Federation Commander

mojo jojo · Lieutenant Commander Joined: 23 Jun 2009 Posts: 340

(3G7a) WEBS: Power absorbers do not absorb power from webs. They will absorb damage points caused by terrain (or anything else).

This line caught my attention. What happens if an Andro tries a HET and fails. Is the 10 pts of damage absorbed by PAs since they qualify as "anything else"?

mjwest · Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:44 am Post subject:

mjwest · Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:50 am Post subject:

mojo jojo · Lieutenant Commander Joined: 23 Jun 2009 Posts: 340

Can TR beams or PPDs use directed targetting? It seems that they can since there doesn't seem to be any specific rule against it, but they'd be the most powerful weapons short of PH4 that can do so.

mjwest · Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 4:31 am Post subject:

Nerroth · Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:47 am Post subject:

If particle cannons are indeed allowed the disruptor code (which, so far as I'm aware, they aren't in SFB) that might set a precedent for other weak heavy weapons being ported over, too - but then, maybe those weapons (when or wherever they may appear) might just have to do without, I guess.

However, I do recall that in SFB, some kind of change was made to allow shield crackers to have a (nominal) affect on PA panels. If so, is this represented in FC - and might it preclude the need for particle cannons to be given the disruptor's bonus? (For Seltorian operations, at least; of the other two PC-users, Tholians of the Will have plenty of web casters to use, while M81 Pirates could just pick different heavy weapons for their option mounts.)

Indeed, if you want to get really awkward, does the pre-existing disruptor bonus apply to the Carnivon Disruptor Cannon as outlined in CL39 Supplemental - since it's a 'disruptor' weapon? (That said, this might be more of an issue if the Carnivons ever get Main Era ships, and if said ships retain some kind of disruptor cannon technology...)
_________________
FC Omega Discussion (v3)
FC LMC Discussion

terryoc · Captain Joined: 07 Oct 2006 Posts: 1386

As a dyed-in-the-carapace Seltorian, I say make the Selt weapons the same as they are in SFB w/regards to the Andromedans. That means, AFAIK, no disruptor leak for the PC and Shield Crackers affect PA panels.

With your particle cannons, yes they lack crunch BUT you can put more power through them per turn than you can a disruptor, mitigating it somewhat. It's also quite hard to keep a panel bank away from the PCs, so the lack of maneuver is less of an issue. Keep plinking away and the Andro's panels should fill up eventually. Plus you have plenty of phaser-1s, which disruptor boats typically do not. (I'm thinking of Klingons and Lyrans here, but Zin usually don't have as many p-1 as the Selts, using p-3 or ADD instead.)
_________________
"Captain" Terry O'Carroll, fourteen papers published including six best of issue
"Man, Terry, you are like a loophole seeking missle!" - Mike West

mojo jojo · Lieutenant Commander Joined: 23 Jun 2009 Posts: 340

mojo jojo · Lieutenant Commander Joined: 23 Jun 2009 Posts: 340

storeylf · Fleet Captain Joined: 24 Jul 2008 Posts: 1897

As I noted somewhere in the middle of this thread I think the Particle cannon issue is mitigated to a reasonable extent by its 2 shots a turn ability. Whilst it lacks single volley crunch it does deal out quite a bit more damage per turn than a disrupter. The short arming cycle also provides a smaller window of opportunity for the andro to deactivate PAs between enemy volleys. The ability to fire twice a turn with every 10th point being burthrough is potentially very powerful. It does sound like that ultimatley it is as much about keeping damage hitting the panels rather than necessarily blasting through in 1 volley, Selts are fairly good at that.

[edit] and as someone above noted, andros have a harder time turning a 'shield' away within 3 impulses unlike other vessels, as it cover 180 degrees.

Whilst I am personally neutral on it as also previously noted I can see a decent argument for allowing Shield crakers to get a PA cracker enhancement.

storeylf · Fleet Captain Joined: 24 Jul 2008 Posts: 1897

Apologies if this been said before, I'm starting to lose track a bit now.

Regarding transferring power when you deactivate a bank.

DirkSJ · Lieutenant Commander Joined: 08 Jun 2010 Posts: 239

storeylf · Fleet Captain Joined: 24 Jul 2008 Posts: 1897

mjwest · Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:19 pm Post subject:

I would imagine the particle cannon does not get the disruptor exception when hitting PA panels.

Disruptor cannons do not need the exception, and would not get it. While obviously of similar lineage, they are different weapons.
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy

Steve Cole · Site Admin Joined: 11 Oct 2006 Posts: 3833

2. The ship’s other active power absorber panel bank (or any of a base’s other banks) until it is full.

(3G4c) Transfer To Banks: An Andromedan ship may transfer power from one bank to the other (if it is active), but no more than one point of power for every undisabled panel (i.e., for ten boxes of bank capacity). Power could also be sent to the power absorbers of an energy module in the hangar (5V2) but not to a satellite ship (5V1c3).

Nice catch, Stormy Elf. You just went from a [] to a <>.

No, it's not about a disruptor being unable to get 10 points. It's about a disruptor squadron being unable to get 70 points in one turn.

Particle cannons don't have the disruptor code in SFB (go talk to Petrick if you think they should) and won't get it in FC until the SFB rule is changed.

Mike, email me about what to do with HET breakdown damage and I'll ask Petrick what SFB does (easier than looking it up myself, SFB is too complicated from me to find rules in without Petrick).
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander