1,601

(16 replies, posted in Starmada)

PSYCO829 wrote:

Its possible that I also overdid it, the weapon in question was a 1/3+/3/3 that shot to 30 with Piercing +2, Continuing Damage, and Starship Exclusive. <.<

Considering this, I think it would be premature to blame it all on Continuing Damage... big_smile

Having said that, the fact that the Continuing Damage weapon always does a hull hit would suggest its multiplier should be at least x2. I should have kept my notes as to why we settled on x1.7...

1,602

(42 replies, posted in Starmada)

Finknottle wrote:

Coming from a loooooong Star Fleet Battles background, so that might taint my understanding, but, reading Klingon Armada, drones (strikers/fighters) are launched in the end phase, after movement. So, if launching w/in the speed (8) of the drones, there is no effective defence (except screens/shields)? Since starship weapons aren't fired until after the drones (strikers/fighters) have moved and fired? Am I reading this correctly?

Welcome, and yes, you are reading it correctly. The only (active) defense against drones fired from within a range of 8 is your own drones, fired in anti-drone mode -- and even that is a new concept for Starmada.

1,603

(60 replies, posted in Starmada)

I believe in the SFU ships are considered to be travelling at warp. They are able to leave combat by dropping out of warp -- sort of the opposite of the Starmada "hyperdrive".

1,604

(60 replies, posted in Starmada)

alchemist wrote:

...and I wish there was a PDF available for printing ship sheets.  In hindsight I should have ordered the loose page version of the book for easier photocopying although nothing beats printing the ships you need from a PDF.

Ask, and ye shall receive...

http://e23.sjgames.com/item.html?id=ADB6101-S

1,605

(16 replies, posted in Starmada)

murtalianconfederacy wrote:

I think perhaps looking at an EHD+Catastrophic weapon trait might be the best way to go. Or maybe outlaw the Cont. DMG+Catastrophic combination (I don't want to do that though, as it is a perfectly legal combination)

The Continuing Damage/Catastrophic combo is not under-costed as things stand... if anything, the problem is that Extra Hull Damage/Catastrophic is OVER-costed.

On the other hand, I am wondering if Continuing Damage by itself shouldn't be x2.0 instead of x1.7.

1,606

(16 replies, posted in Starmada)

underling wrote:

The other problem is that there are always those unscrupulous power weasels who simply try to find the most effective point combinations possible.
Not implying that anyone on this board would ever do that, though.

Well the good news is that, if anything, the one combination is too expensive -- that's always better than one that turns out to be too cheap. smile

1,607

(16 replies, posted in Starmada)

Continuing Damage + Catastrophic = on average 3.5 hull hits, plus 1 system hit. Multiplier = 5.95
Extra Hull Damage + Catastrophic = on average 2.75 hull hits, plus 0.5 system hits. Multiplier = 10.5

So, for 57% of the cost, you're increasing average hull damage by 27% and system damage by 100%. Sounds like a deal to me...

Hmm...

Off the top o' my head, one problem is that the traits are all based on a comparison with a baseline weapon that does 0.5 hull hits per impact point. So, Catastrophic has a multiplier of x3.5, since its average number of hull hits is 1.75, and Extra Hull Damage has a multiplier of x3, since it does an average of 1.5.

But we don't account for the "layering" of these two traits -- the two together only increase the average number of hull hits by 175%, but increase cost by 950%.

Another potential issue is that Continuing Damage MAY be under-costed...

1,608

(10 replies, posted in Starmada)

You appear to have an ORAT of 28 for each tractor beam: they should be 22, which would bring your ORAT total to 1325.

You're missing a DRAT of 4 for the probes (0.8 each), which would bring your total to 60.2

1325 x 60.2 = 79765^.5 = 282.4

1,609

(4 replies, posted in Discussion)

I deleted a semicolon from some php script. It has been returned, and all is well.

1,610

(42 replies, posted in Starmada)

OldnGrey wrote:

Dan,
Tractor Beams on page 33.
[Tractor beams may be used as "weapons" to deflect and/or disable fighter flights]
Does not elaborate on how. Is it a whole flight that is disabled? For how long?
Is a flight "hit" by a tractor beam deflected by one hex?

No. The "deflect and/or disable" bit is just fluff -- when used against fighters, tractor beams are a weapon like any other. When fired at a fighter flight, one fighter is destroyed with each hit.

It goes on to say that the tractor beam is treated as a weapon, traits include Fighter Exclusive but in the next paragraph states that it can be used against starships!
So, not fighter exclusive?

I had hoped the paragraph was pretty clear in its description that tractors used against starships do not operate as weapons -- hence the "fighter-exclusive" trait.

1,611

(5 replies, posted in Grand Fleets)

MadSeason wrote:

Actually, what we really need are those "missing" counters so I can make a vassal mod for Grand Fleets.  big_smile

Have you seen these?

http://www.cke1st.com/m_games4.htm

Scroll down to "All the Ships".

1,612

(5 replies, posted in Grand Fleets)

BUT, if you ask nicely, we might consider putting WW2 next on the list for supplements.

1,613

(3 replies, posted in Starmada)

No, the victor receives nothing. The idea is that the campaign is self-balancing; a scenario win gets you closer to ultimate victory, but it also weakens you for the next battle.

1,614

(60 replies, posted in Starmada)

Only Warlock wrote:

And I am looking at:
Future Legends (U.S.S. Kelvin and Klingon "One Wing")

I do not know these... do tell...

1,615

(0 replies, posted in Starmada)

Hopefully, this is a limited topic, but a few errors crept into Klingon Armada:

The following text was left out of section C4: Weapon Traits:

RANGE-BASED ROF*
A range-based ROF weapon has its ROF value decrease as the range to the target increases. When attacking a target at short range with such a weapon, its ROF value is tripled; when attacking a target at medium range, the ROF value is doubled.

At one point during playtesting, the space station ACC divisors (section B.17) were updated, but the change was never made to the text. The correct divisors are:

ACC 2+ = 2.1
ACC 3+ = 2.3
ACC 4+ = 2.7
ACC 5+ = 3.6
ACC 6+ = 6.5

A couple of errors were discovered in the computations used to determine point values for the included ships; however, the difference is very minor (an aggregate of -2.2%). We felt we should mention it since some players may try to recreate the ships and wonder why they get the "wrong" values.

The Federation Dreadnought should have four additional phaser-1s, with the following firing arcs: [GHI][GHI] [JKL][JKL]. This increases the ship's cost to 620, and changes the weapon damage chart to be: 1-3: XZ; 4-5: X; 6: Y.

The Kzinti Dreadnought should have three additional phaser-3s with the following arcs [ACEF][ACEF][ACEF]. This increases the ship's cost to 670, and the changes the weapon damage chart to be: 1: XY; 2-3: XZ; 4: YZ; 5-6: Y.

Finally, some of the first books had a glitch on a few of the starship data cards.

    Federation Heavy Cruiser:
    X Battery firing arcs should be [AC][AC] [BD][BD] [GHI][GHI] [JKL][JKL]

    Klingon D5:
    Z Battery firing arcs should be [CGHI][CGHI] [DGHI][DGHI]

    Klingon D5W:
    Z Battery firing arcs should be [CGHI][CGHI] [DGHI][DGHI]

    Kzinti Battlecruiser:
    Z Battery firing arcs should be [CGHI][CGHI] [DGHI][DGHI]

1,616

(60 replies, posted in Starmada)

Alex Knight wrote:

On both Federation Heavy Cruisers, the Battery X arcs are listed as [AC] [AC] [BD] [BD] [GHI] [GHI] and then there are some unreadable characters printed after the second [GHI].  Are there additional weapon arcs that were garbled in printing?

The books I have are printed correctly. Hopefully this was a limited glitch.

1,617

(42 replies, posted in Starmada)

bekosh wrote:

1) Tractor Beam isn't listed in the Construction Modifiers chart. Would it be correct to calculate it out as a 6 arc weapon?

Yes.

2) The official ships appear to use more SU's than their hull size would indicate. Were they designed using Tech levels greater than 0? Or were they designed ignoring the overage?

They were designed to match their capabilities in SFB/FC.

3) When firing the Probe as a weapon, does it have a specific firing arc? Or is it 360º?

They have an ABCDEF firing arc.

1,618

(42 replies, posted in Starmada)

ToddW wrote:

Did I figure it correctly.

Yes, you did... IF shuttles were considered normal "dual-mode" fighters. They are not -- they may select one of two modes at the time of launch, so they are different. I arbitrarily set the value at 3 'cause I can. smile

1,619

(42 replies, posted in Starmada)

seldon wrote:

BTW, little thing we noticed.
Range Based Rate of Fire trait is not on the Klingon Armada book. We have SAE so not a problem for us, but wouldn't you want to put an errata out there for the people new to the rules starting just with Klingon Armada given that is used by the main phaser weapons?

Poo. I thought we'd managed to get by without any errata. (Like that was really going to happen...)

Also on the ship info page ( pg 35), it says that the new jersey class has 6 torpedoes but can only fire 4 at a time. There is no rule about this, is this a mistake, is this simply fluff that does not affect the starmada version due to the length of the turn or is there something I am missing ?

No, this is just "fluff" that does not affect gameplay.

1,620

(42 replies, posted in Starmada)

seldon wrote:

So it is ok to fire in regular mode and then fire in overload mode the next turn, it is just that after that I need to spend one turn reloading, and this is the standard for any weapons that has slow firing in one of the two modes, correct?

Correct.

1,621

(60 replies, posted in Starmada)

I will try to remember and let ADB know of the problem.

1,622

(42 replies, posted in Starmada)

seldon wrote:

Anti drone fire... If a ship is attack by drones during the fighter phase only drones used on anti drone mode can defend the ship, any other weapons can only attack the drones during the regular starship combat phase. This means that if drones are released in the end of phase if they are able to reach the target in one turn they will never be attacked except by drones in anti drone mode. Correct ?

Correct.

Also in regular starmada this would render anti fighter batteries useless against seekers or strikers cause when they get to 1 hex they attack and go away before the starship combat phase. Is this correct ?

Yes.

Another question. Dual modes and Slow Firing. If I fire torpedoes on turn 4 on standard mode ) I still cannot fire them on overload ( slow firing ) on turn 5. To fire in overload ( slow firing ) I need to not have fired the weapon in any mode the previous turn and not fire it on the following turn ( also in any mode ). Is this correct?

You actually have it backwards -- the slow-firing does not have an effect until the turn AFTER the weapons are fired in overload mode.

Thanks... next time we play we'll take pictures...

Please do!

1,623

(2 replies, posted in Miniatures)

Aren't those FASA minis?

1,624

(60 replies, posted in Starmada)

Blacklancer99 wrote:

Just a quick question regarding Probes. Are they launched singly as part of the seeker launch phase, singly as an expendable weapon, or can any number of probes be launched as expendable weapons. My instinct is to go with option #2, but I'm just a little fuzzy (I need things explicitely spelled out I guess  :oops: )
Thanks,
Erik

AS they are treated as single-shot direct-fire weapons, any nu,ber can be launched in a turn.

1,625

(10 replies, posted in Starmada)

RobinStirzaker wrote:

Where is Klingon Armada available in PDF?

It is not currently available in PDF form.