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

Topic: Romulan Armada - Errata?

I suppose there is an error on the Gorn CC ship sheet, as the plasma S should have the following fire arcs: GIK GHJ instead of GIK GJL.

BTW, I was wondering some things that seem weird. Why 'fast' ships are not necessarily faster than their 'slower' counterparts.. For example, the klingon fast D7 and the D7 have the same engine rating. Same thing for the Gorn. Also, the same gorn BC is describved as almost maneuvrable as a brick, but has better engines than a fed CA, and the same engine rating as a D7 which is fairly maneuvrable.
Also, why the fed CL (old design) doesn't have 'armor plating' as it is considered to have some armour?

Marc

  • Registered: 2005-11-02
  • Posts: 130

Re: Romulan Armada - Errata?

I thought the fast ships should be a BIT faster smile

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: Romulan Armada - Errata?

madpax wrote:

I suppose there is an error on the Gorn CC ship sheet, as the plasma S should have the following fire arcs: GIK GHJ instead of GIK GJL.

You are correct.

BTW, I was wondering some things that seem weird. Why 'fast' ships are not necessarily faster than their 'slower' counterparts.. For example, the klingon fast D7 and the D7 have the same engine rating. Same thing for the Gorn. Also, the same gorn BC is describved as almost maneuvrable as a brick, but has better engines than a fed CA, and the same engine rating as a D7 which is fairly maneuvrable.

All ships have engine ratings based on the amount of power available in SFB/FC.

Also, why the fed CL (old design) doesn't have 'armor plating' as it is considered to have some armour?

Again, Starmada stats are based on an analysis of SFB/FC characteristics... The amount of armor in relation to the overall number of damage boxes just doesn't merit use of the Armor Plating trait, IMHO.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2009-12-10
  • Posts: 30

Re: Romulan Armada - Errata?

Perhaps the fast trait of ships like the NCF could be useful if we ever see a Star Fleet Universe take on The Sovereign Stars?

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

Re: Romulan Armada - Errata?

cricket wrote:

All ships have engine ratings based on the amount of power available in SFB/FC.

I'm surprised you said that because AFAIK, all ships in FC have more or less the same engine ratings, enough to move at max speed. But FC movement doesn't work like starmada's. In the former, the speed doesn't generate momentum and can be easily different each turn. You can move at max speed one turn, at 0 speed the next.
Also, what is speed in FC is maneuvrability in starmada.
In fact, AFAIK again, there is not really a 'fast' ship in FC.
In the end, fast and non-fast ships should have the same engine rating, but I can see that small ships have a 7 engine rating where as medium to big ships have a 4  to 6.

Another thing about ship design, mainly to understand the basis of design. I can see that F5 and E4 have shorter ranged disruptors. Although in FC all disruptors have the same range, I can understand why it is not so in starmada. But why small kzinti ships dsruptors doesn't have the same reduction of range?

Marc

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: Romulan Armada - Errata?

madpax wrote:

Another thing about ship design, mainly to understand the basis of design. I can see that F5 and E4 have shorter ranged disruptors. Although in FC all disruptors have the same range, I can understand why it is not so in starmada. But why small kzinti ships dsruptors doesn't have the same reduction of range?

This is not true. All disruptors do not have the same range in FC --  those on the F5/E4 are explicitly limited to range 15.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

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

Re: Romulan Armada - Errata?

Sorry, a bad assumption for me. :oops:

Marc

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

Re: Romulan Armada - Errata?

Another one.
Fasthawk: For its  Phaser 1, it should have either  3 x ABC either 2 x ABD. As the firehawwk seems to be the same shuipe with two plasma F replacing ph-1, then the fasthawk should 3 ph-1 with ABC fire arc.
Same as the Gorn CC, the Fasthawk Plasma S fire arc GJL should be replaced by GHJ.

Marc

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

Re: Romulan Armada - Errata?

Sorry, I have again some errata, to be confirmed, of course:

The KR Ph 2 should have twice the CE DF fire arcs  or something approaching, instead of frontal arcs.

KRC PL-S  and -F fire arcs should be GHJ GIK. idem for novahawk and Royalhawk PL-F

Marc

  • Registered: 2005-04-25
  • Posts: 39

Re: Romulan Armada - Errata?

The fast ships in both klingon armada and romulan armada have always been a bit of an issue with me.  They are faster in FC because they have slightly more engines AND half the heavy weapons of their slower counterparts.  The end result is more power to spend on speed and thus in combat they are considerably faster, often able to keep 24+ speed with weapons armed. 

I think when they were converted to starmada that probably only the engine total was taken into account and while slightly better than the average cruiser its not enough to warrant a speed increase...  but when you take the ships energy curve with its reduced weapons load out into account it should definitely be at least one faster than the average cruiser.

Just my 2 cents.   

Alchemist

  • Registered: 2009-11-11
  • Posts: 20

Re: Romulan Armada - Errata?

I agree that it seems "off" that the fast ships aren't actually faster or in some way more maneuverable than the regular ships.

Would it be possible to get alternate versions (with an added point engine rating) for the fast ships? ADB has already shown a willingness to put updated ship cards on their site.