Greetings, all!
I've been tossing some preliminary ideas around to try and come up with
some viable gunboat (FTL-capable fighter) rules to use with my K'rathri
FTFB designs. I'd like some opinions on what you'd all consider a "fair"
points cost for the following:
Gunboats
--------
Gunboats are large, FTL-capable fighters. They are capable of extended,
independent patrols and are effective at anti-shipping attacks.
Gunboats use the basic Fleet Book fighter movement and attack rules, with the
following modifications.
1) Gunboats are grouped in flights of 4 (as opposed to 6 for fighters).
2) They mass 3 each for hanger space requirements.
3) Their base movement is 16 MU, and they get no secondary move. (rationale:
they're a bit heavier & slower than regular fighters)
4) Their endurance factor is 12.
5) When engaged by fighters in a dogfight, gunboats always take damage from
the fighters first before any return fire is allowed. (rationale: fighters
are quicker than gunboats - gunboats were optimized to attack ships, not
fighters.)
6) A gunboat's 'beam' weapon uses 2 dice for its attack. This attack may
not be split between targets - a gunboat group must still attack a
single target like fighters do.
7) Each gunboat carries two 'torpedos' that may be used instead of its beams
for an attack in a turn. Each gunboat can launch only a single
torpedo in a single attack run - the torpedo hits on a 3+ on 1d6 and
does 1d6 of damage each.
8) Gunboats ignore rolls of '4' when defending against fighters, PDS, and
Class 1 beams. Unlike fighters, however, Class 1 beams used for PDS get a
normal 2 kills + reroll when used against gunboats (rationale: gunboats
are considerably sturdier than fighters, so fighter & PDS fire is less
effective. They're also less nimble, so Class 1 PDS is *more* effective.)
9) Strategically, a gunboat may make 4 FTL jumps before jump-engine
refueling is required. A gunboat may replace one or both torpedo launchers
with extra jump tanks - each jump tank so added extends the gunboat's
range by 2 jumps.
Just as an initial SWAG, I'm thinking that the points cost would be somewhere
between 20 and 30 points per gunboat, making a group cost between 80 and 120
points. Opinions, please?
> On Thu, 18 Feb 1999, -MWS- wrote:
> I'd like some opinions on what you'd all consider a "fair"
i'm going to look at this by trying to construct an equivalent starship to do
the job.
> Gunboats are large, FTL-capable fighters. They are capable of
sounds like a starship to me, not a fighter. the point of fighters is that
they don't have extended operations capabilities. starships, on the other
hand, are specifically designed to be large (relative to fighters),
FTL-capable, capable of extended independent patrols and effective at
anti-shipping attacks.
> Gunboats use the basic Fleet Book fighter movement and attack rules,
well, a ship wouldn't, it would use the ship rules. i'm not sure whether this
is a pro or a con.
> 1) Gunboats are grouped in flights of 4 (as opposed to 6 for
ships wouldn't necessarily be grouped, but i don't think it makes any
difference.
> 2) They mass 3 each for hanger space requirements.
hmm. i don't think you could get hull, drive, ftl, PDS, one-shot torps
and screen into mass 3 on a ship. since i can't get Armageddon Outfitter to
work on this machine ("javascript error line 313: undefined is not a
number" - i must have an old version of javascript), i can't check
though.
> 3) Their base movement is 16 MU, and they get no secondary move.
i'm not sure how fighter movement maps on to ship thrust.
> 4) Their endurance factor is 12.
ships would have unlimited endurance, but 12 is as good as in any one battle.
> 5) When engaged by fighters in a dogfight, gunboats always take damage
fighter attacks on ships go after PDS, right? thus, the ship would fire first,
unlike the gunboat.
> 6) A gunboat's 'beam' weapon uses 2 dice for its attack. This attack
like a twin PDS with some restrictions.
> 7) Each gunboat carries two 'torpedos' that may be used instead of its
one-shot pulse torpedoes. you do not mention range.
> 8) Gunboats ignore rolls of '4' when defending against fighters, PDS,
level 1 screen.
> Unlike fighters, however, Class 1 beams used for PDS get a
gunboats are
> considerably sturdier than fighters, so fighter & PDS fire is less
just like ships!
> 9) Strategically, a gunboat may make 4 FTL jumps before jump-engine
a ship wouldn't have any such limits, that i'm aware of. they should do,
though!
> Just as an initial SWAG, I'm thinking that the points cost would be
well, i think that might be a bit much stuff to pack into such a small space.
however, i think i would reach the same conclusion for any other type of
fighter! let's check: standard fighter would have PDS, drive, hull. that
wouldn't fit in mass 1. it must be that fighters are built with
less german approaches - everything is lighter, minimised, more fragile,
etc, lacking the solidity of a real ship. thus, your proposal looks roughly
ok. i would have thought that gunboats would cost about 3x a normal fighter
(well, maybe; if it weren't for either the torps or the
ftl).
Tom
> 1) Gunboats are grouped in flights of 4 (as opposed to 6 for fighters).
I'd make it three considering their size and ability to lay waste to ship
targets
> 3) Their base movement is 16 MU, and they get no secondary move.
16 is an odd number. I'd call it 18
> 7) Each gunboat carries two 'torpedos' that may be used instead of its
Another reason to limit sqaudrons to 3 vessels.
> 8) Gunboats ignore rolls of '4' when defending against fighters, PDS,
This rule seems unnecessary to me. I'd just leave fighter/PDS/Class 1
interaction alone. Yes, they may be sturdier, but they're slower. Sounds like
a even trade to me. No eneed to overly complicate things. Simple is Good.
> 9) Strategically, a gunboat may make 4 FTL jumps before jump-engine
Why not link jumps to endurance. Such as, it costs 2 or 3 endurance points to
make a jump. That also allows for the interesting idea of: if we take on these
fighters or make this attack, then we won't have the fuel to get home.
> Just as an initial SWAG, I'm thinking that the points cost would be
Cost feels about right. I'd start at 24 and adjust according to playtest
results.
> On Thu, 18 Feb 1999, Sean Bayan Schoonmaker wrote:
> >1) Gunboats are grouped in flights of 4 (as opposed to 6 for
Possibly. However, doing so makes a gunboat group less efficient in
anti-shipping attacks than an equivalent fighter group. 3 gunboats = 6
dice beam attacks, 6 fighters = 6 dice beam attacks, with PDS having more
effect against the gunboat group than the fighters, since each PDS hit kills 2
dice worth of attacks against the gunboats.
Also, the K'rathri count in octal... <g>
> >3) Their base movement is 16 MU, and they get no secondary move.
I had it at 18 to start, then reduced it to 16 after mentally SWAG'ing the
effectiveness. Hey, that octal counting thing shows up again. [ducking]
[snip]
> >8) Gunboats ignore rolls of '4' when defending against fighters, PDS,
gunboats are
> >considerably sturdier than fighters, so fighter & PDS fire is less
Sounds
> like a even trade to me. No need to overly complicate things. Simple
Hmmm - I thought it *was* simple :). Fighters/PDS/Class 1 all hit
gunboats on
a roll of 5 or 6 (5=1 kill, 6=2 kills+RR). It's the same mechanism used
by the Heavy Fighters, but allows more hits from Class 1 PDS fire.
> >9) Strategically, a gunboat may make 4 FTL jumps before jump-engine
*VERY GOOD* suggestion - I like this a lot.
> >Just as an initial SWAG, I'm thinking that the points cost would be
Thanks for the feedback. BTW, are your FT campaign rules posted somewhere on
the web? If not, could you email me a copy please? TIA!
> On Thu, 18 Feb 1999, Jared E Noble wrote:
[snip]
> FTL fighters have been discussed before, but in a different context -
Yes, the point of implementing gunboats is for campaign style games -
something we're exploring at the present time. However, an additional reason
is to find an equivalent to the Wing Commander & Star Wars style of fighter,
as well as the Arachnid gunboat from Weber/White's In Death Ground.
Wing
Commander FTL fighters - the Broadsword, Excalibur, Goran, and others -
tend to be large, slow attack craft capable of launching a couple of
phase-torpedoes at ships. I was trying to capture the feel of these
types of fighters.
[snip]
> Well, you can't fit hull, drive, and a one-shot torp onto a torpedo
That is correct.
> >> 4) Their endurance factor is 12.
Sean made the same suggestion, which I will include in the next revision.
[snip]
> Or just a twin Fighter Beam Weapon (FBW)
Twin FBW is correct.
> >> 7) Each gunboat carries two 'torpedos' that may be used instead of
Since
> there is no different range specified for them, they keep the same 6"
Nope, the torpedo attacks were intended as an either/or. Even though I
was
envisioning the gunboats at being better than fighters for anti-shipping
attacks, allowing them to torp *and* fire in a single turn is probably giving
them way too big a hammer to play with... <g>
The reason I increased the to-hit on the torpedo runs was to offset the
reduced group size. Uncontested by PDS fire, a gunboat group can expect to
average 6.4 points of damage per attack using their beam weaponry (vs 4.8
pts/attack by a 6-fighter group). The torp attacks would average 7
points if
they hit on a 4+, or 9.3 points if they hit on a 3+.
Hmmm. Perhaps another way to balance the attack values is to make the
torpedos hit on a 4+, but allow the gunboats to launch either a single
or both torpedoes in a single attack. I'll have to cogitate on this a little
more.
> Personally I would prefer to replace the torpedoes with single-die
Could you run that one by me in detail, please? I haven't been on the list
that long.
> >> 8) Gunboats ignore rolls of '4' when defending against fighters,
Correct - I phrased that rather poorly.
[snip]
Thanks for the feedback.
> On Thu, 18 Feb 1999, -MWS- wrote:
> I'd like some opinions on what you'd all consider a "fair"
> Gunboats are large, FTL-capable fighters. They are capable of
> sounds like a starship to me, not a fighter. the point of fighters is
FTL fighters have been discussed before, but in a different context -
basically
they had almost negligible FTL endurance - enough to jump in from an
assembly point, allowing them to start the game on the board, and FTL out if
necessary, to be picked up by the carrier that also makes a single jump out.
The problem is that the FTL endurance concept only really becomes workable in
a
campaign style (or at least scenario-based) game. The gunboats, by not
requiring hangarage in the fleet, provides a potentially huge cost savings for
the capabilities it brings. (similar to the discussion on ground-based
fighters). Operationally they have a disadvantage of limited range, but you
won't normally see that, as it doesn't apply once you are on the FT playing
field...
I do not know of a good way to reconsile this.
> 2) They mass 3 each for hanger space requirements.
> hmm. i don't think you could get hull, drive, ftl, PDS, one-shot torps
Well, you can't fit hull, drive, and a one-shot torp onto a torpedo
fighter
either, except you can. (re-read that if it made no sense). If theses
are
constructed of fighter-class materials and systems, then maybe this is
doable. BTW, unless I totally missed something, the Gunboat has no PDS system,
just a
double-die Fighter Beam Weapon and the 2 single shot torpedoes.
> 4) Their endurance factor is 12.
But if you tied the FTL range to endurance (2-3 per jump perhaps), then
the 'usable' endurance changes dramatically, again though, this is at the
operational level.
> 6) A gunboat's 'beam' weapon uses 2 dice for its attack. This attack
Or just a twin Fighter Beam Weapon (FBW)
> 7) Each gunboat carries two 'torpedos' that may be used instead of
Actually, 2 loads for a torpedo fighter, with slightly better to-hit (I
think it
should be returned to the 4+ to-hit for Torpedo Fighters) Since there is
no different range specified for them, they keep the same 6" attack range as
normal fighters. however, the gunboat could presumably launch 1 torpedo and
fire its FBW at the same target in a single attack run.
Personally I would prefer to replace the torpedoes with single-die
sub-packs, as
Mike Wikan proposed may moons ago.
> 8) Gunboats ignore rolls of '4' when defending against fighters, PDS,
Yes, though I think it was defined this way to address the fact that PDS is
still capable of doing normal damage. PDS vs ships (the only targets
previously screenable) is 1 pt on a roll of 6, but against gunboats they are 1
on a 5, or 2 on a 6.
> Unlike fighters, however, Class 1 beams used for PDS get a
gunboats are
> considerably sturdier than fighters, so fighter & PDS fire is less
So is this opening up to where they can be targetted by other anti-ship
weapons?
they are half the size of a scout/courier type ship, though a bit more
maneuverable. But I don't really think we want to open that can of worms.
> 9) Strategically, a gunboat may make 4 FTL jumps before jump-engine
Nice touch with the fuel tanks, and yes, ships should have some sort of range
limitation, but again, that is Operational level and thus hard to pull into
the game with any form of consistency. Though refeuling seems to dictate the
they operate with a tender of some sort for all but the shortest missions
outside home territory.
> Just as an initial SWAG, I'm thinking that the points cost would be
> well, i think that might be a bit much stuff to pack into such a small
Well said in general, I may have to muse more on small craft construction.
> Possibly. However, doing so makes a gunboat group less efficient in
Remember the torpedo attacks make these quite different from fighters. The
beam weapons don't tell the entire story.
> I had it at 18 to start, then reduced it to 16 after mentally SWAG'ing
[ducking]
Ahem.
> Hmmm - I thought it *was* simple :). Fighters/PDS/Class 1 all hit
OK, then just delete the bit about more effective Class 1s and make them just
like heavy fighters for resolution.
It'll be interesting to see if they balance.
> -MWS- wrote:
> Greetings, all!
> 2) They mass 3 each for hanger space requirements.
So a GB bay is Mass 18 if you use them. Hm... Well, OK - you don't have
to use them, since the GBs can jump in themselves. Or are you thinking of
external GB racks here? <g>
> 3) Their base movement is 16 MU, and they get no secondary move.
Works OK if you use Vector movement, but it'd be pretty hard to catch my
ships in a Cinematic battle. (Using the GBs as a close-in screen might
work... might. I still have bad memories from battles between MT fighters
and ships racing around at speeds of 20-40 - if the fighters were lucky
they got a single shot off during an entire battle...)
> 4) Their endurance factor is 12.
Unless your opponent completely forgets to bring PDS, Class-1 batteries
or fighters, I'd be very suprised if they survive that long - especially
since they can't use secondary movement.
> 5) When engaged by fighters in a dogfight, gunboats always take
Ie, they always lose initiative - and worse, since they don't even
alternate fire in larger furballs. Ouch - you'd better not get hit by
enemy Interceptors :-/
> 6) A gunboat's 'beam' weapon uses 2 dice for its attack. This attack
> single target like fighters do.
> 7) Each gunboat carries two 'torpedos' that may be used instead of its
Similar to those of Torpedo fighters, but hits on a 3+ instead of on a
4+.
> 8) Gunboats ignore rolls of '4' when defending against fighters, PDS,
get a normal 2 kills + reroll when used against gunboats (rationale:
> gunboats are considerably sturdier than fighters, so fighter & PDS
OK.
> 9) Strategically, a gunboat may make 4 FTL jumps before jump-engine
gunboat's range by 2 jumps.
Depends completely on your background, of course.
> Just as an initial SWAG, I'm thinking that the points cost would be
between 80 and 120 points. Opinions, please?
Compared to a cost of on average 87 pts for a standard fighter squadron
(including fighter bay)... yes, 100 pts per squadron sounds reasonable
provided you don't have to pay for the GB bays.
Later,
What about using noble's fighter design rules, here is an exsamble:
Heavy Large 4 0
Long Range 3 2
Torp 4 2 Interceptor 2 2 15 points
-Stephen
I've been in agreement with most comments on the gunboats so far. I think it's
pushing the fighter miniaturization PSB to the limit.
Approach it another way: Think of a gunboat as a double fighter.
- Base cost of 6 per gunboat
- Gunboat takes 2 hangar spaces instead of 1. It can have 2 standard
weapons (Fighter Beam Weapons) or 1 FBW + Interceptor armament or 1
FBW+1torp or 2 torps, etc.
- Base cost is 6/gunboat, Heavy is +4, LR +2 etc. (just double the cost
per regular fighter mods).
- Say it has an endurance of 10, but using both weapons on attack chews
1 end each.
- It takes 2 hits from PDS and/or fighters to kill, 1 from Class 1's. If
hit by 1 PDS or fighter, The gunboat as a whole takes a threshold check. If it
fails, one system (drive, weapons, endurance, chosen randomly) is damaged.
Drive hit reduces move to 12", Weapon hit takes all wepons
offline, Endurance hit reduces endurance by 1/2 round up.
If you want to add FTL capability, add 1 more to bay space and +10 or so
points per boat for balance.
2 more Quatloos
> Yes, the point of implementing gunboats is for campaign style games -
Wing
> Commander FTL fighters - the Broadsword, Excalibur, Goran, and others -
In that respect, it feels like a good start on paper, please report how they
do in tests.
> Nope, the torpedo attacks were intended as an either/or. Even though I
Remember 'way too big a hammer to play with'? <g> I would prefer it to be a
2-shot system, rather than 2 1-shot systems. YMMV.
> Personally I would prefer to replace the torpedoes with single-die
Sent in a separate post - to recap, 2pts, ftr counts as laden while
carried, when fired does 1 die of damage that is scored as beams, but ignores
shields
(just like sub-packs)
> On Thu, 18 Feb 1999, Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
[snip]
> > 2) They mass 3 each for hanger space requirements.
This is more of a operational level concern, of course.:) For extended
deployments you'll want to use either orbital/system bases (system
hopping) or carriers as mobile support centers for the gunboats. Gunboat
pilots need someplace that they can bunk in comfort every now & then.
> > 3) Their base movement is 16 MU, and they get no secondary move.
You must be playing on the floor in a large room <g>. We're normally
restricted to a couple of store playing tables for area (4' x 8' or 4' x
12'),
and lately we've been playing on a single 4' x 6' Starscape map. Since we use
Cinematic movement at a scale of 1" = 1MU, any ship racing around at 20 or 40
tends to leave the table after a single turn...
> > 4) Their endurance factor is 12.
True, although I'm going to be incorporating Sean's suggestion of tying the
FTL range to endurance point usage - again an operational level concern.
If I
allow gunboats a secondary movement factor, it would be 1/2 the base
movement range just like fighters. This would give them an 8" secondary move.
I'll have to think about it.
> > 5) When engaged by fighters in a dogfight, gunboats always take
Very true, and a deliberate design decision. Fighters are simply murderous
when attacking gunboats.
[snip]
> > 9) Strategically, a gunboat may make 4 FTL jumps before jump-engine
Agreed. I was trying to specify the game mechanics so that both 'jump space'
and 'jump point' drives could be accommodated.
[snip]
> On Thu, 18 Feb 1999, Jared E Noble wrote:
> >On Thu, 18 Feb 1999, -MWS- wrote:
no, perfect sense. i reread it anyway in case i'd misunderstood and it
actually didn't make sense :-). i agree - fighters are not bound by the
same rules as ships, as i state further on.
> BTW, unless I totally missed something, the Gunboat has no PDS system,
PDS was an approximation to FBW; i don't think FBWs are listed as options for
ships, so i had to pick the closest thing.
> >> 4) Their endurance factor is 12.
good idea. i was thinking that a gunboat's endurance would have to last over
several battles, and so you'd only really get, say, 4 points per battle if you
were being careful.
Tom
> -MWS- wrote:
> Greetings, all!
(gunboat snippage!)
> Just as an initial SWAG, I'm thinking that the points cost would be
Sounds very interesting. I haven't had much experience with fighters yet, so
can't compair on that point. But it does bring a question to mind...
I take it, that the gunboats are smaller than the smallest possible ship using
the FB rules?
Could a larger ship carry some into battle? (IE battleriders, ect.)
> At 01:11 AM 2/19/99 -0500, you wrote:
[snip]
> Sounds very interesting. I haven't had much experience with fighters
Correct.
> Could a larger ship carry some into battle? (IE battleriders, ect.)
Bullet point 2 :) - gunboats mass 3 each for hanger bay space
calculations.
Since fighter/small craft/etc. bay space weighs 1.5 times the mass of
the
small craft carried, a single 4-group of gunboats (total mass 12) would
require an 18 mass hanger bay.
> -MWS- wrote:
> At 01:11 AM 2/19/99 -0500, you wrote:
would
> require an 18 mass hanger bay.
Thanks. (Duh....I must remember to push the memory modual in until it
clicks...)
> ===================================================================
I like the idea, but I think they are not survivable enough. If you made them
tougher, say 1 kill on a 5 or 6; plus a re-roll for 6's. This would be
for Class 1, PDS, standard fighter beams, and attack fighter beams. The
justification for the attack fighter beams is that they are better able to
deal with larger, slower, and heavier targets. Interceptor beams would do 1
kill on
a 4, 5, or 6; pluss a re-roll for 6's. They are better then other
fighters, but not excessively. Comments???