Raiders?

[Sulfurdown]

It has to be said, any fleet with such a limited choice of ships is going to struggle. When one is terrible (strike carrier) and another poor (modified freighter), the situation becomes impossible.

SO IT SHOULD BE!!!!!

Weak, yes. Low priority, yes. (I'm ambiguous on whether the Raider Nova is a good idea. Battle through War are getting very advanced for kitbashing Raiders.) I'm even fine with the Strike Carrier as is, it's specialized like the Drakh Carrier/Mothership with the purpose of delivering fighters, initiative sinking, and then bugging the ^_^ out.

But they are first and foremost to take out Civilians, and if they have trouble with that, like not being able to catch anyone. Maybe the Strike Carrier doesn't need a high speed because it's Fighters will get to the target, but the Freighter? If the only way it can possibly reach a target is to ambush it, and the only ships it can ambush are the freighters it's modeled from (traders just zooming by). The RMF should be stated to be about 0.7x of the patrol cutters like the Haven, Tethys, Sho'Kos and somewhere around 0.9x the Patrol Boat.

 

[Calistan]

As was pointed out in SFOS, not all the raiders are "pirates". The Abbai have their own Merc Fleet and there are lesser independents that would try to make a useful fleet.

These small Mercs or Militias would have a larger variety of ships, with the occasional battle level ship. There are probably a number of obsolete EA ships that were probably sold for cash because the EA needs to rebuild again and they are taking the tech route.

In a short time the Avengers, Orestes, Olympus, Tethys, and the Artemis ships were mothballed. I can see these ships ending up in Merc units or lesser governments. And don't forget that the Brakiri have a tendency to sell ships, so we should see raid level or lower Brakiri ships in Merc units. It wouldn't be surprising if the Brakiri maintained several Merc units of their own.

What would be interesting is having rules for lesser independents. Instead of saying, they are raiders, these worlds would have a mix of homegrown and purchased fleets.

 

[Tankdriver]

What would be interesting is having rules for lesser independents. Instead of saying, they are raiders, these worlds would have a mix of homegrown and purchased fleets.

This would kind of be what the Pak Ma Ra are. But I see your point.

As for the Raiders, I am getting a feeling this is a fleet a lot of people see as in need of help. Sure, they are supposed to be targetting civilian and not military ships, but they should be able to defend themselves against military ships, or at least out run them, which they currently cannot!

 

[Triggy]

Raiders are more viable in 2nd ed. but are still slightly worse than other races at each PL - this is a Matt directive and for one fleet alone, is not a big problem. At least now each of their ships has a definite purpose and is good at doing what it does best (and is a viable choice in any typical fleet).

Hopefully no more "automatic loss" moments just because the wrong opponent turned up

 

[Nightmares about Minbari]

Personally I would have no problem with making the raiders fleet article available, however I don't know what the rules are as it was submitted to Signs and Potents. If anyone knows whether this can be shown do let me know.

Obviously as it wasn't accepted, it would be in no way official.

However there were over a dozen different raider ships in there, and four specialist raider fleets ranging from the strange to the outright dangerous. There were even rules for raider prize crews getting ships underway during a battle so they could actually capture ships.

Glad to hear that the raiders are getting some love and attention in 2e though. They are a marvelously colourful fleet to model, convert and paint.

 

[Romu]

Thats good to hear

In that case there is a great chance that i'll star playing them really soon !

Raiders are more viable in 2nd ed. but are still slightly worse than other races at each PL - this is a Matt directive and for one fleet alone, is not a big problem. At least now each of their ships has a definite purpose and is good at doing what it does best (and is a viable choice in any typical fleet).

Hopefully no more "automatic loss" moments just because the wrong opponent turned up

 

[Mister_ELK]

I know the topic has been discussed on a number of occasions, but I'll point out again that the Raiders are a great fleet to play in a CAMPAIGN setting.

Here is my logic for saying that:
There is nothing in the Campaign rules that mandate a player take, control, or hold ANY strategic targets.

With that being said, when I played the Raiders for a campaign, my 'move' in every turn was to go after the "Trade Route" - which is a staple in all campaigns.

Here is the breakdown -
If the Raiders attack it and nobody safeguards it - it's a win-win scenario. (No battle... no repairs... No COST to you as a player.)
If the Raiders attack and someone does defend - it's up to the player: Try to fight it out -or- Just runaway to fight another day. (Either way, you get something. The "loser" still gains XP for each ship!)
If the Raiders aren't the first one there - Then go on the defensive. (Remember, Raiders gain a bigger bonus when DEFENDING the Trade Route from attack.)
And lastly, IF there are already two players going after it.... the odds are you were low enough on the Initiative Rolls to pick a target that is less likely to be defended. (If all strategic targets are already claimed, I tend to suggest going after the person with the most. Typically, they have to spread their fleet out in order to guard everything.)

Granted, there are all sorts of campaign scenarios that don't fit into these generalities, but for the most part as long as you play your Raiders in some degree of "character" - it will turn out to be a lot of fun no matter what happens.

Have fun! And happy raiding!

- Mister_ELK

 

[locarno24]

The only other thought for a new raider ship....didn't Midnight on the Firing Line have a raider C&C ship? Or was that just what's now considered the raider base?

If not, then a low priority ship with a few popguns and no launch bays, with scout and fleet carrier might be interesting...

 

[Da Boss]

I think it was a Narn ship that was sold / leant to the Raiders - Have the Nrn got a ship that fits?

 

[Sulfurdown]

There is nothing in the Campaign rules that mandate a player take, control, or hold ANY strategic targets.

In general I still agree with you that Campaigns are the true playground of the Raiders, but technically there is a mandate to take strategic targets. The winner of a campaign according to the stock rules in SFoS is the player who can capture all available S/Targets first. (And auto-lose if you lose all ships in your roster)