Federation Commander

We played our first game using the play test direct fire drone rules last year (i.e. last night). A 500pt game. I'm not really that bothered about carrier stuff (it was one of the things that turned me off SFB), so played a target for a carrier attack, rather than a carrier duel. My opponent was keen to try them out (he is much more into old SFB stuff), and whilst I'm not bothered, I am actually keen to see how they play before jumping to conclusions.

Klingon Strike carrier with 8 Z-Y and 4 Z-D, escorted by a D6 and an F5D.

The klingons were attacking a Federation group of DN, NCA, DW. It was decided before hand that the DN was the primary target that the klingons were sending a carrier after. The Feds were commanded by 2 players, me with the NCA and DW, whilst the DN was commanded by Capt "I'm just bringing rear phasers into arc" Jack. The map was a location map around a single hex planet.

Brief overview:

The klingons and Feds approached each other, the carrier launched fighters during the middle of turn1. By the end of turn 1 everyone was in the 9-15 range bracket. The klingon ships did some damage to the DN shield 6 which was largely batteried away. The NCA and DW concentrated Ph1s on a Z-Y and cripppled it. The Fed DN fired a hopeful photon and split phasers between 2 other Z-Ys, damaging but failing to cripple either. Drones and shuttles were launched at several of the fighters (give them something to think about), a swarm of klink drones were launched at the DW.

Turn 2 saw the Feds slip away from the Klinks in order to split the fighters across the range 8 boundary. The NCA fired partial overload photons at more Z-Ys, the DN also launched a partial overload photon and more phasers at the 3 Z-Ys that had been hit last turn. Our fire wasn't terribly effective, most photons missing, but the phasers did ok.

The DW then swung in towards the Klingons in a suicide run as the DN turned away firing rear end phasers back at the fighters. The DW did a good job as it closed killing 3 Z-Ys, most of the fighters at this point were using Ph3s on the incoming drones, however 2 drones got through and took out 2 of the Z-Ds (an unneccessary error from the klingon, forgetting what was tracking what amongst the counter clutter). Whilst it intially looked like we weren't doing a great job against the fighters, they were suddenly down to 6 losses and a couple of cripples. The DW took a pile of phasers from the klingon ships and took quite a pounding, then the wave of drones hit it and all that was left of the brave escort was a tumbling bridge (both bridge boxes was all I had left, I didn't even have any spare frame).

With the fighters largely spent, the NCA swung in and followed the path the DW had taken, and ended engaging in a range 1 centerline exchange with the D6 and Carrier. The NCA was badly hurt, but so was the carrier. The Fed DN then HET'd and moved at the carrier, at which point the klingons moved to disengage off the map egde, though the carrier had lost to much power to quickly disengage. We called it a draw at that point, raher than play out the DN trying to catch up with the carrier whilst avoiding the F5D and D6. The Fed DW was dead (finished off by a couple more drones) the NCA was a clear cripple. The Klingon had lost its fighters and suffered a badly damaged carrier, but had failed to do any damage on the supposed primary target of the DN.

Thoughts:

My opponent had misread the aspect of which shield is hit and thought that was resolved at the point of launch, not at the point of impact. That meant more bookkeeping, which took a lot of shine of the new rules for him. I'm not keen on that part either, but can't make my mind up - it would be a little naff to not be able to turn a different shield round as well, but more bookkeeping, mmmm.

With multiple units in various categories at different speeds (ships, drones, fighters, suicide shuttles) it started to noticebly slow the game down. Checking which fighter had how much damage left, which had fired some poxy Ph3, Which drone was tracking which fighter. Drone records for the drones on the map, and records of what direct drones had fired from which hex and would hit when. The counter clutter may be down, but it is still slow.

The fighters them selves were a lot wimpier than I expected. As I remember only 3 direct fire drones got launched (achieving nothing), and only 2 fighter disrupters got to shoot. Most of the Ph3s were expended on drones.

I'm sure my opponent would take a different mix of fighters next time, probably with a different mix of ships. But this game was just to get a feel for the playtest rules at the moment. The Feds worked as I expected - the photons, whilst missing quite a few shots, did indeed make up for it with their 'dial +0 for Z-D and +2 for Z-Y fighter crippling capability', Ph1s then finished off.

storeylf wrote: The fighters them selves were a lot wimpier than I expected. As I remember only 3 direct fire drones got launched (achieving nothing), and only 2 fighter disrupters got to shoot. Most of the Ph3s were expended on drones.

Good recap.

FWIW the Klingon carriers and fighters were easily the weakest in SFB.

The direct fire fighters were weak sauce compared to the two-turn arming races and Klingon fleets are, to me, all about massed phasers and disruptors at range 15. Taking fighters just complicates maneuver and dilutes ranged firepower.

I know the target of the Klingons was supposed to be the DN, but it sounds like they actually did pretty good. They killed one Fed ship, severely crippled another, and really only lost a handful of fighters in exchange.

Yup, but that was because of the aim of the scenario. As those ships were expendable I played them that way to protect the DN. I woudn't have engaged in what I knew were suicide runs if it was just standard victory condidtions. Plus we didn't really have time to engage in a long drawn out affair given how slow it was going, and the primary point of the game was just to get a feel for the playtest fighter rules.

If we hadn't called it when we did the carrier was in serious trouble, or the D6 and F5D were going to be sacrificed. Ignoring the other klingon ships, The DN was guaranteed to get to range 1 of the carrier the impulse before it disengaged, 5 overloads (1 was still arming) up its backside would have been terminal. However, it was getting a bit late so we just called a draw.

As to the effectivenss of the fighters, I woud also add that I think they suffered from a bad deployment. The klingons made it fairly easy for us to engage them piecemeal. Instead of approaching in a formation that made it hard to split them at a given range, he came at us somewhat straggled out and we were able to shoot half at range 8 whilst avoiding the other half back at range 9. Whilst our shooting wasn't quite as effective as we'd have liked it did nobble a few of the Z-Ys and prevent them launching. He never got the chance to fire 8 direct drones as a salvo.

Just out of interest.

I know there are Fed and klingon Carrier/fighters to play around with in FC, I think I've seen a Kzinti one somewhere. Is there a romulan one, or is plasma fighters (I assume they carried plasma) something that has never been been looked at yet?

I ask cos we are looking at some form of Fed-Klink campaign, and I was looking at allowing any BoM stuff in it. The way it is likely going to be setup would limit BoM stuff heavily, but provide a good playtest environment for any bits either us of fancies giving a go. If the rom carrier was available then a Fed-Rom campaign might be another possibilty.

[edit] Oh and another question that came up during our game, If a drone armed fighter is crippled it can't launch, but what happens to any drones it still has - are they dropped/destroyed or does the fighter retain them (for if it gets repaired).

Every major empire had a version of strike cruiser up on the legacy board at one time...don't know if they are still there.

I did a scenario that did not use any carriers, but did use planet-based fighters. Submitted to ADB a long time ago, but never heard anything back about it. Maybe they are holding it until Borders of Madness will be released as a product, maybe they thought it was terrible, or maybe they forgot about it. We ran it quite a bit and it always seemed to come down the last turn as to who would win or lose. We got the feel for fighters from a different perspective (no carriers).

I think the crippled fighter simply cannot launch another drone. Its crippled status should not prevent it from controlling a drone already launched.

The Klingon, Federation, and Kzinti strike carriers are all on the Commander's Circle somewhere. I am not going to look up the reference; they are easy enough to find.

No, plasma fighters have not been yet addressed. However, Pl-D fighters should be pretty trivial to handle. Just use the drone rules with these exceptions:
- For "direct-fire" Pl-D, the damage done is 10.
- For "seeking" Pl-D, just launch a Pl-D instead of a drone.
- Remember that Pl-D are self-guiding, so control issues become moot.

For the Gorn G-18, just take an F-18 and replace the drones with Pl-D. Actually, that matches the Romulan FSF, so use it for both Romulans and Gorns.

PS: Mike is correct. A crippled fighter cannot launch new drones, but can continue to control any drones still in flight.

Sorry - my question was about the drones still on the fighter itself (not ones in flight). It cannot launch them, but if it is repaired are the drones still there for it to launch without waiting for reloads. Or does getting crippled mean any unlaunched drones are lost/destroyed as well?

Just a thought: For drone control, would it not simplify things, in a Fed Commander - stylee way, if the number of drones on the map is capped at the number of available control channels from all (friendly) sources, rather than worrying about who's controlling what drone?

And could that be extended to Fed Commander proper, not just BoM?

For example, a Fed CA for whatever reason is flying with six fighters, each of which have two control channels (these are hypothetical, generic units; I have not studied the actual capabilities of Fed fighters). The carrier proper is off-map, loitering somewhere less interesting.

There are therefore eighteen control channels available: six from the CA and two from each of the six fighters. The Feds can therefore control eighteen drones. Problem solved, nice and simple.

What say you guys?

Tony wrote:What say you guys?

The problem therein lies in who's controlling which drone when things get heated and the fighters begin to get destroyed. I suppose you could say that an on-top-of-things science officer is able to monitor targetting and drop/shift control to surviving units as needed... but that takes away a bit of the tactical strategy.

i realize the discussion is based on simplified rules for BoM... but I remember many a SFB game where the best firing option was at a crucial target farther away... sometimes a scout, sometimes a drone ship...
When every control channel is filled, it's often "fun" to take out the ship that is controlling the drones most likely to be your biggest problem.

Using generic control like this will certainly take away that flavor...

Or at least that's my two Quatloos worth.

Tony (no, the other one...)

Scoutdad wrote:I suppose you could say that an on-top-of-things science officer is able to monitor targetting and drop/shift control to surviving units as needed... <snip>

...or perhaps some reasonably simple 26th Century software, or its equivalent.....

HAL wrote:Let me put it this way, Mr. Amor. The 9000 series is the most reliable computer ever made. No 9000 computer has ever made a mistake or distorted information. We are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error.

Before it gets lost in a tangent, can anyone answer my question earlier, do crippled fighters lose their drones, or will they have to reload them?

Kang wrote: There are therefore eighteen control channels available: six from the CA and two from each of the six fighters. The Feds can therefore control eighteen drones. Problem solved, nice and simple.

Sorry, What problem?

I would think that the drones are still there. The damage is done to the fighter, not the drones.

If I were playing against you, I'd have no problem allowing you to repair the drone, relaunch the fighter, and firethe remaining drones.