I imagine the front shield rule as being more suitable for the Middle Years Klingons (and Kestrels), personally, where the aft shielding was more vulnerable than seen in the refitted ships (and wartime hulls) in the main time period. In FC, rather than show a series of refits on the same SSD, Middle Years and Main Era (General War) hulls are split into different Ship Cards, intended for use in different "eras".
If it helps, there is an array of low-toner versions of the Ship Cards used for the initial wave of ship conversions into ACtA:SF over here. (Most empires were given a Shield score based on their #2 shield facing on the Squadron Scale Ship Cards. I'm not quite sure what the case was for the Klingons and Kestrels, but the "regular" shield numbers were lowered in order to make room for the front shield rule. Had said rule not been implemented, the D7 would likely have a Shield score of 22 instead.)
Which touches on a broader point: FC, rather than SFB, is/was the primary reference used here, as is the case for the Star Fleet adaptation of Starmada. The non-monster units from the first four FC modules (plus associated booster packs) were converted and published in the first two Starmada books; while all four were done in one go for ACtA:SF book 1.
This has a factor in what weapons are absent, and which have more pruned options relative to SFB. For example, photon torpedoes in FC have no proximity setting, so neither do they have them in Starmada or ACtA:SF either. Similarly, things like pseudo plasma, scatterpacks, wild weasels, T-bombs, and so forth were kept out of FC, and thus are absent here and in Starmada also.
I would imagine that future additions may at least try to go with the FC take on things first, and only try to "skip over" to SFB if the first option doesn't work. (ESGs, PPDs, PA panels, and other expansion book fodder might be good examples of this if/when their respective times come to be formally worked on.)
One thought - if Agile were to go away, would re-scaling the conversion from FC Turn Modes to ACtA Turn scores be an option?
For example, if Turn Mode D was kept as equivalent to Turn: 6, perhaps Turn Mode C could go to Turn: 5, B to 4, A to 3, and AA to 2? (In the absence of Agile, the only real difference would be the number assigned to Turn Mode C.)
That would allow for a more gradual range, but still offer benefits to those ships with improved Turn scores.
If it helps, there is an array of low-toner versions of the Ship Cards used for the initial wave of ship conversions into ACtA:SF over here. (Most empires were given a Shield score based on their #2 shield facing on the Squadron Scale Ship Cards. I'm not quite sure what the case was for the Klingons and Kestrels, but the "regular" shield numbers were lowered in order to make room for the front shield rule. Had said rule not been implemented, the D7 would likely have a Shield score of 22 instead.)
Which touches on a broader point: FC, rather than SFB, is/was the primary reference used here, as is the case for the Star Fleet adaptation of Starmada. The non-monster units from the first four FC modules (plus associated booster packs) were converted and published in the first two Starmada books; while all four were done in one go for ACtA:SF book 1.
This has a factor in what weapons are absent, and which have more pruned options relative to SFB. For example, photon torpedoes in FC have no proximity setting, so neither do they have them in Starmada or ACtA:SF either. Similarly, things like pseudo plasma, scatterpacks, wild weasels, T-bombs, and so forth were kept out of FC, and thus are absent here and in Starmada also.
I would imagine that future additions may at least try to go with the FC take on things first, and only try to "skip over" to SFB if the first option doesn't work. (ESGs, PPDs, PA panels, and other expansion book fodder might be good examples of this if/when their respective times come to be formally worked on.)
One thought - if Agile were to go away, would re-scaling the conversion from FC Turn Modes to ACtA Turn scores be an option?
For example, if Turn Mode D was kept as equivalent to Turn: 6, perhaps Turn Mode C could go to Turn: 5, B to 4, A to 3, and AA to 2? (In the absence of Agile, the only real difference would be the number assigned to Turn Mode C.)
That would allow for a more gradual range, but still offer benefits to those ships with improved Turn scores.