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 

Fed CA vs Fed NCA

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Sebastian380
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 3:55 pm    Post subject: Fed CA vs Fed NCA Reply with quote

Hello All,
I notice that the Fed NCA has two drone racks as opposed to the CA single rack. Are the two drone racks on the NCA still split 2/4 (drones/ADD) and can we assume that ALL Fed racks are split 2/4?
Thanks.
Back to top
Dal Downing
Commander


Joined: 06 May 2008
Posts: 552
Location: Western Wisconsin

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes the NCA has 2 Fed Hybrid Racks which in SFB are known as Type G racks which is the 2/4 split.

No, not all drone racks on Federation Ships are this kind of Hybrid Rack, most but not all. The BCG for example has 2 Hybrid Racks and 2 Regular 4 Space Drone Racks.
_________________
-Dal

"Which one of you is the Biggest, Baddest, Bootlicker of the bunch?"
"I am."
"ARCHERS!!! THAT ONE!!!!"

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sebastian380
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 4:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks. Surprising that the extra drone rack and 2 extra energy points on the NCA add up to only a difference of 3 BPV. CA=147, NCA=150
Back to top
djdood
Fleet Captain


Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 2918
Location: Seattle, WA

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 5:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Point Values measure more than just weapons loadout. The NCA has less "padding" than the classic CA, to protect those weapons.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
storeylf
Fleet Captain


Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Posts: 1832

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The NCA is noticeably superior to the CA, a 3 pt difference is a definately out. The CA has 7 extra 'padding' (yellow and hull boxes) but the NCA has an extra drone and 2 extra power (so only 4 boxes extra overall) plus far better phaser arcs.

Extra padding is nice, but it is situationally useful, it only really helps once you have taken a bit of a pounding, and by that point in a game those extra boxes might not be of any practical help, i.e. except in very close games. Always starting with more power and having better phaser arcs and an extra drone is, on the other hand, always good. The extra power is a huge gain for a ship that struggles to hold overloads and move fast, and the phaser arcs provide much better coverage against those who can outmanouver you (just about everyone), plus extra firepower up front.


Last edited by storeylf on Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sebastian380
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:51 pm    Post subject: Ship Upgrade for Sunday Reply with quote

Idea hmmm. Lee, I'd like to change my usual choice of ship for our next meeting. I'll be flying the NCA.
Back to top
marcus_aurelius
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 07 Jun 2008
Posts: 245
Location: Cary IL

PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 4:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Forget the NCA or CA, take a Strike Cruiser!

It has the best power curve / fastest of the Fed cruisers with a 3/4 movement, almost the power of a heavy cruiser and almost the padding of a heavy cruiser. It can run at speed 32, hold 4 overloaded photons and still fire 2 phasers every turn without having to burn any batteries. Neither the NCA or CA can do that. You need that sustained speed 32 to close with saber dancers, etc.

If I have a choice I always take the CS.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Nerroth
Captain


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 1533
Location: Ontario, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 5:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

To be fair to the Constitution-class, by the time the NCA was entering service, the older hulls (be they CAs or CCs) were getting upgraded into Gettysburg-class CBs instead. If you haven't seen the Ship Card for it yet, there's a low-toner version of it in Communique #71.

Although, if you did want to switch to the newer hull type, I might note that one of the New Command Cruisers listed in the Naval Construction Contract file might be of interest; have a look for NCC-1673...


And as for the Strike Cruiser, I can't help but feel that the ship benefits a little too much from its conversion to FC. (In SFB, the CS SSD has a very unorthodox movement cost of 5/6, which was rounded down to 3/4 on the Ship Card.)
_________________
FC Omega Conversion Project:
*Discussion (v2a)
*Feedback/Errata (v2a)


Last edited by Nerroth on Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sebastian380
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 11:16 am    Post subject: Good Information Reply with quote

Thank you gentlemen for the information--it's all very interesting. Thank you especially for pointing out the CS.
Back to top
storeylf
Fleet Captain


Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Posts: 1832

PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 12:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is some benefit to using the CA - if you get used to that then you will find almost any other Fed ship a lot easier.

I'm easy with what you want to play with next time, I'll choose my ship accordingly, CA vs some older cruiser, NCA vs some newer cruiser.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sebastian380
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you gents. I'm really enjoying this thread. This kind of ship analysis is a real eye-opener for me and is a good indication of the depths of this game.
My declaration to switch to the NCA was made tongue-in-cheek. I should have used a smiley or something.

By the way, Lee is too polite to point out on a public board that my game has a lot of glaring weaknesses including power management and maneuvering; looking for a cheaper ride, more maneuverability, more weapons et c, wouldn't really be addressing the problem. I will be sticking to the CA because I think it's a good way to learn about those parts of the game.

Sebastian
Back to top
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1929
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 2:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

marcus_aurelius wrote:
Forget the NCA or CA, take a Strike Cruiser!

It has the best power curve / fastest of the Fed cruisers with a 3/4 movement, almost the power of a heavy cruiser and almost the padding of a heavy cruiser. It can run at speed 32, hold 4 overloaded photons and still fire 2 phasers every turn without having to burn any batteries. Neither the NCA or CA can do that. You need that sustained speed 32 to close with saber dancers, etc.

If I have a choice I always take the CS.


What he said Smile
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Steve Cole
Site Admin


Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 3007

PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 2:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Without a timeline, per se, FC tends to favor the latest/greatest ships, like the NCA. In reality, there were few CAs left by the time NCAs were built, which is why NCAs were built. CAs were converted into CCs, CBs, CVs, CDs, SRs, and other things.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
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 -> 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