Base damage question

[Spacecowboy87]

Do bases receive an advantage in FC over SFB based upon the owning player's right to allocate damage to weapons as he sees fit, rather than marking weapon hits only on those weapons that can bear on the shooter?
Yes I know everyone benefits from that rule, but does anyone else think its a bit odd that all those out-of-arc weapons have to go down before the ones shooting at you do? The SSDs of bases are drawn to clearly show which weapons are in which "pod," so what if there was a rule that said the first weapon hit in a given volley had to be allocated within the facing pod?
Or do bases need that advantage?

[Mike]

You're correct. The player with the base may allocate weapons damage any way he wants. May seem strange, but it is what it is.

[Bolo_MK_XL]

Don't forget, bases rotate, so track when it rotates and where you think the enemy will be later, then decide, you may want to take the facing weapons ----

[terryoc]

Bases may rotate, they don't have to. OTOH, depending on map setup, the opponent may fly his ships around to a blind arc.

[Savedfromwhat]

bases lose so many advantages already that it would just make them worse. No fighters, little seeking weapon defense, no mines... Bases are pretty much just pretty targets waiting to get blown up by the empire with the most seeking weapons.

[duxvolantis]

Do bases receive an advantage in FC over SFB based upon the owning player's right to allocate damage to weapons as he sees fit, rather than marking weapon hits only on those weapons that can bear on the shooter?
Yes I know everyone benefits from that rule, but does anyone else think its a bit odd that all those out-of-arc weapons have to go down before the ones shooting at you do? The SSDs of bases are drawn to clearly show which weapons are in which "pod," so what if there was a rule that said the first weapon hit in a given volley had to be allocated within the facing pod?
Or do bases need that advantage?

Bases are pretty weak in FC.

Note that in SFB the facing weapon rule only applied to phasers and it was a *protective* rule since *only* facing phasers could be destroyed by a volley of internals.

Firing arc had no impact on the choice of which heavy weapon would be destroyed (for example letting the ISC use rear-firing F's as padding for their first offensive torp hits).

Once you'd lost all the phasers in that arc you stopped taking hits which meant that you'd typically have a few phasers left even if someone mizia'd the crap out of you.

[storeylf]

Bases on their own are weak. We, however, play with bases quite a lot and find them fairly decent if they part of a larger force. Obvioulsy some empires bases are better than others, and some empires are better at attacking them others.

Remember bases have sensors as well with the addition of the scout rules in the latest rule book, that can make a big difference when they have a fleet helping defend them.


[caveat] I would add we play our home brew campaigns nearly all the time, so the attacker is not just going to 'win' by losing a few less points than the defender, depending on the state of the camapign such a 'victory' could be an unmitigated disaster. Neither is there guaranteed to be an equal points match. 'One off' games are probably different, with no real meaning to the fight and no reason to concern yourself with ship losses then tactics and perceptions of what are good or bad units are going to be different.

[duxvolantis]

Bases on their own are weak. We, however, play with bases quite a lot and find them fairly decent if they part of a larger force. Obvioulsy some empires bases are better than others, and some empires are better at attacking them others.

Remember bases have sensors as well with the addition of the scout rules in the latest rule book, that can make a big difference when they have a fleet helping defend them.

I was speaking in a comparative sense. In FC bases are weak compared to SFB for a lot of reasons (bases don't count against the fleet scout limits, bases have a nearly endless supply of shuttles for use as wild weasels and scatter packs, their prodigious power and energy efficient weapons leaves a ton of energy for Electronic warfare and shield reinforcement, etc).

FC bases are not pushovers but it is pretty difficult to deny the destruction of the base to a sufficiently determined opponent--esp those with powerful seeking weapons.

Also, economically speaking, a campaign should acknowledge that losing a BATS is significant and losing a Starbase is catastrophic--economic cost *well* beyond the BPVs of the unit.

[liquidsky]

We find the bases go down fairly easily because they lose power rapidly to combat, then frame hits. Many times the base will go down, even though it still has a lot of cargo/hull boxes left.

[paulgenna]

Depending on the base, power is a big concern. The base station really does not have the power to do much after it uses the PH-4's and heavy weapons. Even when they have other ships to protect just hitting the shields a little over several turns, assuming fast rotation, will start to really count. If you are playing a race with drones then shoot two waves back to back and ride them in. The base will have to decide which way to die.