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 

Preferred Heavy War Destroyer Configurations?
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Star Fleet Battles
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
OGOPTIMUS
Captain


Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 981

PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 12:51 am    Post subject: Preferred Heavy War Destroyer Configurations? Reply with quote

Does anyone have a preferred Heavy War Destroyer configuration? The FC version for the Feds doesn't seem to make a ton of use of the varaible options (though making too many would take forever, and it's always up for interpretation as to what is 'better', and a lot of the systems available aren't in FC proper).

So, what do people generally use? Are they most often used as carriers? Escorts? Troop ships? Is there a pure awesome combat variant?

Do people think heavy weapons in the OPT spaces are worth it? That's what SFC did, and it feels like a somewhat poor choice, since the ship doesn't really have the power to arm them (and they're RA arc).

This can be empire specific or not.
_________________
O.G. OPTIMUS


NEW Page | OLD Page
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Sentinal
Lieutenant JG


Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 34

PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

In Fleet actions I take:

Scout Channels for the "opt" boxes
Fighters for the "NWO" boxes
AWR/APR for "pwoer" boxes

It plays out as a good combat scout with a half-squadron of fighters in support

In duels I probably go with the combat variant (maybe switch "opt" boxes with drone racks)

"Troop" variant might be good in a squadron battle, but in my opinion, it usually will become a prime target
_________________
B^)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steve Cole
Site Admin


Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 3046

PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The F&E guys pretty much use nothing but the escort variants.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3464
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The point of the FC HDW was to provide a ship card for use with the new miniature, not to fully represent the modular capabilities of the SFB HDW. So, it is presented as a normal combat warship. For the options, the RA optional weapons make the most sense: 360 drone racks. They take zero power and are not restricted by the bad arcs. Perfect weapons choice. The power is power (obviously), as Feds always need power. Finally, the other four boxes are just hull, as anything else starts getting fiddly.

In SFB, I just ignore HDWs ...
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
OGOPTIMUS
Captain


Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 981

PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mjwest wrote:
The point of the FC HDW was to provide a ship card for use with the new miniature, not to fully represent the modular capabilities of the SFB HDW...Finally, the other four boxes are just hull, as anything else starts getting fiddly.


Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining about the config that was chosen, and I'm ecstatic that ADB gave it to us in the first place. I was just trying to see some of the rationale behind the config. Sorry if ti came off that I was less than enthusiastic.

I have R6, and I see all those systems that can be substituted in for those systems, but I just don't know SFB enough to know what a truly effective combination would be. Hull just seemed like the last thing someone might take, and I was curious.

Thanks for providing some background on that.
_________________
O.G. OPTIMUS


NEW Page | OLD Page
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3464
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OGOPTIMUS wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining about the config that was chosen, and I'm ecstatic that ADB gave it to us in the first place. I was just trying to see some of the rationale behind the config. Sorry if ti came off that I was less than enthusiastic.

I did not take it that way or take it wrong. I was just trying to answer the question. Smile

Quote:
I have R6, and I see all those systems that can be substituted in for those systems, but I just don't know SFB enough to know what a truly effective combination would be. Hull just seemed like the last thing someone might take, and I was curious.

Thanks for providing some background on that.

You are welcome.

Yes, hull is not the most efficient choice. However, it is the safest and most generic. If you want to actually "optimize", you will want to add some combination of transporters and shuttles. It has plenty of hull without the extra four.
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
djdood
Fleet Captain


Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 2928
Location: Seattle, WA

PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The HDW suffers a little bit in FedCom Fleet Scale. It loses both RA heavy weapons (presumably to allow it to keep two photons up front).
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3464
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

djdood wrote:
The HDW suffers a little bit in FedCom Fleet Scale. It loses both RA heavy weapons (presumably to allow it to keep two photons up front).

Correct. The squadron scale HDW has 6 (photons + drones), and the fleet scale HDW has 3 (photons + drones). It seems reasonable to short the drones and let the photons go long.
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
OGOPTIMUS
Captain


Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 981

PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mjwest wrote:
djdood wrote:
The HDW suffers a little bit in FedCom Fleet Scale. It loses both RA heavy weapons (presumably to allow it to keep two photons up front).

Correct. The squadron scale HDW has 6 (photons + drones), and the fleet scale HDW has 3 (photons + drones). It seems reasonable to short the drones and let the photons go long.


I was looking at that too. But it makes sense when considering ALL heavy weapons, so that cool. Plus, having a ship with two drone and only one photon would be kinda strange.

The phaser suite changes from the DW too, so while the two have the same number of weapons in Fleet Scale, they will fight differently. One of those idiosyncrasies of Fleet Scale ships.
_________________
O.G. OPTIMUS


NEW Page | OLD Page
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
marcus_aurelius
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 07 Jun 2008
Posts: 246
Location: Cary IL

PostPosted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

When I first saw the HDW in Communique at 128 BPV I immediately
compared it with its BPV peer the NCL at 125 BPV.

NCL
Power 32 + 2
4 Photons
6 Phaser-1
2 Phaser-3
1 Drone Rack

HDW
Power 33 + 2
3 Photons
4 Phaser-1
2 Phaser-3
3 Drone Racks

So in my very simple analysis you are losing 1 Photon and 2 Phaser-1 (NCL)
to get 2 more Drone Racks and 1 Power (HDW).

So to me I am losing 3 very powerful weapons to get an extra
power and what are essentially 2 "enemy phaser-3 neutralizers".

Excluding batteries, the NCL can move at speed 32 holding 4 OL photons with the HDW can move at speed 32 holding 3 OL photons and firing 3 phasers per turn (most of which would probably fire at greater than range 4 if the photons were not already fired).

I am not sure why I would ever take a HDW instead of an NCL in Fed Commander (except an an excuse to use an HDW miniature).

Am I missing something???


Last edited by marcus_aurelius on Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:06 am; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Jeffr0
Commander


Joined: 19 Jun 2009
Posts: 741

PostPosted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Less photons = more power for speed.

More power = even more power for speed.

3 drone racks = mad knife fighting skillz.


(Have you ever been tractored by a Kzinti FF?)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marcus_aurelius
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 07 Jun 2008
Posts: 246
Location: Cary IL

PostPosted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Point taken on the knife fight tactics although the equivalent
Kzinti would be the CM and it has 4 drone racks.

Perhaps I might try it next time I play Feds. Perhaps with both
an NCL and HDW to compare.

I still might prefer the extra photon and phaser 1s of an NCL in a knife fight though since the NCL could still charge at almost speed 32 if not at 32.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Steve Cole
Site Admin


Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 3046

PostPosted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I might comment that HDWs with their endless configurations could provide just the thing to fill pages in Communique after the reformatting project is finished. We could even have contests for people to submit configurations which we'd print.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
marcus_aurelius
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 07 Jun 2008
Posts: 246
Location: Cary IL

PostPosted: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Variable configurations would certainly make the ship more interesting.

I suppose that many of the more interesting configurations might require borders of madness rules (e.g. HDW-Scout, HDW-Carrier, etc.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
terryoc
Captain


Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 1378

PostPosted: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rear firing photons might be an interesting option for those who want to play ships from certain movies which I am not allowed to mention. Wink
_________________
"Captain" Terry O'Carroll, fourteen papers published including six best of issue
"Man, Terry, you are like a loophole seeking missle!" - Mike West
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Star Fleet Battles All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
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