I can't help it. I tried to avoid designing ships based on that show, but it
keeps sucking me in. Besides, I have lots of miniatures used for SFB, SFBM,
and STTCS (Fasa's); and many people like the show as well.
So here is my ideas about representing some ST ships and a new system I'd like
to add; it, or something similar, may have been suggested already.
How about shielded "armor"? It would represent the degrading effects of
shields as seen in the show and is also repairable in combat. Treat as armor
except that it costs 3 points, it also must precede any regular armor on the
armor row. It would also provide some shielding vs photon torpedoes (pulse
torpedoes) and the occassional missile. The symbol would be a circle, just
like armor, with an 'S' inside.
Another thought for lack of fighters and why missiles do not seem to be a
threat: any "phaser" (beams, no matter the class) can shoot at fighters and
missiles.
Here are my concepts for ST style ships, I didn't use my shielded armor idea.
Pulse torpedo = photon torpedo (that was easy).
Class-3 beam weapon = disruptor (wait until I'm done).
Heavy phaser = class-2 beam, light phaser = class-1.
Btw, I've only considered the Federation and Klingons; very few fighters or
missiles are used (they are rarely seen in ST).
Feds use level-2 screens on cruisers and larger, Klingons use
only level-1. This would give the Fed ships more staying power
since the Klingons' main weapon is treated as a beam weapon. Feds use more
armor, Klingons prefer more weapons (I kept all hull strengths as Average).
Fed ships' thrust speed is 4, Klingons' is 6. But I have a dilemma: I'm in the
middle of designing a
Klingon DN and I'm torn between the thrust-6 or thrust-4 with a
lot more weapons (+2 disruptors with 120 degree arcs, +2
heavy phasers, and +2 armor). The little bit of Klingon in me
says "more weapons!". :) Or should I stay with the thrust-6?
This is a DN, afterall, used more for brute strength that positioning.
So, I'll provide my list of ship designs.
Fed CA, 84 mass, 282 points. Thrust-4, average strength hull,
level-2 screens, 7 armor, 3 FC, 2 PDS (or should be 2 class-1s?),
2 pulse torpedoes, 3 class-2s with 180 degree arcs each.
Klingon D7, 80 mass, 262 points. Thrust-6, average strength hull,
level-1 screens, 4 armor, 2 FC, 2 class-3s with 60 degree arcs
(disruptors), 2 class-2s with 180 degree arcs, 2 class-1s.
(PDS? bah, defenses are for losers)
Why? The Fed CA is tougher than the Klingon D7 which it seems to be shown in
the show (TOS). But the Klingons make up for it with the smaller ships I
designed (and why you see more of them,
besides the sfx costs). I tried putting class-3s on the Fed CA
as that main phasers but couldn't get them to fit properly.
One class-3 didn't seem to be enough, and 2 with 180 degree
arcs was just too much mass. Also, I liked reserving the class-3
as a disruptor and keeping phasers to class-2s and class-1s.
Fed DD, 44 mass, 148 points. Thrust-4, average strength hull,
level-1 screens, 4 armor, 2 FC, 1 PDS, 1 pulse torpedo, 2 class-2s
with 180 degree arcs of fire.
Klingon Bird of Prey, 48 mass, 157 points. Thrust-6, average
strength hull, level-1 screens, 4 armor, 2 FC, 1 class-3 (60 degrees),
2 class-1s.
Looks like the DD might have an edge, but the class-2s only overlap
in the F arc. So if the BoP can maneuver to the side then the firepower is
even. And if the BoP can maneuver so its main
weapon bears but the DD's does not, well.. good-bye DD. Yeah,
the reverse is true but the BoP has a little more manueverability.
I tried to make the BoP 10 more points than the DD so that a
Fed force of a CA + 2 DDs vs a Klingon force of a D7 + 2 BoPs
would be even in points.
I've designed a Fed DN: 180 mass, 602 points, double weaponry &
PDS on the CA and add a class-2 (360) + 2 class-1s, 13 armor.
No missiles for the Klingons, you ask? Get that SFB influence out of your
mind.
> YES! _Thank_ you! The thing that always pissed me off the most
Hear hear...that and adding fighters to a (at the time) purely cap ship
background. ADB diediedie.
On Tue, 29 Jun 1999 09:16:23 -0400 Glen Bailey <Glen.Bailey@sabre.com>
wrote:
> I can't help it. I tried to avoid designing ships based on that show,
Don't we all... I have well over a hundred myself.
> ...and many people like the show as well. <
It's also a good way to get potential players interested. ST got me into FT,
and I plan to use it for some ST participation games at a forthcoming SF con
here in Bristol.
> Here are my concepts for ST style ships, I didn't use my shielded
Class-3 beam weapon = disruptor (wait until I'm done).
Heavy phaser = class-2 beam
Light phaser = class-1. <
Don't like the long-range disruptors. Maybe I'm overly influenced by
previous games, but I always had the feeling that disruptors were
shorter-range weapons.
> So, I'll provide my list of ship designs.
> Fed CA, 84 mass, 282 points. Thrust-4, average strength hull,
Why the PDS/class-1's? We know what and where the CA's weapons are, and
they're not there. Unless the "defensive systems" represent the ability
to use the phasers in a defensive, rapid-fire mode, which would be more
in keeping with what we saw on screen.
> Klingon D7, 80 mass, 262 points. Thrust-6, average strength hull,
> Why? The Fed CA is tougher than the Klingon D7 which it seems to be
There's not that much difference between the 2 -- 4 mass, 20 points.
Not a lot from which to say that the CA is a better ship. I'd do something
different to represent the disruptors and downgrade the design as a whole to
something like 250 points or less.
> No missiles for the Klingons, you ask? Get that SFB influence out of
YES! _Thank_ you! The thing that always pissed me off the most
regarding SFB was the was in which Steve Cole took a small design detail from
a set of blueprints and blew it up into a system which more or less took over
the entire game (and ruined it, IMO). Those drones
supposedly located in the D-7's shuttle bay were meant to be practice
targets, not semi-active missiles!
Phil
> Tim Jones wrote:
> >YES! _Thank_ you! The thing that always pissed me off the most
/Rant Mode ON/
My biggest annoyance with the entire SFB peaple at Taskforce, was in one of
the old Nexus mags, Someone had asked why did his favorite race allways gets
trashed by the
favorite race of another player. He was told that "Using non-historical
opponents violates the "implied" warrenty, and they (the ADB) was not
responsible for what happens when players don't play the game the way it was
intended."
What a closed minded attitude!
Sometime after that, I stopped trying to keep up with the latest versions of
SFB, because they were allways messing with the rules!
/Rant Mode OFF/
> Donald Hosford wrote:
> What a closed minded attitude!
I had a rule added because I was in a campaign with one of the
better known playtesters. I was Klingon and stripped Komania
of 250 fighters with 2 D-7s and 4 D-6s.
The HOW TO: I cranked the ECM up to 6, and the fighters could not get a
lock on my ships. With a series of passes, I beamed the pilots
aboard the ships (dropped the aft shield in passing), and had my security
teams 'take care' of any problems. I enjoyed it!
Bye for now,
> John Leary wrote:
> I had a rule added because I was in a campaign with one of the
Gads! Sounds clever! Was the other player peeved?
What was the rule? (I never used ECM, we always wanted to get down to trashing
the other guy's ships...)
About the fanciest thing I ever did in SFB, was to trash a Klingon F5 with a
Gorn DD!
For that battle, was supposed to be the first battle of a very simple campain.
(Every battle, you could spend a few more points on improvements. Hehehe, we
never got to the rest of it...)
He upgraded his P2's to P1's, and upgraded his Drone rack so it could fire
every turn. I just bought an additional G torp. (I assumed it would have the
same arc as the the original.) I then spent the whole game (about 4 turns)
traveling at about speed 4. (this gave me a turn
mode of 1 -- I could allways keep my #1 shield towards him!) and
specificly reenforced the #1 shield. He was using "Traditional Klingon
Tactics". (Basiclly, charge across the board and trash the plasma armed ship,
before it could fire. If I had charged into battle like that, my ship would
have been trashed!)
I used long-ranged phaser shots to kill his drones. We exchanged phaser
fire every turn. He spent the game travelling at speed 10+ When we
closed on turn 3, I fired one plasma torp into his #6 shield. It blew the
shield away, and did several internals. He realized he was in danger, and
proceeded to whip around me at 2 hexs distance. I fired my other torp on turn
4, blowing out his #5 shield, and doing more internals. At that point, he
dumped everything into warp, and left the map before I could recharge my
plasma torps.
After the battle, he was amazed. His ship was a total cripple, and mine had
only lost 4 boxs on the forward shield. Those little Gorn ships can be a real
bear to "Traditional Klingon Tactics".
> Donald Hosford wrote:
> > Bye for now,
XXXX
What a nice polite way of putting it. JTL
XXX
> What was the rule?
XXX
Oops! Knew I forgot something.
The addition/correction states that no person may be beamed
off a ship/fighter without the permission of the person (player)
about to be beamed.
Bye for now,
> The addition/correction states that no person may be beamed
see total pants, if your shields are down you fair game to beaming.
> Tim Jones wrote:
Well, it was a number of years ago. The rule may have been
changed again, again, again...
:-)
Bye for now,
> John Leary wrote:
> > Gads! Sounds clever! Was the other player peeved?
I bet that room had an elevated temperature for a while! 8-D
> XXX