas arrived in the Aurora system in 2530, its crew might have expected to profit from the impending wave of expansion by the Federation. When fate brought the ship, along with the rest of the system, to Omega, they instead found an opportunity which would secure their place in history.
The Throne started its service a year later, and with its stealth systems and cloaking device soon proved how uniquely placed it was to act as the eyes and ears of the Republic. As the Navy built itself up at home, the Throne reached out into the Omega Octant, delivering vital information and technology to Aurora III on many occasions.
Long after it had been written off as “overdue from mission” in the Alpha Octant, the exploits of the Throne of Ozymondas had became the stuff of Auroran legend.
Note: The Throne can be represented using the Middle Years Raider Cruiser from the printed Briefing #2 book and the Briefing #2 Ship Pack B file on e23. In Squadron Scale, the Throne is equipped with a cloaking device, as well as photon torpedoes in its Y and Z option mounts. Prior to 2575, option mount A is equipped with a Phaser-1; this is replaced with a disruptor from 2575 onwards.
To experiment with the ship as it served after 2577, replace the lone port battery with a tachyon missile launcher and increase the Point Value of the ship to 113.





*The following should be added to the rules for quantum phasers:

Quote:
(4OA1e) Resistance to Adjustments: As a useful side-effect of the way in which quantum beams carpet the target area, the ability of an opponent to mitigate the opportunities for quantum phaser users to land hits upon their targets is significantly reduced. Subtract 2 from any adjustments which would otherwise affect the target unit under (4A); +1 or +2 become +0, while +3 is reduced to +1. Note this means that no shift greater than +1 is possible against this weapon. (Other non-Phaser-Q direct-fire weapons in the same volley do not benefit from this rule.)





*Replace (4OA3d) and the example with the following:

Quote:
(4OA3d) Step 4: Roll one six-sided die. Use the result of this die roll and the range to Cross-Index on the Quantum Phaser Table for the type of quantum phaser you fired and determine whether the weapon has hit the target. Note rule (4OA1e) when determining potential adjustments under (4A) by various considerations including Evasive Maneuvering (2D4) by the target or by (5L2) Orion Stealth coatings. If the weapon hits, apply the listed damage points to the target facing.
Example: A Probr heavy cruiser wants to fire two phaser-Q1s at the Auroran raider cruiser Throne of Ozymondas, which is currently under evasive maneuvers. It determines that the chosen phaser-Q1s are within arc and are not damaged. Two energy points are paid and the phaser-Q1s are fired. Count the range (let us say five hexes for this example). Comparing the range to die rolls of “2” and "1" would usually mean a total of seven (3+4) damage points would be scored on the target facing. As the Throne is under evasive maneuvering and has its natural stealth coating bonus, its normal adjustment to incoming fire is +3; however, the Phaser-Q1s ignore the first two points of adjustment, only suffering a +1 penalty. Thus, the die rolls are adjusted to "3" and "2"; resulting in a total of five (2+3) damage points against the target facing.




*The following should be added to the rules for radiation phasers:

Quote:
(4OB1e) Improved Accuracy: One ‘built-in’ aspect of radiation phaser fire is its relatively high degree of accuracy. When faced with an adjustment under (4A4), such as Evasive Maneuvering (2D4) or Orion Stealth coatings (5L2), each point of modification reduces the damage scored by the radiation phaser by .5 damage points.
In other words, a +1 shift reduces the damage scored by .5, a +2 shift reduces it by 1, and a +3 shift reduces by 1.5 damage points.)





*Replace (4OB3d) and the example with the following:

Quote:
(4OB3d) Step 4: Consult the range as listed on Cross-Index on the Table for the type of radiation phaser you fired and apply the number of Damage Points noted. There is no need for a die roll. Round down any fractions caused through radiation phaser fire in a single volley. Note (4OB1e) when evaluating any adjustments under (4A).
Note: Phaser-Rs can, under some circumstances, do a half-point of damage. This is resolved by adding all of the fire in a given volley and rounding down to the next whole number. Any remaining half-points are lost immediately.
Example: A Trobrin deep space dreadnought wants to fire five radiation phaser-1s at an Auroran armored cruiser, which is currently under evasive maneuvers. It determines that the chosen phaser-R1s are within arc and are not damaged. Five energy points are paid, one for each weapon, and the phaser-R1s are fired. Count the range (let us say five hexes for this example). Comparing the range to the relevant entry on the weapon chart results in 3.5 damage points scored per radiation phaser. The two levels of adjustment caused by the target’s evasive maneuvering equals a reduction of each radiation phaser’s result by one damage point, to 2.5 damage points apiece. This times five totals 12.5 damage points. However, as the remaining half-point is lost, only twelve damage points are scored against the target unit.





*The background introduction states that "This type of phaser is employed almost exclusively by the Mæsron Alliance." The opposite is true; wide-angle phasers are the most common type in the Omega Octant (and beyond, if one includes the Iridani Cluster).


*Replace (4OC3d) and the example with the following:

Quote:
(4OC3d) Step 4: Roll one six-sided die. Use the result of this die roll and the range to Cross-Index on the Wide-Angle Phaser Table for the type of wide angle phaser you fired and determine the damage. The result is the number of Damage Points scored. This might be adjusted (4A) by various considerations including Evasive Maneuvering (2D4) by the target or by (5L2) Orion Stealth coatings.
Example: An Iridani clipper wants to fire two wide-angle phaser-1s at a Trobrin heavy cruiser. It determines that the chosen phaser-W1s are within arc and not damaged. Two energy points are paid, one for each weapon, and the phaser-W1s are fired. Count the range (let us say three hexes for this example). Comparing the range to die rolls of “5” and "3" mean that a total of seven (4+3) damage points were scored on the target vessel.





*The weapon chart at the bottom of the page covering the Altered-Scale Photon Torpedo rules is of the Implosion Bolt; this might be replaced in a future revision with charts for light and/or heavy photons instead.


*Replace (5OB) with the following:

Quote:
(5OB) IRIDANI MODULES

Most Iridani starships are designed with the application of one or more modules in mind. (Indeed, the relevant ships cannot operate without all of these module slots filled.) The modular system is at the very core of the operation of Iridani Quests, since the variety of modules available allow an Iridani vessel to perform a wide range of tasks, in order to fulfill the terms of the Quest the commanding officer may be placed under.
For the time being, each modular Iridani ship in Federation Commander is assumed to have a common set of modules already attached to each ship of a certain class type. These modules are considered part of the ship for all purposes.
Should the desire arise for more detailed rules concerning the application of specific modules to a given Iridani ship, these options may be presented in a future product.
Note: As a point of clarification, the playtest Galleon-B is considered to be equipped with a VIP and Weapons module; these are noted on the Ship Card, but for now are only of note for those wishing to compare the ship to its SFB counterpart.



*The Trobrin CA Ship Cards (both standard and low toner versions) have an arming track for only one of their implosion bolts; a second track should be added to cover mount B.


*The following note should be added to the playtest Probr Ship Cards:

Quote:
The lower turn mode in the right-hand column is used when all of the L Warp and R Warp engine boxes are disabled on the ship; the turn mode returns to the higher value once at least one L or R warp engine box (in either wing) is restored.





I've probably missed a host of other things, but that's what I've got for the time being.


----------------------


For those unfamiliar with the octant, there are other pre-existing ships you could try out alongside (or against) the eight new ships, for playtest purposes. There were a handful of Klingon ships (a D7, D6, F5C and F5, as well as a frigate of unspecified class which was lost in battle against the Vulpa) brought over with the Kraknora colony in 2571; a Lyran CL which found itself in FRA territory in 2573; as well as the aforementioned Throne.

Also, the Andromedans are fair game...
_________________
FC Omega Discussion (v3)
FC LMC Discussion
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mojo_billbo
Commander


Joined: 07 Mar 2010
Posts: 428
Location: Danville, PA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 11:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I didn't play much, but I like the FRA - CLA already...
torps, light torps + armour...

That feels like a good time to be had.. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Nerroth
Captain


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 1556
Location: Ontario, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Personally, I like the idea of using the new Fed OCA miniature as a stand-in for the CLA, but that's just me.
_________________
FC Omega Discussion (v3)
FC LMC Discussion
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JimDauphinais
Commander


Joined: 22 Nov 2009
Posts: 756
Location: Chesterfield, MO

PostPosted: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What existing FC Fed ships would be in play for the FRA?

Middle Years CL?

Middle Years Police Cutter?

Anything else?

I assume the aforementioned Klingon ships and Lyran CL would be the main setting versions since they came over in 2571 and 2573.
_________________
Jim Dauphinais, Chesterfield, MO

St. Louis Area Fed Comm Group: http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/STL_Federation_Commander/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Nerroth
Captain


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 1556
Location: Ontario, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 5:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Fed CL and POL (of either Alpha era) aren't quite close enough to their Auroran counterparts to match.

Similarly, the Aurorans don't have (and didn't build) any OCAs; the CLA and BC took things along a different path.


So far as the Klingon and Lyran ships go, it hasn't been specified yet what configurations they were in at the point of transference. For now, using the main era ships would be a start, though bear in mind that the Klingons would be pretty short of drones by this time.


Right now, there's not a lot of hard data on what other ships were brought over, be they civilian or military; though that could be an interesting topic for a background article one day...
_________________
FC Omega Discussion (v3)
FC LMC Discussion
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steve Cole
Site Admin


Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 3051

PostPosted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 6:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gary, I would have space in CL42 for two FRA ship cards if you can get Richard to do them.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Rick Smith
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 02 Sep 2008
Posts: 266
Location: Silver Spring, MD

PostPosted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Steve, it's funny you mentioned this. Before I could do the FRA CLA ship card, I had to first do the art for the CL. So I actually have that on file and the turn around wouldn't be too intense.

So, the following questions remain:

1. What would you or Gary want to see for the second ship? Possibly a POL? Would you need both Squadron and Fleet scale?
2. How much time do I have to get the work done? When do you need the files by for CL#42?
3. How do you need the files? What file format?
4. Do you need counters to go along with the ships?

Sadly (and embarrassingly) I have yet to purchase a Captain's Log, as my funds - when I have them - go to your core games (and, of course, bills) and not the monthly mags. So my final question is: what do the ship cards look like when they go into the CL's? Is my previous format (along with accompanying text) suitable, or are the size requirements different? If you have a spec sheet, sending it would be very helpful.

Thanks, Steve. Feel free to either reply here or email me.
_________________

UPFY
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nerroth
Captain


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 1556
Location: Ontario, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If they were intended to match the other playtest ships, we might only need Squadron Scale for the time being... which would mean both ships could go side-by-side on the one page, if that helps leave space for something else.


I guess the CL and FF wouldn't be a bad start; they are both fairly straightforward in terms of rules, help flesh out the early Auroran fleet, and allow for the use of the CL and POL minis.



------



EDIT:


I just noticed something else;


*On the Mæsron Alliance CA and DD Ship Cards (both standard and low toner versions), the entries for standard tachyon missiles say they are explosion 12. This is incorrect; as stated in the rules on page 12, they should be explosion 8.
_________________
FC Omega Discussion (v3)
FC LMC Discussion
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nerroth
Captain


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 1556
Location: Ontario, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

*I made a mistake with the Probr turn mode note I posted earlier in the thread; to keep it in line with SFB, it should be more like this:

Quote:
The lower turn mode in the right-hand column is used when all of the L Warp OR all of the R Warp engine boxes are disabled on the ship; the turn mode returns to the higher value once at least one L AND one R warp engine box (in both wings) is restored.

_________________
FC Omega Discussion (v3)
FC LMC Discussion
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nerroth
Captain


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 1556
Location: Ontario, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 11:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A few other quick notes; I'll tidy them up by the time a revised file is on the cards.


*As Terry noted in the other thread, the TM rules say the standard missile is explosion-8, but the cards say exp-12; the cards are wrong, it should be 8.


*As Richard Eitzen pointed out by referring to the SFB originals, the detonation of implosion torpedoes at range 1 means that when attempting any defensive fire against an impacting torpedo, one must assume a range of 2, rather than 1.


*Barry Kirk came up with a few notes on missile composition; I tweaked his alternate missile proposals to come up with these:

Quote:
Middle years missile.

Explosion: 12
Armor: 10
Speed: 24
BPV Adjustment: 1

Transition years missile.

Explosion: 16
Armor: 12
Speed: 32
BPV Adjustment: 3

Late years missile.

Explosion: 20
Armor: 14
Speed: 32
BPV Adjustment: 5


Do these look better than the ones we currently have? If so, they could go into the file revision. If not, what would you prefer instead?


*In SFB, an enemy is able to launch hit-and-run raids against destroyed TM racks, in order to potentially get rid of any missiles which haven't either been launched or destroyed already.

Should a similar rule be included in FC, to allow hit-and-run raids against surviving missiles in disabled racks?
_________________
FC Omega Discussion (v3)
FC LMC Discussion
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nerroth
Captain


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 1556
Location: Ontario, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2010 11:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A little more errata:

*The rules for Target Illuminators (5OA) mistakenly note that the system has a 2-impulse delay; this was a hangup from the SFB rules that is not required in FC (and was excised in later rule revisions). Similarly, the Ship Card for the Galleon-B includes Impulse Used tracks for the vessel's TIs, which are not necessary.

Therefore, delete "and may not be used within 2 Impulses of a previous activation" from the rule, and delete (or ignore) the Impulse Used tracks for that particular system.

(In contrast, the 4-impulse delay for focused energy beam operation is important to retain, as are the impulse used tracks for FEBs.)
_________________
FC Omega Discussion (v3)
FC LMC Discussion
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group