Def Sats & Bases

Ask your questions about Federation Commander game system rules here.

Moderators: mjwest, Albiegamer

User avatar
Targ
Lieutenant SG
Posts: 125
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:04 am
Location: York U.K.

Def Sats & Bases

Post by Targ »

Can Def Sats be set up round other static points besides planets? i.e. bases. This would make up to some extent the lack of mine fields in F.C and give a cheap up grade option for bases in a campaign.
wedge_hammersteel
Commander
Posts: 578
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:42 am
Location: Lafayette, LA

Post by wedge_hammersteel »

Defense satelites have to be "in-play" at the beginning of the scenario. They cannot be installed during the scenario.

Would that interfere with your using as mines like your post mentions?
User avatar
Steve Cole
Site Admin
Posts: 3846
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 5:24 pm

Post by Steve Cole »

I cannot think of a reason not to put defsats around bases (if you pay for the point value) but then, I've been shown to be wrong before.
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
Image
User avatar
Targ
Lieutenant SG
Posts: 125
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:04 am
Location: York U.K.

Post by Targ »

I wasn’t looking at installing them during a scenario but rather as a quick and cheep up graded to a base in a campaign situation, so it would not interfere with using them as a kind of directly player controlled captor mine. Also I was wondering how far out they can be placed? I take it is 2 hexes as with normal deployment round a planet.
User avatar
Ravenhull
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 231
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 7:47 pm
Location: Mobile, AL

Post by Ravenhull »

I once thought that DefSats would work as a way to give bases their minefields without forcing the addition of minefields from SFB. Maybe a max of 3 for an BS, 5 for a BATS and 10 for a SB, non moving.
NOLI UMQUAM VIM TURBARUM STULTORUM DEPRETIARE.

Donovan Willett, USS Alabama
User avatar
mjwest
Commodore
Posts: 4103
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 4:30 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas
Contact:

Post by mjwest »

Do note that deploying DefSats around non-astronomical bodies is strictly forbidden in SFB. I would not be surprised to see that percolate down to Federation Commander.
Image
Federation Commander Answer Guy
User avatar
Targ
Lieutenant SG
Posts: 125
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:04 am
Location: York U.K.

Post by Targ »

mjwest wrote:Do note that deploying DefSats around non-astronomical bodies is strictly forbidden in SFB.
Mike can you remember the reason for this, was it background/scientific or a rules mechanic? If scientific what are the relative masses of a def sat and a base?
User avatar
Mike
Fleet Captain
Posts: 1674
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 10:58 pm
Location: South Carolina

Post by Mike »

One reason for only allowing DefSats around planets or moons would be the gravity needed to keep them in orbit. Bases of any kind simply would not have enough mass to do that. A DefSat is more of a "put it and forget it" weapon as far as its position is concerned. It is a weapons platform with the necessary electronics and power generators to arm, launch/fire, and control whatever weapons it has.

Though, on second thought, some kind of positional stabilizers would seem to be required to fire phasers, photons, or disruptors. Perhaps those would be simply for aiming and not for stabilizing the position of the entire satellite in space.
Mike

=====
Sandpaper gets the job done, but makes for a lot of friction.
wedge_hammersteel
Commander
Posts: 578
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:42 am
Location: Lafayette, LA

Post by wedge_hammersteel »

If mines can stay in one place then defense sats can too.
User avatar
Mike
Fleet Captain
Posts: 1674
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 10:58 pm
Location: South Carolina

Post by Mike »

But how many shots do mines get? Or do they just explode?

DefSats are much larger and need to target their weapons turn after turn.
Mike

=====
Sandpaper gets the job done, but makes for a lot of friction.
User avatar
terryoc
Captain
Posts: 1384
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 12:46 am

Post by terryoc »

Explosive mines in SFB go boom once; captor mines may have multiple shots, but not as many weapons as DefSats.

DefSats orbit around the planet, whereas mines cannot move (while I think the rules do allow minefields around planets, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me, because the planet is moving in its own orbit). Mines can be swept but DefSats cannot be tractored. And so on. So mines and DefSats are clearly different beasts.

I think DefSats should probably be limited to around planets in FC. Argument anti is that bases are pretty vulnerable in FC and this should beef them up. Also it may be creeping SFB-ism, which we want to avoid. Pro is that they're very cheap, and giving them effectively 360-degree arcs of fire without any blind spots makes them pretty darn good. And they're defense SATELLITES, not mines. They have to orbit something, and a base just doesn't have the mass.
"Captain" Terry O'Carroll, fourteen papers published including six best of issue
"Man, Terry, you are like a loophole seeking missle!" - Mike West
Image
User avatar
rulesjd
Lieutenant JG
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 6:31 pm
Location: seattle

Post by rulesjd »

I'm with Terry on this one.

Def Sats will comlicate FC, an undesirable goal. They weren't intended to protect anyting but a planet or other similarly large mass. Def Sats require detection rules (labs) as they use hidden placement.

Just provide escort class ships (or some type of attrition unit) for patrol and base protection. You don't need Def Sats.
"Damn the torpedoes, full spe........[squarrk]"
User avatar
terryoc
Captain
Posts: 1384
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 12:46 am

Post by terryoc »

Actually DefSats (with simplified rules) are already in FC; it's MINES I don't want. Given that DefSats are already here, I think they should be planets only. Like monitors.
"Captain" Terry O'Carroll, fourteen papers published including six best of issue
"Man, Terry, you are like a loophole seeking missle!" - Mike West
Image
User avatar
Dal Downing
Commander
Posts: 665
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 1:43 pm
Location: Western Wisconsin

Post by Dal Downing »

I tend to think since Defence Satalites are already here and it is becoming easier and easier to crack bases (with nothing keeping ships out of Range 1-2 Overload Volleys). We might as well let Defence Stalites stand in for minefields and just get on with it. Otherwise we will sooner or later see simplified Mine and Mine Sweeper Rules and I think most people would be aginst that.

Just my 2 coppers worth.
rulesjd wrote:Def Sats will comlicate FC, an undesirable goal. They weren't intended to protect anyting but a planet or other similarly large mass. Def Sats require detection rules (labs) as they use hidden placement.
Actually there is no hidden deployment rules in FC. You know right where the DefSats are (they are already placed on the board) you just can't fire on them until they fire on you.
-Dal

"Which one of you is the Biggest, Baddest, Bootlicker of the bunch?"
"I am."
"ARCHERS!!! THAT ONE!!!!"
User avatar
Hod K'el
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 6:03 am
Location: Lafayette LA

Post by Hod K'el »

I hate to say this, but I agree. The verbiage is defense SATELITE, not defense platform.

So are we going to get defense platforms soon?
HoD K'el
IMV Black Dagger
-----------------
Life is not victory;
Death is not defeat!
Post Reply