Preferred Heavy War Destroyer Configurations?

[OGOPTIMUS]

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.

[Sentinal]

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

[Steve Cole]

The F&E guys pretty much use nothing but the escort variants.

[mjwest]

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 ...

[OGOPTIMUS]

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.

[mjwest]

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.

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.

[djdood]

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).

[mjwest]

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.

[OGOPTIMUS]

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.

[marcus_aurelius]

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???

[Jeffr0]

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?)

[marcus_aurelius]

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.

[Steve Cole]

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.

[marcus_aurelius]

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.)

[terryoc]

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.