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 

Federation CVO

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Star Fleet Battles
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
marcus_aurelius
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 07 Jun 2008
Posts: 254
Location: Cary IL

PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 6:22 pm    Post subject: Federation CVO Reply with quote

I had a question on the Federation CVO just out of curiosity.

I remember first seeing this ship in Supplement #1 years ago and when I got back into FC / SFB I found out the ship no longer "officially" exists.

I was curious about the reason.

Was the ship unbalanced/broken in some way?
Was such a large ship with only 2 very large warp engines incongruous?
I think I remeber that it only had a move cost of 1. Perhaps that was part of the reason since it was such a large ship?
etc.

Thanks!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
OGOPTIMUS
Captain


Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 981

PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 6:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It was removed because in F&E all other races could convert a CVA from a DN, except for the Feds. So a new DN-based CVA was created to make the Fed fleet design like all the others.

You can still find it in Stellar Shadows Journal #1.
_________________
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: 254
Location: Cary IL

PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the quick response!

That makes sense.

I had a miniature of it back in the 80s and I was thinking of getting another in my next miniature purchase just because it is such a pretty ship. So that sparked the question.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Davdob
Ensign


Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 1:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

In what edition of Module J was this changed? I have the copyright 1991 version and rule R2.13 still references the "flatbed" design. I didn't go into my attic to grab the SSD, but maybe this just means the DN hull modification but with the 3 engine design?

I started early with SFB so the supplement rules tend to bleed in my memory sometimes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
djdood
Fleet Captain


Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 2925
Location: Seattle, WA

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 3:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

To the best of my knowledge, the Federation CVA has been a DN-variant ever since the "Doomsday" Captain's Edition was first printed. The old, two-big-engine CVA ended when Commander's Edition did.

One of the major things that was changed with the Captain's Edition Fed CVA (besides its configuration) was the elimination of the "photon freezers" for the A-10s. That made for a pretty big shift.

The current CVA (which is indeed a DN variant) is much modified from the base DN. The fluff text mentions that the engines are on struts that place them below the level of the balconies and that she has a large shuttlebay door on the rear edge. This would involve a fairly major reconfiguration of the struts and rear hull; The DNG has its "flat" engine struts right at the mid-line and shuttlebay on the front face.

The existing Starline 2400 CVA minis uses a smaller saucer (from the old "cruiser like" M/C 1 "flatbed" CVA mini). This is artistic license at work and ADB is fine with it.

When I rebuilt mine after a major accident, I chose to bring it more in-line with the ship's description in Module J, using a DN saucer and highly modified DN rear hull (bashed together with the balconies portion of the CVA mini).



_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Davdob
Ensign


Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 12:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A rear hull like this would still mesh up with the "flatbed" description in R2.13 I guess.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3492
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The change was made in the transition to Captain's Edition.

Quite frankly, there were really only two changes made to the ship in the transition:
- It went from a movement rate of 1 with two 18 box engines to a movement rate of 1.5 with three 15 box engines.
- The photon freezers where removed from the SSD. (The freezers are still there, but are a boxless system that is an assumed component of the fighter's shuttle box.)

That's basically it. It still retains its "flatbed" rear hull with all of its balcony positions and track system. The systems that were contained in the saucer are unchanged. Aside from those changes above, the ship is virtually identical.

The idea that it is a "DN variant" really just a non-sequitor. In "reality", the rear hull is totally different and the saucer is virtually gutted and completely rebuilt between a DN and CVA. Apparently the reason it is a "DN variant" is because of the engine arrangement alone.
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Steve Cole
Site Admin


Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 3073

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Actually, it's so you can do a DN to CVA conversion in F&E.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
mdauben
Lieutenant JG


Joined: 15 Aug 2013
Posts: 59
Location: Rocket City

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I totally understand the in-game reasoning for the change. I do have to say I really like the old "flat bed" design better than the current DN based mini, but that's just aestetics. Cool
_________________
Mike

"The best diplomat that I know is a fully-loaded phaser bank."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nerroth
Captain


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 1568
Location: Ontario, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 10:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If it helps, Stellar Shadows Journal #1 (which, as noted above, includes the "current" SSD for the original flatbed ship) is available for download on e23.
_________________
FC Omega Discussion (v3)
FC LMC Discussion
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Davdob
Ensign


Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 10:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess my question is really was the R2.13 ship description ever revised? The 1991 version of module J still talks about the "flatbed" design and doesn't state the CVA is a DN variant. Why this is on my mind is a bit of a mystery.

Thanks for all of the great input here. And I was inspired to buy SS #1 off of e23. So a sale made also!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sneaky Scot
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 384
Location: Thornbury, Gloucestershire

PostPosted: Sat Oct 19, 2013 4:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess you could say that "flatbed" comes from the look of the main hull section - it is somewhat flatter than your typical Federation design, plus it keeps the reference to the WW2 carriers (which is nice).
_________________
Nothing is quite as persuasive as a disruptor pistol on slow burn and a rotisserie......
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
David
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 08 Nov 2009
Posts: 209
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 9:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mdauben wrote:
I totally understand the in-game reasoning for the change. I do have to say I really like the old "flat bed" design better than the current DN based mini, but that's just aestetics. Cool


Have to agree. There's just something about the original that sings so-to-speak. We still use the original as well as the DN version. Best of both worlds.
_________________
My other car is a D7 BattleCruiser.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Star Fleet Battles 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