Federation Commander

"mjwest Not quite. What Pinecone is talking about is the ability, in SFB, for the phasers on the Fed CA to fire in the hex row directly behind the ship. It doesn't get the full LS/RS arcs of the CS and BC, but still gets to fire down the rear hex row.

And, as an aside, if I was given the option between the CA and CS, I would probably take the CS each time. It is an absolutely disgusting ship. (Which is great if you are flying the Feds.)

I agree here MJ, but I was referencing the fact that the CS has a better All Around Phaser Suite (capable of 4 phaser ones in the RH) as opposed to the CA (only two), though it does give up two phaser ones on the Centerline and front obliques... And yes it is absolutely disgusting, why did it "prove to be inneffective" ?

Pinecone look at the CS's total power then look at movement costs in comparison to the CA, also the CS has two drone racks, also look at the firing arc's. You will see why it is so good. BTW disgusting = very good in this case.

Savedfromwhat wrote: You will see why it is so good. BTW disgusting = very good in this case.

Or down right rude as the case may be

Cheers

Derek

pinecone wrote:What do you mean about the CS being disgusting?

And in the space aomeba battle, The CA is better.

In any scenario involving lab points, the CA is better. In the other 99.9% of the scenarios (involving combat) the CS is better. It has better discresionary power, better weapons arcs, and two drone racks (as Saved' points out). It is an absolute combat monster for its size and point value.

As for why the CS "proved to be ineffective" ... Well, really, it wasn't a design issue; it was a production issue. The CS required the same production facilities as the CA, whereas the NCL could be made in the production facilities of the DD. So, they could make CS+DD or make CA+NCL. Put in that light it is pretty obvious why they chose the NCL over the CS.

Which, of course, is all entirely off-topic.

On topic, Steve is watching this thread, and will take it into consideration (which is not to say he will base his decision on it). And please be clear: I have only made a suggestion. The decision is entirely Steve's.

hmm...

I get sentimental and usually always use the greatest starship design ever on TV (When it's within the points barrier, of course). It will be a hard habbit to give up...

Back on topic one more time, I want to restate something that might have become lost in this wandering discussion.

The main (if not only) point of this proposal is to remove an abusive tactic. By "abusive tactic", I mean a tactic for which there is no real counter tactic.

pinecone wrote:hmm...

I get sentimental and usually always use the greatest starship design ever on TV (When it's within the points barrier, of course). It will be a hard habbit to give up...

That was always the way I leaned as a Fed.....well, either that or the CC, anyway

MJ
If your only capable of winning when you get to take a range 1 or zero shot with no chance of missing -- then maybe you should change tactics and empires and start using drone only ships ----

My father commonly uses an interesting tactic on me in Fed on Klingon Games. He will send in suicide shuttles (and drones, of course) on the first turn, then follow them in. When we have our pass at each other, I have to hold some phasers back to defend against suicide shuttles and drones (depending on how many tractors I have, And how much energy ). Because not all of my fire is at his ship, we come out about even.

I don't despise the evasive manuvers proposal, but I'm not with it either. It just doesn't come up in our games enogh to be a threat.

Bolo_MK_XL wrote:If your only capable of winning when you get to take a range 1 or zero shot with no chance of missing -- then maybe you should change tactics and empires and start using drone only ships ----

False assumption. Evasive Maneuvers don't just apply to range 0 or 1; it is any range.

The issue is that Evasive Maneuvers can be used to force the Fed (or Hydran or Seltorian) player to take a massively disadvantaged shot with no real response.

Let's compare it to another system in the game that can also force a massively disadvantaged shot: the cloak. The cloak (among other things) forces the cloaking ship to a maximum speed of 16. This allows the opposing ship a guaranteed chance to be able to pursue. The opposing ship can hold its fire with a reasonable opportunity in the future.

With Evasive Maneuvers, there is no such speed limit. The ship can go as fast as it wants to (and has power for). The big disadvantage of Evasive Maneuvers are its extreme vulnerability to seeking weapons. Well, if you have no seeking weapons, what good does that do? So, direct fire dominant empires can't exploit the weakness, and there is no reasonable expectation of useful pursuit.

I usually fire photons at range 0-1, ocassionally 2-4, Never farther than 8. at 0-1, evasive manuvers don't work well, because most heavy weapons are automatic hits there, and Ph-3's and 2's are hardly efected. Just fire all the phaser 1's as ph-3's, and you hardly lose any considerable damage.

Ph-G's are even better in this case (in other words, the Hydrans are safe)

mjwest wrote: The issue is that Evasive Maneuvers can be used to force the Fed (or Hydran or Seltorian) player to take a massively disadvantaged shot with no real response.

It doesn't force you take shots.

With Evasive Maneuvers, there is no such speed limit. The ship can go as fast as it wants to (and has power for). The big disadvantage of Evasive Maneuvers are its extreme vulnerability to seeking weapons. Well, if you have no seeking weapons, what good does that do? So, direct fire dominant empires can't exploit the weakness, and there is no reasonable expectation of useful pursuit.

But it does lose turn abiliy which is quite important, need to keep back power for EM, which goes someway to limiting run away power, and can't HET as a free 'shake off tail' move. You shoud be able to follow in on an advantageous arc, probably (given when EM will get used) at very close range popping phasers at him and using the leakage to aim at power further limiting his run away ability, hold back the heavy weapon so that if he does drop EM he takes what he tried to avoid in the first place.

Hydrans aren't that badly affected, PH-G at point range only takes a modest reduction in effectiveness and you can keep back fusion power until you decide to fire so you will probably have more power than the target to keep up speed, and their HB ships are less affected by EM anyway due the 2 dice to hit roll. Fed have a fair few PH-1s which remain fairly effective for a few hexes, and on a lot of ships they have just enough drones to hurt a simliar size target that can't prevent them hitting. If you do get to range 1 the photons are still greater than 50% of getting 3+ hits out of 4 which still remains pretty effective.

Myabe I just haven't seen it used in some really cool ways that you have, but I don't class it as being some un-counterable thing - sure you can't just negate it, but you can't negate other stuff either, you counter it via play and tactics. The scenarios I can think of where it would be difficult taking advantage of the EM downsides are the ones where I would just accept I was outplayed.

It is now live per the lastest Communique Sad to see the change

storeylf wrote:It doesn't force you take shots.

Depending on the angle of approach and the range of your weapons, you may never get another shot during that pass. So yes, in some cases it does force you to take that shot.

But it does lose turn abiliy which is quite important, need to keep back power for EM,

The increase of turn mode by one point has never been that critical when EM is applied in my games, particularly since many times the shot that EM is used against is a "now or never" affair. i.e. by the time the turn mode might actually start to matter, two impulses have passed and you can drop out of it. Additionally, if you declare EM during the Defensive Fire Phase of impulse 8 then this penalty doesn't affect you at all, since you can immediately drop EM at the start of the next turn by not paying for it.

Of course, with the new Communique rule, the only reasons now to declare EM in Impulse #8 are if you plan to continue it next turn, and if you want to avoid a tractor attempt.

For the disruptor races, saving the energy for EM isn't as difficult as it is for the multi-turn arming races. Since disruptors are "pay as you fire", you tend to have more power left over if you can't get into a good firing arc (which tends to be the same sort of situation that prompts a last second decision to use EM). And since you can't fire those weapons anyway while under EM...

on board a klingon destroyer:

captain: the federation have overcharged their photons, evasive manouvres now!!

a few seconds later:
damage control: captain we have lost all weapons and are on emergency power, the good new is we have started evasive manouvres.

captain: you fool, you were too slow!!!
captain pulls disruptor and vapourises the helmsman.