[ACTA/SFB] Federation Ship Names

[LimeyDragon]

I have some questions about ship names and class.

I have made a list of ship names that i plan on using. I thought it would be a good idea to have all the names that i have chosen to match any ship that SFB currently has listed in there starship name registry. So far i have 7 of them that do match. But my issues is some of the ship names do not have defined models. I am needing help either to ID them or figure out what they are under ACTA:SF ..

Ship name Ship Class NCC
Agamemnon DDE Destroyer Escourt 0545
Ajax DDE Destroyer Escourt 0548
Defence NCL New Light Cruiser 1531 <<<Kearsage per SF main book
Defiance CA Heavy Cruiser 1717 << Constitution per SF main book
Mars BB Battleship 2152
Neptune DDE Destroyer Escourt 563
Sirius DDE Destroyer Escourt 564


AS you can see from above most are Destroyer Escourts, which at this time i have no idea what ship/model would represent one.

 

[ctchapel]

Destroyer escorts use the Saladin class hulls, which are not being sold at this time. You could cut up a cruiser to make one since it is a saucer and dorsal connecter with the warp engine where the engineering hull would be.

 

[Iain McGhee]

The DDE is basically the Franz Joseph "lollipop" destroyer (the Saladin saucer and single nacelle design). Just has a different weapons fit. Even when the DDs do appear, they'll have to be sold as part of a "Franz Joseph starships" box due to licencing (including the CA, DN, DD, Scout and tug). There isn't a direct equivalent in the current SL 2500 range, although the war destroyers (DW) which replaced the DD are available.

The battleship won't appear until late next year from what I've read, along with the next rulebook. It looks like a larger dreadnought with 4 nacelles. The NCL should appear along with the reinforcement box in a few months.

 

[scoutdad]

Or you could use Starline 2400 DDs for your DDE's.
They would be a bit small although even withthe size increase, I think the DD saucer would be larger than the Starline 2500 frigate saucer.

You can get them 2 to a pack HERE!. Although this pack comes with two different saucer types, one plain suacer for the DDG and a more detailed saucer for the DDL. The inscribed DDL saucer would make a good substitute for the DDE.

And I personally no someone who has a couple dozen of those saucers sitting in his bits box that he might be persuaded to part company with. :wink:

 

[LimeyDragon]

Well thanks for all the info guys..

@ctchapel
I'd love to kit bash one, but i'm still waiting on my first round of models..

@Iain McGhee
Sweet, so at this point beyond the escourts, it's just a waiting game for the next book.

@scoutdad
Ahh, this idea is better than cutting up a ship i don't have yet.. So what kind of persuasion is needed to aquire a couple of those...?


So from what i have learned. i should go ahead an do the rest of my ships up and skip the current names that do not have models yet, excluding what ever i can kitbash...

 

[scoutdad]

PM inbound

 

[Nomad]

Why are you concentrating on DDEs rather than mainline DDs?

DDEs are specialist carrier escorts that won't appear in ACTA until carriers and fighters do, and there are no plans to do that in the near future.

I'd suggest using the standard DD (same miniature, more Photons, no cheesy Federation gatling phasers) instead, or just the War Destroyer which has an existing miniature and is generally regarded as a better ship.

 

[Rambler]

Nomad I don't thinking it is a case oh he is picking Destroyer Escorts so much as the names he wants are DEs.

But remember there is nothing stopping you from repurposing thosenames on to War Destroyers or even Texas class cruisers. They are both comparable hulls and most SFB guys wouldn't even break a sweat over it seeing as it may be a while before we see lollipop DDs.

 

[LimeyDragon]

Why are you concentrating on DDEs rather than mainline DDs?

DDEs are specialist carrier escorts that won't appear in ACTA until carriers and fighters do, and there are no plans to do that in the near future.

I'd suggest using the standard DD (same miniature, more Photons, no cheesy Federation gatling phasers) instead, or just the War Destroyer which has an existing miniature and is generally regarded as a better ship.

Not worried about the ships them selves.. Just the names.. I like to have the names i choose match any existing fluff....

 

[scoutdad]

That's right.
Yall let him but decals for whatever name he wants to use for his ships.
After all, they are his and I'm sure he can find a decal vendor to help out...
After he finds a few extra CC suacers to convert into impromptue DDEs.

 

[Sgt_G]

Nomad I don't thinking it is a case of he is picking Destroyer Escorts so much as the names he wants are DEs.

But remember there is nothing stopping you from repurposing thosenames on to War Destroyers or even Texas class cruisers. They are both comparable hulls and most SFB guys wouldn't even break a sweat over it seeing as it may be a while before we see lollipop DDs.

History backs him up, I do believe. I can't think of any examples off the top of my head, but I'll bet one could find names for WW-1 light cruisers that were given to battleship (or destoryers, or subs) in WW-2 or cold-war era navies.

I very much doubt any SFB player is going to care what names he puts on his ships. Oh, there's a couple names that should ONLY go on Heavy Cruiser. But that's not an SFB thing -- that's a Trekie thing. ;-)

Edit: Oh, hey! Wasn't the name of class-type in the TV show about a starship flung to the far side of the galaxy the same as the name of a cruiser that got eaten by some space germ? Yet another precident to "allow" him to name his ships whatever he wants.

 

[Nomad]

Oh it wasn't the *names* that concerned me.

The Royal Navy had, what, four Ark Royals, all notably different, over the last century or so.

But from past experience, the thought of a group of carrier escorts - which, due to the perversity of the SFU can sometimes be much better combat ships than their 'line' sisters - running around with no carrier to actually *escort* did rather alarm me.

I accept that was not the OP's intention, but I do know gamers who will try that (it's me, but on a really bad day)