Federation Commander

kiloton · Ensign Joined: 22 Aug 2013 Posts: 16

Every time I open my mouth it causes you work and a depletion of ink and laminating sheets.. Confused

_________________
Ken

lincolnlog · Posted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 2:04 pm Post subject:

Ken,

That's okay, we want to get this one right. In the future I will hold off printing all the ships, and print just what we are play testing. Wink

That will save materials. I think with the ship charts, we're almost there. The biggest concern was clutter in the PP area. I think I've fixed that and made the entire section of the card more efficient. I hope I'll have something to show the group today.

Bob

lincolnlog · Posted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 2:07 pm Post subject:

ebesensei · Ensign Joined: 14 Aug 2013 Posts: 1

Bolo_MK_XL · Posted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 11:14 pm Post subject:

To prevent the "Get rid of all Witness", all that has to be done is send one of the warships forward at full speed.

kiloton · Ensign Joined: 22 Aug 2013 Posts: 16

But the Feds could not win if the freighters were destroyed so we did feel it wise to use our ships to try and protect the freighters. Although I will admit it did not occur to me to send one of our ships off to send word. It would have just ensured the destruction of the freighters, though. But that happened anyway.
_________________
Ken

kiloton · Ensign Joined: 22 Aug 2013 Posts: 16

I thought based on the conditions of the scenario that the Klingons really needed to just attack our warships and ignore the freighters. Once we were destroyed or mission killed then the freighters would be easy to pick off, assuming destroying us did not take too long. Given the point values, that plan seems unlikely to have worked so what they did was probably best. It at least ensured that the Feds did not win. It would be an interesting scenario to play again with different forces and see how it goes.
_________________
Ken

lincolnlog · Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2013 5:03 pm Post subject:

It would work with 3 D7's or possibly 4 D6s. I would have to check the points. But the Klingon's were definitely under pointed. Not sure how I did that.

The D7's would carry the 3 FX PH-1's and the 2 ea Forward firing PH-2's. The D6's with the 3 FX PH-2's didn't pack any punch above the 4 disruptors. The Klingons could have turned onto the F and P or S arc border and then would have gotten 2 addtional PH-2's per offensive attack.

But, as a Klingon player, I would have drone swarmed the DDM's. In the back of my mind in the first turn when they launched at the freighter I was thinking "go for the DDM's".

Bob

lincolnlog · Posted: Wed Aug 28, 2013 2:06 pm Post subject:

The D6 in Fed Comm seems over pointed. 130points for a D6 that represents a D6 with a B Refit, but without the K Refit. In SFB that D6 configuation would be 123 points. Meanwhile the D7 in Fed Comm has both the B & K refits for 131. 138 points in Fed Comm for the D7.

ACTA-SF gave both ships the K refit. Ironically the D6 point value is 94% of the D7 in both games in the configuration mentioned.

However, if the D6 has both the K and B refit the point value is 126 which is 96% of the SFB value compared to the D7 with B and K refits.

SFB D6 113 + B 10= 123 + K 3= 126 FC Point Value 130 (reflects B refit only)
SFB D7 121 + B 7= 128 + K 3= 131 FC Point Value 138 (reflects B and K refit)

123/131= .9389 SFB D6 B only/D7 B+K Comparision
126/131= .9618 SFB D6 B+K/D7 B+K Comparision

130/138= .942 D6-D7 FC comparison

kiloton · Ensign Joined: 22 Aug 2013 Posts: 16

The BPVs may go up based on drone speeds. SFB assumes speed 8 drones so upgrading those using the SFB point system might account for the difference unless you already factored that into your numbers. I did not bust out my SSDs.

That does not explain the lack of K refit on the D6, though.

Even if point values were equal in our scenario, the Klingons very much seemed outgunned. And that was only allowing Feds partial overloads!
_________________
Ken

kiloton · Ensign Joined: 22 Aug 2013 Posts: 16

It appears that Fed Com changed all drone rack types to either four-space A-racks or G-racks. The G-racks look identical in TFC but the other racks retain their six spaces as in SFB. Is that on purpose? It seems like in FedCm there was some attempt to reduce the power of drones based on other factors (lack of wild weasels, increased speed of drones, less defensive firing opportunities). I am wondering if the same needs to be considered in TFC, i.e., changing the six-space racks to four spaces.
_________________
Ken

kiloton · Ensign Joined: 22 Aug 2013 Posts: 16

Well, looking at the ship cards, it appears that the drone racks are already four-spaces like Fed Com, not six like SFB. Not sure why my memory on that was off but it looks like this is already addressed!
_________________
Ken

lincolnlog · Posted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 11:40 pm Post subject: Re: Drone Racks in TFC

kiloton · Ensign Joined: 22 Aug 2013 Posts: 16

We had a great rules discussion session last Friday and got some things worked out.

Some highlights:

1) Simplified damage control
2) More balanced drone rack reloading
3) Seeking weapon launch movement improvements
4) Variable speed plots

We will be running Kzintis for the first time on Friday 20 September with the new rules changes. Looking forward to it!

After Kzintis it looks like plasma will be tested for the first time with Gorn. I am really enjoying the way the game is shaping up. A big thank you to Bob for putting this together and spending all the time he has on it!
_________________
Ken

lincolnlog · Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 4:24 pm Post subject:

Game tonight, Kzinti have the Klingons by 2 points in this match-up.

Klingons:

C7 192
D7 138
D7 138
D5 118
F5 82
E5 87
Total 757

Kzinti:

BCH 195
BC 144
CM 122
CM 122
FF 87
FF 87
Total 759