Federation Commander

Mike wrote:I don't know anything about Frax or their submarines, but from an outsider's perspective (reading what has been posted) it seems that the subs probably have very light shielding. Is this so?

Not really. The subs' biggest problem is that they are "light" for their class. One good shot and they're done. In return, they have weapons that are great to use while cloaked (mainly because they can be used while cloaked), but aren't that great when uncloaked.

If I recall correctly, the 150BPV missile cruiser had 24 point shields. Hod K'el, is that right?

MJ is right about the weapons.

During playtest, I couldn't fire my plasma S's due to the cloak. The missiles kept my phaser 1's tied up because we were playing that the missiles required 6 to kill.

If the frax didnt have the cloak, then he would have been taken care of quickly.

Matt had drones waiting to fire at the frax but couldnt due to the cloak.

I suppose that if the sub's power is reduced enough it will not be able to pay for the cloak and be forced to "surface" where drones will finish it quickly.

Don't want to drag this on too much, but how is the Frax cloak different from the Romulan cloak?

terryoc wrote:I suppose that if the sub's power is reduced enough it will not be able to pay for the cloak and be forced to "surface" where drones will finish it quickly.

If the sub is damaged enough that it is forced to surface, and it has not already destroyed/driven off the opponent, this is all moot as it is likely dead.

Mike wrote:Don't want to drag this on too much, but how is the Frax cloak different from the Romulan cloak?

The Frax cloak is the Romulan cloak. In fact, there are no specific cloak rules for the Frax. The primary thing about the Frax subs is that they get to violate (5P3a) in two cases: Axion Torpedoes and missile/drone racks. Other than getting to fire specific weapons, the cloak rules are the cloak rules.

I think your right, Wedge... I can confirm 150 pts against 412 points. I am 95% sure it was 24 point shields. My doubt is that it may have been a 25 point shield. [Big whoopee, right?]

And I still think the subs are great against convoys, but not that great against other ships...but I would want to play against convoy escorts to get a good feel of the sub.

Drones need to go to Type-I only. If you are going to convert the missile racks to drone racks, then definitely standardize. This is also the reason we used Photon Torp Charts instead of Axion Torp Charts. We just limited them to range 12 and +2 overloads.

And yes, without the cloak, the sub is DRT.

FRAX Missile destroyer is in the new Communique. Haven't played with it yet, but looks pretty standard for the missile boat class, even with "only" five drone racks.

I'm happy to see the Frax remain a "simulator" race. I always enjoyed the "historical" races and quite frankly disliked the Andromedans when they became part of SFB. The Magellenics and Omegas should stay home.

More to the point, there were already enough disrupter races by the time the Frax appeared. While I have often wished the ship classes in SFB operated as "wet navy" ships (long and heavy guns on capital ships and classes more reflective of roles than minor design differences) that is not the paradigm selected. The Frax weapons arcs "break" the concept on which the other ships were built. Conversely, if the design using disruptors were superior, it would ultimately be adapted by all disruptor races.

I'd almost like to see Steve invent an entirely new design (with some similar mechanics) in which the wet navy paradigm could be better captured and the frax would make an excellent start.

rulesjd wrote:While I have often wished the ship classes in SFB operated as "wet navy" ships (long and heavy guns on capital ships and classes more reflective of roles than minor design differences) that is not the paradigm selected. The Frax weapons arcs "break" the concept on which the other ships were built. Conversely, if the design using disruptors were superior, it would ultimately be adapted by all disruptor races.

I'd almost like to see Steve invent an entirely new design (with some similar mechanics) in which the wet navy paradigm could be better captured and the frax would make an excellent start.

I would also like to see Steve invent an entirely new design (with some similar mechanics) in which the wet navy paradigm could be better captured, but I disagree with your statement that if the design of the current or future Frax ships using disruptors were superior, it would ultimately be adapted by all disruptor races. The reason is due to how the other races use their ships.

Example, Klingons come in for an oblique attack to maximize their firepower and offer you their followup strike from their rear armaments. If need be, they can stay at range 15 and sabre dance with you. Actually, plasma races should fear the Frax more than the disruptor races.

But, have you fought against them yet? Or fought with them?

If you want a system that gives the SFU more of a wet navy feel, try Klingon Armada. That system (Starmada) uses a wet-navy metaphor for starship combat, and the SFU ships, while definitely having the flavour of Trek, feel much more wet-navy in that system.

Maybe I'm just lazy, but I could see doing a Frax ship in each communique for the rest of 2010.

Maybe I'm just lazy, but I could see doing a Frax ship in each communique for the rest of 2010.

I'd be happy to see that.

I, for one, welcome our new simulated overlords!

Steve Cole wrote:Maybe I'm just lazy, but I could see doing a Frax ship in each communique for the rest of 2010.

I too, would not be upset with this plan.

Huh. I guess I'm in the minority in that Frax ships don't do much for me.

Feh; the band has got to play to the house crowd, not the whiny guy in the corner.

we it would be nice to have the mauler,scout,cw drone cruiser,carrier, etc (most of this is BoM (actually the frax could be called BoM)).

djdood i dout your in the minority on this.