Fleet Update #1 and Other Star Fleet News

[MongooseMatt]

We have just posted Fleet Update #1, a free supplement for A Call to Arms: Star Fleet. This exciting issue contains some valuable additons for all fleets, including Escorts and the latest descriptions of the laest ships, such as the Federation Mars-class Battleship and Klingon E5 Corvette. In all, 19 new ships have been added to the game!

You can grab a copy at http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/pdf/fleetupdate1.pdf

You can also pick up the latest ships, such as the Gettysburg Heavy Command Cruiser, Light Raiding Dreadnought, F5W War Destroyer and OK6 Converted Cruiser at;

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/miniatures/ctastarfleet.html?dir=desc&order=position

Finally, we have posted the first of a set of reference sheets on Wargame Vault. The first pack covers the Gorn fleet, and comes complete in two formats; card/smart phone and printed/tablet. You can find a copy at;

http://www.wargamevault.com/product/110079/Star-Fleet%3A-Gorn-Reference-Cards

 

[AdmiralGrafSpee]

Thanks Matt, looks great. Love the New Jersey and the shock rule. I fear the Fed DWE, but fortunately I'm the only one in my play group with one so I guess instead they will fear me

 

[archon96]

Can you look at the points on the New Jersey class, its ten points cheaper then the Gettysburg and is far superior even with the shock effect added.

 

[Greg Smith]

The rulebook one was errata'd to the same cost as the Kirov. This shouldn't be too much different.

 

[scoutdad]

Can you look at the points on the New Jersey class, its ten points cheaper then the Gettysburg and is far superior even with the shock effect added.

The points value of the BCJ was discussed a couple of times during updating... this is one of those things where we were of differeing opinions, so the value listed is what was printed. Once some reports start coming in, we'll know if it needs changing (and which way) before final versions are released in aCTASF2.

 

[Greg Smith]

Looking at the OK6, I'm guessing the Unique trait should be in italics.

 

[Allerka]

Guess I got more stuff to add to my reference cards.

Also, I don't see where Shock is explained.

 

[Nerroth]

Also, I don't see where Shock is explained.

On the bottom of the last page.

 

[Allerka]

Ahh hah! Thanks!

 

[Totenkopf]

will scouts be included in a future update?

 

[Rambler]

will scouts be included in a future update?

Scouts were already published in the A Call to Arms Journal 1 on Wargamevault.com and ADB's Captain's Log 45.

 

[Da Boss]

There are........issues with the current Scout rules and as I understand it they are undergoing a process of revision.

 

[billclo]

There are........issues with the current Scout rules and as I understand it they are undergoing a process of revision.

Um yes. I wasn't impressed with them the one time I tried them out. Too easy for equal EW factor scouts to cancel each other out, net result being wasted points on a scout when you could have had a standard warship for less points.

Now if you can afford a small scout in addition to the main scout, and the enemy only has one scout, then they become more useful.

 

[Myrm]

There are........issues with the current Scout rules and as I understand it they are undergoing a process of revision.

Um yes. I wasn't impressed with them the one time I tried them out. Too easy for equal EW factor scouts to cancel each other out, net result being wasted points on a scout when you could have had a standard warship for less points.

Why is that a bad option? OK players may feel their scout is no use, but then their opponent has exactly the same issue.....is this not similar to saying 'well my opponent took a dreadnought too so they cancelled each other out'.

I always assumed that since it was the Journal the Scout rules were a draft (the first of extensive scout rules, the second iteration since the main rulebook placeholder ones). While I have assorted comments I could make on them, and they are not perfect they did seem a reasonable draft to be playtesting on to tune them up.

 

[AdmiralGrafSpee]

Yes, the BCJ is clearly just better than the CB, but cheaper - I imagine their points values should just be reversed and that will be enough.

Also, the shock trait should be in Italics.

Even if its more points, I will definitely field the BCJ. 6 Photons is quite scary!

I really like that they are doing all these variants for existing ship classes. Gets you a lot of mileage out of your current minis - but does give you reasons to buy more!

-Tim

 

[Myrm]

Also, the shock trait should be in Italics.
-Tim

Thats a good catch! Much agreed - can't have a critical reinforcing the main frame.

 

[Da Boss]

Indeed

What are the class names of the new Federation escorts?

Yes I agree that the New Jersey is in superior to the Gettysberg but is 10pts cheaper which I assume is an error?

It gets +2 shields, the ability to fire 2 extra Photons, 2 extra shuttles and 2 extra Marines.

(There is also a typo on the Gettsyberg that says Troops rather than Marines)

 

[TheRowan]

Indeed

What are the class names of the new Federation escorts?

I don't think they've been referred to by a class name, but going by the fleet list then the DWE would be either the Presidents Bush-Class or the Thunderbolt-Class (I believe the DWAs were also built as DWEs?). The CLE would be the Harry Lee-Class.

 

[Nerroth]

Indeed

What are the class names of the new Federation escorts?

I don't think they've been referred to by a class name, but going by the fleet list then the DWE would be either the Presidents Bush-Class or the Thunderbolt-Class (I believe the DWAs were also built as DWEs?). The CLE would be the Harry Lee-Class.

The difference between an -A and -E escort is only worth noting in SFB, due to the difference between limited and full Aegis; the -Es came first, and had limited Aegis, while the -As get full Aegis installed later on.

Since there is no difference in Aegis fire control systems in FC or (for the time being) in ACtA:SF, any of the DWA names listed there should be good as DWEs, too.

 

[Myrm]

The difference between an -A and -E escort is only worth noting in SFB, due to the difference between limited and full Aegis; the -Es came first, and had limited Aegis, while the -As get full Aegis installed later on.

Since there is no difference in Aegis fire control systems in FC or (for the time being) in ACtA:SF, any of the DWA names listed there should be good as DWEs, too.

Is the FC lack of difference to do with time frame, or simplicity? Ultimately the difference is relatively small isnt it - for translation I'd have thought the difference was the range of weapons under the Aegis control (says he risking his neck on his memory with no rulebook here). That said if FC ignore the difference then carry on in ACTA....those as want an SFB type game should be able to knock 5 or 10 points off for the limited weapon set of Limited Aegis ships.