SF Errata 16/05/12

[GalagaGalaxian]

Now that I'm finally back from a few months off, I took a look through the book and the new errata file. I'm pleased to say I only noticed one glaring set of mistakes!

Nothing TOO important, but some of the Phasers on several of the Civilian ships are inconstant with standard Phaser stats. Specifically the first phaser entry on each of the Large Freighter (FL), Free Trader (FT), and Heavy Freighter (FH). The Range of 18" suggests a Phaser-1, but the weapon name and special traits suggest it should be a Phaser-2.

For what its worth these phasers are, indeed, Phaser-2s on the Federation Commander ship cards. Please don't hurt me...

Finally, a double-check question but is the Prime Trader's variable weapon slot supposed to be a Turret arc? Given its a modified Free Trader wouldn't F or F,P,S be more appropriate? I mean, I'm not turning down Turret arced Photons, Plasma or (range 24?) Disruptors on a dinky little ship, it just seems odd.

 

[Rambler]

Absolutely nothing offical about what I am about to post but figured I would. Seeing how these can not be picked for a Fleet Option it seems harmless to let them stand but just because I can be kinda obsessive compulsive about ships, I will post my opinion on these. And that is just what it is a Opinion, and you know what they say about Opinions, they are like... :twisted:

Now that I'm finally back from a few months off, I took a look through the book and the new errata file. I'm pleased to say I only noticed one glaring set of mistakes!

Nothing TOO important, but some of the Phasers on several of the Civilian ships are inconstant with standard Phaser stats. Specifically the first phaser entry on each of the Large Freighter (FL), Free Trader (FT), and Heavy Freighter (FH). The Range of 18" suggests a Phaser-1, but the weapon name and special traits suggest it should be a Phaser-2.

For what its worth these phasers are, indeed, Phaser-2s on the Federation Commander ship cards. Please don't hurt me...

Yeah looks like the Klingon Phaser 2 Range Typo at play again here. They all should be Range 12".

Finally, a double-check question but is the Prime Trader's variable weapon slot supposed to be a Turret arc? Given its a modified Free Trader wouldn't F or F,P,S be more appropriate? I mean, I'm not turning down Turret arced Photons, Plasma or (range 24?) Disruptors on a dinky little ship, it just seems odd.

Kind of a wierd one here you actually have 3 set of arcs to pick from here depending on weapon type selected;

F,P,S - Phaser-2 (Also some empires might actually have Phaser-1s here but Phaser-2 is the general catch all for this.)

F - Photon, Plasma-F, and Disruptor (which is noted in the Eratta as being limited to 15")

T - Drone (Though here there could be a Plasma-D Option for Plasma Empires to take but if they did the arcs get really screwey so saying " T " is simpler that saying to choose either 2xFH -or- 1xPH & 1-SH.)

:twisted:

 

[Nerroth]

My FLGS finally managed to get a copy of the rulebook in this week:

At some point, I should probably try to trim off some of the edges, in order for the errata pages to sit more neatly beneath the front cover.

(Or have people been going so far as to cut out the new ship details altogether, and tape them over the older entries directly?)

 

[Iain McGhee]

The ones with the most extensive changes, yes. Rest of them I just wrote notes on the originals.

 

[JohnDW]

I'm keeping my book pristine by not adding any of the changes, either with pen/pencil or by taping the new entries into the book. I'm fine flipping back to my errata pdf to make corrections on ship card spreadsheet data and whatnot.

Edit: plus I don't need to keep goin back into my book to change things if the errata changes something back that has all ready been changed.

 

[nekomata fuyu]

Any changes I make are by writing them onto post-it notes, cutting them out, then adding them into the book.

 

[Red-24]

I've printed them out separately cut them out and pasted them into my book. I've done this about four times. ;-)

I just like to have the information right there and handy. Looking forward to an updated PDF doc that will have it all correct in the first place.

 

[doublenot7]

Are the ship stat changes ONLY used from the current errata and previous ones discarded?

 

[Ben2]

Are the ship stat changes ONLY used from the current errata and previous ones discarded?

Yes. That's why I've kept my errata as a separate sheet until we hear there will be no more.

 

[AdmiralGrafSpee]

Hey, just noticed. But should the C8 have 6 drone racks? This one does:

http://www.starfleetgames.com/federation/Commanders%20Circle/documents/ship%20cards/Klingon%20reorginzation/Klingon_C8_LT.pdf

And also I think the Kzinti NCC should have 30 shields (up from 24 on the NCA):

http://www.starfleetgames.com/federation/Commanders%20Circle/documents/ship%20cards/Kzinti_NCC-both.pdf


-Tim

 

[Ben2]

You're right, it is the C9 with 4 drone racks and the C8 with 6 racks.

I've spotted a couple of other things that everyone seems to have missed.

Do we want to have a little list of this stuff for another errata update?

 

[AdmiralGrafSpee]

@Ben2

I'd post it here. Not for us to decide if they are doing another errata but at least lets provide the info!

-Tim

 

[Lincolnlog]

As a point of clarity, the Fed BCJ is 240 pints, and DWD is 130 points?

 

[McKinstry]

As a point of clarity, the Fed BCJ is 240 pints, and DWD is 130 points?

Yes

 

[Lincolnlog]

Thanks McKinstry!

 

[Jiraiya1969]

The Romulan BH is listed as having 4 shuttles, while the SSDs from SFB/FC list only 2.

All the other ACTA write-ups have have direct conversions as far as shuttles go, so I thought I would point this out.

J69

 

[ericpaperman]

If we're gathering tidbits for the next update to the errata, I have three issues:

1. For almost all of the ships, the Crippled threshold is one-third of the Damage rating, rounded up. There are five ships which don't follow this rule: Romulan NovaHawk & RoyalHawk, and the Kzin NCA, NCC & BCH.

2. In the errata, the Romulan FireHawk and FastHawk were changed to Damage 32. But the NovaHawk and RoyalHawk are still rated at Damage 40. The NH has the same weapon array as the FH and small increases in shuttles, marines, tractors & transporters. Do the NH and RH really need to have their Damage rating increased by 25% from the FH?

3. The difference in points between the Firehawk and NovaHawk/RoyalHawk is only 15 points. Other Command Cruiser upgrades seem to be worth 25 or 30 points. The Gorn Allosaurus-Rex variant is worth +25 points and the only change is adding Command +1 trait.

 

[Nerroth]

2. In the errata, the Romulan FireHawk and FastHawk were changed to Damage 32. But the NovaHawk and RoyalHawk are still rated at Damage 40. The NH has the same weapon array as the FH and small increases in shuttles, marines, tractors & transporters. Do the NH and RH really need to have their Damage rating increased by 25% from the FH?

As shown here, the Squadron Scale Ship Card of the NovaHawk in Federation Commander has a total of 20 Hull boxes; which would translate to Damage 40 in ACtA:SF.

(For most ships, the Damage score is double the total number of hull boxes on the Squadron Scale FC Ship Card for a given ship; which is more or less in line with the number of Hull boxes per SFB SSD.)

I don't have the Ship Card (or SSD) of the RoyalHawk to hand; but if it's supposed to share the same base hull as the NH, it too would have a Damage score of 40, rounding issues for the critical threshold notwithstanding.

 

[MarkDawg]

Why would a different game have any baring on what is done in ACTA:SF?

 

[ericpaperman]

Why would a different game have any baring on what is done in ACTA:SF?

None of the ships in ACTA-SF are original designs by Mongoose. They are all conversions of ships from Star Fleet Battles (SFB) and its successor, Federation Commander (FC).

So if I were to dig out my old copy of SFB and look at the ship sheets, I would expect to see a correlation between the designs. For example, the number of tractor beams and transporters are the same between SFB and ACTA-SF and the SFB ships have twice as many Boarding Parties as the ACTA-SF have Marines.