Teaching Someone Special to Sabre-Dance

pinecone · Post by **pinecone** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:49 am

Hi guys! After my first scenario with my dad for over half a year, ir became quite obvious (despite the fact that he won, a battle report I will post later) that he does not know the standard klingon tactics. I hav prined off a description of the sabre-dance, shallow sabre-dance, knife fight and waggle for him, but I was wondering what a good scenario would be to test these. I know that the Frax were designed for that purpose, but I want to start him off with something that will show the importance of the sabre dance. Any suggestions?

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 3:37 am

Yes. Fight against a photon ship. Perhaps a D5W vs an NCA. You take the NCA and make sure you overload the photons. Now his job is to fight you without ever getting inside 8 hexes of range. I.e., he must sabre dance or get smacked with four overloaded photons.

Once he learns it with the D5W's wider arcs, graduate him to the D7 against a CA. Again, make sure the CA is holding overloads. Now, he has to do it again, but with less advantageous disruptor arcs.

storeylf · Post by **storeylf** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:19 am

The best way to make someone rethink is to beat their current tactics consistently. After all, standard tactics don't mean only tactics, if he won without using 'standard tactics' then why would he need to learn other methods.

Take a Ranger or Mohawk against a D5. Feds are a little random if you only play the odd game - even if the Feds does get to range 8 he can still miss with photons. The Hydran is pretty consistent in its damage output at close range and will hose a D5. Play on a floating map, there is little point trying to emphasize 'sabre-dance' on a small fixed map where it just isn't possible to maintain range.

pinecone · Post by **pinecone** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:48 pm

Thanks guys, I will take this into account.

And the reason it's imprtant for him to learn is because the particular scenario we were playing required him to get in close and fast, and I made a mistake in overloading one of his ships with damage. (The scenario being "The bigger they are..." from CL37). But in a standard duel, it's imprtand that he learns he can't just run in and smash like he did with his battleship in thuis scenario.

Brazouck · Post by **Brazouck** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:50 pm

storeylf wrote:there is little point trying to emphasize 'sabre-dance' on a small fixed map where it just isn't possible to maintain range.

But, in this case, how do you play klingons in tournament shaped games ?

storeylf · Post by **storeylf** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 3:04 pm

With difficulty!

Brazouck · Post by **Brazouck** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 4:39 pm

I ask myself if I choose klingons or Romulans for the jnext tournament, Feds are too much binary for me

Klingon of Gor · Post by **Klingon of Gor** » Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:22 pm

Brazouck wrote:

But, in this case, how do you play klingons in tournament shaped games ?

It depends on who and what you're fighting. You may be able engage old style Fed CAs on a fixed map, due to their limited power supply. With Fed war cruisers, you may simply be out of luck on a fixed map. There may be people out there who know how to beat a squadron of Fed war cruisers in a 450 point squadron game with Klingons, but I'm not one of them.

With plasma races, you're basically committed to a shallow saber dance. It's hard to stay out at range 15 with them, because once the S torps go live (And nowadays, that's on turn 1), they hold for 2, and they can buy lots of acceleration and chase you very aggressively. I've won games off Gorn squadrons with Klingons on a fixed map, but it's a good deal harder than it used to be. Under the latest edition rules, plasma races are more intimidatiing. I consider this to be a very good thing.

As to how I learned my Klingon tactics against Feds, Hydrans, and plasma races, it was by joining the Black Fleet. Repeatedly.

pinecone · Post by **pinecone** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 1:58 am

You mention new edition rules... are they universal, or only for tourneys?

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:48 am

They are the rules. There are three actual changes (rather than simple clarifications) that were made in the Rev6 version of the rules:
1) The 3 impulse delay between firings of a particle cannon only applies within a turn. There is no delay over a turn break.
2) Plasma may use the "dump the batteries for prior turns of arming". So, if they start with empty batteries, they can start with on their final turn of arming. (So, they may fire Pl-G, Pl-S, and Pl-R torpedoes on turn #1.)
3) ADDs can be used offensively against nearby drones and shuttles (and fighters).

The other cool thing about the Reference Rulebook R6 (RRB6) is that it includes all of the rules from War & Peace, including several clarifications and 'bug fixes'.

EDIT: Fixed an extraneous "not" in the above parenthetical comment.

Sneaky Scot · Post by **Sneaky Scot** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 5:54 am

Sorry Mike, but doesn't (4J2e) mean you can fire Plasma-G/S/R on Turn #1 if you start with empty batteries?

Brazouck · Post by **Brazouck** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 7:23 am

So, if they start with empty batteries, they can start with on their final turn of arming. (So, they may not fire Pl-G, Pl-S, and Pl-R torpedoes on turn #1.)

Ok so you can but you can not ?

Sorry but I don't understand this one

pinecone · Post by **pinecone** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:13 pm

Yeah, that's a bit confusing. So they can dump the batteries to get 2 turns arming right away, doesn't that mean if they finish loading they'll be ready by turn 1?

Mike · Post by **Mike** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:21 pm

That IS what it means. I think Mike must've accidentally put in the word "not" unintentionally. Plasmas can now start the game with 2 prior turns of arming already done at a cost of empty batteries. All they have to do is pay for their 3rd turn of arming during energy allocation and they are ready to launch.

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 4:19 pm

As Mike points out, it should be extremely clear that the "not" was a mistake. If I am highlighting it as a change, then, obviously, the rule has changed, and not remained the same.

Anyway, I have no idea how I could think one thing and type the exact opposite. Especially since I went back and reread it, too! Must be the preliminary stages of senility or something. Regardless, I have fixed the earlier message.

So, yes, you CAN have your Pl-G, Pl-S, and Pl-R ready to fire on turn #1.