View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
storeylf Fleet Captain
Joined: 24 Jul 2008 Posts: 1897
|
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 9:02 am Post subject: temporal elevator? |
|
|
I've heard mention of something called a temporal elevator that the Andros had on their starbase.
Is it something that has an in game effect, or was it just some stategic level device that was just damage padding in a tactical game.
If it was useful in a tactical game, what was its effect? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TheRowan Lieutenant JG
Joined: 03 Jul 2012 Posts: 31 Location: West Midlands, UKGBNI
|
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Basically, I believe it was a device that moved the base through an extra dimension... the practical effect was to increase its range from all units outside the Elevator. _________________ The Rowan
Dura Lex, Sed Lex |
|
Back to top |
|
|
storeylf Fleet Captain
Joined: 24 Jul 2008 Posts: 1897
|
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So something like a cloak and its +4 range. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mjwest Commodore
Joined: 08 Oct 2006 Posts: 4075 Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
storeylf wrote: | So something like a cloak and its +4 range. |
Only on super-steroids.
The additional range not only affects direct-fire weapons, but also seeking weapons. So, if the temporal elevator moves the base "up four levels", that is four more hexes any seeking weapons have to travel, too.
Really, it is an incredibly complicated solution to the problem that Andromedan bases are instantly dead against plasma. At least with drones they can try to use transporter bombs, and Ph-2s are at least generally effective. Against plasma, they just get those Ph-2s and nothing else. The temporal elevator makes the plasma empires work a little harder to kill the base. It also balances out the other big option non-Andromedan bases have (wild weasels).
You don't see it in Federation Commander, as it isn't needed. (The cynic will say this is because all bases are screwed in FC, not just Andromedan bases. ) _________________
Federation Commander Answer Guy |
|
Back to top |
|
|
storeylf Fleet Captain
Joined: 24 Jul 2008 Posts: 1897
|
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | You don't see it in Federation Commander, as it isn't needed. |
Well that is sort of obvious, given the Andro starbase doesn't even exist in FedCom yet.
However, I seem to remember looking at the old SFB SSD and (assuming my memory is not playing tricks on me) thinking that it seemed to be seriously devoid of firepower, as in hardly any weapons. Not like galactic SBs with with plenty of Ph4s and heavy weapons.
If it is indeed as weak in firepower as I remember then I was wondering how an andro force would defend it, given their ship deployment limitations. The temporal elevator was the thing I was thinking might be the key.
This is relevant as I may well be wanting to use the Andro starbase as a victory objective in a campaign, but it needs to be vaguely capable of withstanding an attack. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Magnum357 Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 09 Dec 2006 Posts: 223
|
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mjwest, thanks for clarifying the Andro's Temperal Elevator to me. I never could understand most SFB Andro rules so I had no idea how the temperal elevator worked. there was talk before the SFB doomsday rules where writen that Andros got nerfed down, but after you stating how the Elevator rules worked with there technology, it probably was needed. Andro bases with Phaser-4's would really be scary. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
storeylf Fleet Captain
Joined: 24 Jul 2008 Posts: 1897
|
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So assuming we use it what would be a good approximation of the elevator rules for FedCom, keeping it nice and simple. Would it be an always on modifier to range, or does it only last for an impulse or so, does it need power. For seekers would it knock them back a few hexes or something, or just add an extra impulse or so to plasma on impact? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mjwest Commodore
Joined: 08 Oct 2006 Posts: 4075 Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I would have to go learn the SFB rule before I could translate it to Federation Commander! So, it isn't something I can do for a while. Maybe one of our Andro experts could give a brief description. I only know enough to give the high-level description I gave. I don't know the actual mechanics.
Yes, the Andromedan Starbase was comparatively weak. The reason is because it was never intended to face any kind of significant resistance or see any real combat. As a result, it was heavily under-gunned. (In fact, "historically", it still only ever saw combat after the war had already been lost.) _________________
Federation Commander Answer Guy |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Nerroth Fleet Captain
Joined: 08 Oct 2006 Posts: 1744 Location: Ontario, Canada
|
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 10:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mjwest wrote: | Yes, the Andromedan Starbase was comparatively weak. The reason is because it was never intended to face any kind of significant resistance or see any real combat. As a result, it was heavily under-gunned. (In fact, "historically", it still only ever saw combat after the war had already been lost.) |
That was only the case for the third Desecrator; fielded in 2558, and the only one still operating in its originally-designed role by 2602.
As noted in the Module C5 timeline, the first was made operational in 2545 and destroyed in 2554; while the second Desecrator was established in 2552, heavily damaged in 2563, and left fallow until 2600 (at which point it was re-purposed as a production facility for the never-finished Devastator battleship).
It is somewhat surprising that the Andromedans, after losing one Desecrtor, and seeing the second essentially mission-killed, still thought that the lone operational starbase by that time was good enough for them; either in terms of its strength (in combat) or in terms of redundancy (since they didn't build any more Desecrators to act as backup in case the third was lost). Maybe the Andros were simply incapable of constructing (or upgrading to) a more powerful starbase design so far from the M31 Galaxy?
(But then, given what happened in the alternate Darwin-less timeline as detailed in Module C3A, perhaps the Andros felt that the third Desecrator was enough for them by that point; or perhaps, by the time they were forced to press the second Desecrator back into service, they decided that using it to work on the Devastator was more useful to their wider war effort than adding that degree of redundancy back to the inter-galactic RTN.) _________________ FC Omega Discussion (v3)
FC LMC Discussion |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Targ Lieutenant SG
Joined: 02 Nov 2006 Posts: 125 Location: York U.K.
|
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 1:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
let play iv no problen
can kling have status d |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|