Latest Errata File

[Myrm]

In our gaming group the ONLY DN's that were used were the C8 and K9R. They seemed decent for their points whereas the others were rather crippled with lumbering.

Hmm, only the Fed DN is limited with lumbering really. The C8/K9R have no lumbering and a turn of 6. The Fed has a turn of 6 but gets stuck with one turn due to lumbering. The other DNs (Condor and the Gorn one) in game so far may have lumbering but they also have Turn 9 so merely get no HET rather than a turn by turn slow down on mobility.

Sorry guys but I thought that Lumbering was gone form all current ships including the DNs.
Did I miss a condition on the removal of Lumbering?

No you didn't - I was replying to a comment that suggested several DNs were previously crippled by lumbering - whereas I only really thought the Fed one was as it was that one that had a significant effect....

 

[Ben2]

The vast reduction in the damage capacity of the civilian ships has played merry heck with their points comparable to one another.

Civilian ships should be used as scenario objectives, rather than initiative sinks and damage sponges.

Civilian ships are not allowed in standard scenarios. So they are scenario-specific choices. And it looks like there will be several of those in Battleships.

Take a look at the Armed Cutter. At 30 points it is massively better armed than any other civilian ship. It is pretty much the only decent civilian choice. Others were formerly good choices because they were massive damage soaks. Previously it was hampered by low damage (very low compared to other civilian ships). Now it has only two points less than the comparable Prime Trade which has less weapons and is 10 points more.

I agree the points cost should be changed. It's likely 15-25 points undercosted as it stands, and once drone fixes are definitely locked in and there's been a bunch of playtest data to back it up the points cost should be changed. I'd say that was true of all ships where drones are a significant feature (*cough* Kzinti) the same as removing lumbering from the game changes how the Gorn play completely and the points of those ships should be looked at again.

However fixing drones and other issues comes first, and going over points costs is something to do after.

 

[lastbesthope]

Matt,

Quick pointer re the filenames.

If you make the dates BigEndian then the files will be in chronological order when listed in alphabetical order.

e.g. An eratta file for today would be called

sferatta20120422.pdf
OR
sferatta120422.pdf

Depending on how much of the time and date you want to put in

(yy)yymmdd(hhmmss)

Just make sure to use all the leading zeros to keep it straight.

LBH

 

[dalek4890l]

so want about the poor Gorn and our vanishing phasers - yes we can turn, but some of our ships appear to have holes where weapons used to be

Look closely and you'll see there are thrusters where the weapons used to be. Hence you don't lumber anymore

 

[Keeper Nilbog]

that would account for the 'Tribble Cooking Thrusters' - light dawns :wink:

 

[Halfbat]

Thanks for the errata and update pages, Matt.

I'm using some other models for the Orions, atm, but am puzzled by the errata's reference to the Raider upgrade. It says to add a 3rd fore arc *1AD weapon .

Unfortunately, the Light Raider only has 1 fore arc weapon and 2 side half *1AD weapons. However, the Matrix Destroyer has two fore-arc *1AD weapons. Does the upgrade actually apply to the Destroyer or does it apply to the Raider and, if so, be reworded to say something like "add another Fore Arc *1AD weapon to the Raider"?

Have I found an errata to the errata?

 

[Iain McGhee]

Not the mistake you think :wink: , the weapon add is for the CR not the LR. It's the Raider's heading that's confusing you (it's got the Tholian DD's name, although it's correctly identified in the text and the fleet list).

 

[Halfbat]

Not the mistake you think :wink: , the weapon add is for the CR not the LR. It's the Raider's heading that's confusing you (it's got the Tholian DD's name, although it's correctly identified in the text and the fleet list).

Good spot/correction - I didn't notice that as I find myself completely uninterested in the Tholians!

At least it is another errata needed, though.

 

[Ben2]

Don't mean to be a pain, but shouldn't the FD7 have the same changes to the ph-2 arcs as the D7 in the latest errata?

Just going over ships before the tournament.

 

[MarkDawg]

This Thread should be cleaned up and stickyed for new players. Just sayin!