• Registered: 2010-12-22
  • Posts: 2

Topic: SFU Fighters and PFs

I'm working on Star Fleet Universe Fighters and PF ships.  I think it will be some time, if ever, that we get them officially as they aren't used in FC (except for Hydrans).  Since I'm new to Starmada I have a few questions.  I have both the core rules and the Rules Annex.

1.  Dual-mode fighters.  If the Fighter has a dual-mode of Striker is the unit removed from the board after it uses the Striker mode?  I thought no, but it is one-use.

2.  Dual-mode fighters.  If the Fighter has a second fighter mode, is that mode able to be used multiple times?  Yes?

3.  Creating PFs.  Help?  PFs are the quintessential eggshells armed with hammers.  I thought the flotilla rules would best reflect  that, but flotillas are so small that none of the weapon systems will fit inside.  Would playing with Tech Levels help that out or should I redesign the weapons for PFs?  Maybe a really tough Fighter flight would best represent them.

Thanks for the advise!

  • Registered: 2008-12-22
  • Posts: 654

Re: SFU Fighters and PFs

I'm working on Star Fleet Universe Fighters and PF ships.  I think it will be some time, if ever, that we get them officially as they aren't used in FC (except for Hydrans).  Since I'm new to Starmada I have a few questions.  I have both the core rules and the Rules Annex.

1.  Dual-mode fighters.  If the Fighter has a dual-mode of Striker is the unit removed from the board after it uses the Striker mode?  I thought no, but it is one-use.

If the striker mode of the DMF is used, it cannot be used again, but the flight remains on the board.

2.  Dual-mode fighters.  If the Fighter has a second fighter mode, is that mode able to be used multiple times?  Yes?

My understanding is that fighters can be designed with a second weapon that is not a Striker mode weapon, and therefore can be used again.

3.  Creating PFs.  Help?  PFs are the quintessential eggshells armed with hammers.  I thought the flotilla rules would best reflect  that, but flotillas are so small that none of the weapon systems will fit inside.  Would playing with Tech Levels help that out or should I redesign the weapons for PFs?  Maybe a really tough Fighter flight would best represent them.

Personally, I never really liked PFs. That aside, the problem in making them tough fighter flights is that you lose their weapon's range. Tech levels seem to be what the designers used to make the designs of the SFU ships "fit".  It might also be possible to "tone down" or tweak the weapons suite of a PF (PF-classed weapons with equivalent damage damage and effects but shorter range?) to get something that is representative without being a 100% accurate conversion. Personally I find that the construction mechanics of Starmada a great for finding "broken designs" from other systems. This usually occurs with over-gunned ships done without a construction mechanic other than, "hey this looks cool!"
Hope this helps a little.
Cheers,
Erik

  • Registered: 2010-12-22
  • Posts: 2

Re: SFU Fighters and PFs

Thanks for the clarification on the fighters.  Works the way I thought it did, but it is good to have a second opinion to that effect.

Blacklancer99 wrote:

Personally, I never really liked PFs. That aside, the problem in making them tough fighter flights is that you lose their weapon's range. Tech levels seem to be what the designers used to make the designs of the SFU ships "fit". It might also be possible to "tone down" or tweak the weapons suite of a PF (PF-classed weapons with equivalent damage damage and effects but shorter range?) to get something that is representative without being a 100% accurate conversion. Personally I find that the construction mechanics of Starmada a great for finding "broken designs" from other systems. This usually occurs with over-gunned ships done without a construction mechanic other than, "hey this looks cool!"

Over-gunned is the definition of a PF!

I liked carriers better than PF tenders.  I'm being completionist with my plans.  It is a bad habit of mine. 

Most PFs had shorter range weapons.  Disruptors topped out at 10 hexes and phasers at 15.  I'll have to play with it once the holidays are over. 

I don't suppose there is a discussion of what tech each race/ship used to make it "fit"?

Chris

  • Registered: 2010-03-09
  • Posts: 630

Re: SFU Fighters and PFs

AFAIK, all races in SFU-adapted to Starmada use tech 1.
Could you give us an example of a PF in terms of equipment, please?
I don't remember how they looked like.

Marc

  • Registered: 2008-12-22
  • Posts: 654

Re: SFU Fighters and PFs

Over-gunned is the definition of a PF!

And thus my dislike  wink

I played around with the Klingon G1 and found that while, as you said, you can't do them as Flotillas, you can make them as Hull 1 ships pretty well. Maybe just build them as Hull 1 ships and use Flotilla rules?
Just a thought.
Erik

  • Registered: 2008-12-22
  • Posts: 654

Re: SFU Fighters and PFs

madpax wrote:

AFAIK, all races in SFU-adapted to Starmada use tech 1.
Could you give us an example of a PF in terms of equipment, please?
I don't remember how they looked like.

Marc

For example a basic Klingon G1 PF has a Disruptor, 2 Phaser 2's, 2 Drone Racks, an Anti-Drone rack, a Transporter, one marine, and one shuttle. I found that I could comfortably make it a hull 1 ship if I dropped the drones to 1 rack and halved the range of the energy weapons. As they are classified as "Nimble" I included Overthrusters.
Chees,
Erik

  • Registered: 2010-03-09
  • Posts: 630

Re: SFU Fighters and PFs

Blacklancer99 wrote:

For example a basic Klingon G1 PF has a Disruptor, 2 Phaser 2's, 2 Drone Racks, an Anti-Drone rack, a Transporter, one marine, and one shuttle.

The disruptor should be range 9, maybe without the overload possibility, and Ph-2 could be downgraded to range 9 also.

Marc

  • Registered: 2010-12-25
  • Posts: 30

Re: SFU Fighters and PFs

My thought on PF's is that they need a new ship trait that reflects the fact that these ships have very limited combat duration and don't have any (much?) of their hull space taken up with crew quarters, supply storage, etc.  Consequently these should have more available systems space for a given hull size than a fully autonomous ship.  This would require that they be accompanied by a tender which would have the opposite trait - having less available system space than normal since the tender also carries crew space and stores for the PF's.

Brian

  • Registered: 2008-12-22
  • Posts: 654

Re: SFU Fighters and PFs

bcantwell wrote:

My thought on PF's is that they need a new ship trait that reflects the fact that these ships have very limited combat duration and don't have any (much?) of their hull space taken up with crew quarters, supply storage, etc.  Consequently these should have more available systems space for a given hull size than a fully autonomous ship.  This would require that they be accompanied by a tender which would have the opposite trait - having less available system space than normal since the tender also carries crew space and stores for the PF's.

Brian

Yeah, there is a bit of a black hole for PFs/Battle Riders/LACs in the rules, especially for campaign play. Maybe a trait something like "Deep Space" for ships that have the "legs" for interstallar travel. If you make it independent of Hyperdrive, for settings where that would apply, then ships with both a Hyperdrive and Deep Space Capability would lose space that couldn't be used for offensive or defensive systems. On the flip side, a PF type vessel without the hyperdrive and Deep Space capability have proportionally greater volume that can be used for purely tactical systems. Add in a Tender Trait for moving them around, and that should about cover it. I'm hoping that Cricket will come out with a canon version for Starmada, maybe in the process of doing the Andromedan ships from the SFU stuff. Starmada is already very good at most stuff from lots of settings and large, non-fighter sub-craft is one area that I think is a bit lacking.
Cheers,
Erik

  • Registered: 2010-12-19
  • Posts: 1

Re: SFU Fighters and PFs

bcantwell wrote:

My thought on PF's is that they need a new ship trait that reflects the fact that these ships have very limited combat duration and don't have any (much?) of their hull space taken up with crew quarters, supply storage, etc.  Consequently these should have more available systems space for a given hull size than a fully autonomous ship.  This would require that they be accompanied by a tender which would have the opposite trait - having less available system space than normal since the tender also carries crew space and stores for the PF's.

Brian

Why not just adjust the Tech Levels appropriately to achieve the desired result? Whether doing away with crew quarters and supply storage or utilizing advanced technology, the end result is fitting more stuff in a given hull size. At the tactical level, the difference is really just fluff.

Adam