There is a lot of debate over the Klingon (and Kestrel) forward shield rule, and whether or not it (or something like it) is a good thing to have in A Call to Arms: Star Fleet. On the one hand, it provides a degree of character to those ships which have it, but on the other can be argued as going too far in the wrong direction.
My thinking was that, if nothing else, it makes conversions somewhat awkward - not just for the Klingons and Kestrels, but for other potential candiadtes in the future.
By and large, the Shield score is based on the number of boxes in the #2 shield facing on the relevant Squadron Scale Ship Cards (as can be seen for comparison's sake over here). The Romulan SparrowHawk has a 24-point #2 shield on its Ship Card, go gets Shields: 24 over here. However, despite having a 22-box #2 shield on its Ship Card, the adjustments obliged by the current forward shield rule has seen it dropped to Shields: 18 in ACtA:SF terms.
(If you want to think of a potential future candidate, the Paravian War Cruiser shown in SSD form in the SFB Module C6 preview PDF has a 34-box front shield, and 20-box shields in facings #2 through #5. If that empire were not given a Klingon-esque front shield rule, it would get Shields: 20 in ACtA:SF. But, if it were deemed that the Paravians' heavy emphasis on their front shields was worth accounting for, it would get the Klingon front shield rule, but have some lower Shield score to compensate.)
However, rather than stick with the two options above - of leaving the rule in place and working around it, or deleting it and taking that dynamic out altogether - I was wondering if a third option might not be possible.
What if, instead of halving the incoming shield hits, the F arc offered only one-quarter protection instead?
Say in this case that the "regular" #2 shield values are converted over (so the D7 goes "back" to Shields: 22), but gets a reduced, but still notable, bonus in the F arc (which in this case would have an effective rating of 30 in the F arc if dropped to one-quarter). And since the D7's #1 facing in FC has 30 boxes, the one-quarter rule lands it in the sweet spot.
It wouldn't just have to be the Klingons, either. Other empires which have stronger front shields in FC, such as the Federation, could get a similar one-quarter rule; while those fleets with a tendency to put equally thick shields in all six arcs (such as the Archeo-Tholians or Eagle-series Romulans) would be left as they are instead. So, a Fed CA with the one-quarter rule would have an effective F arc of 32, which is close to the 30-box #1 arc it has in FC.
And in the above Paravian example, their CW would keep Shields: 20 and get an effective F arc of 27 with a one-quarter rule; a bit below its original, but a fairly reasonable approximation.
This sort of rule would better match the historical ship layouts, and really show the difference between those ships with all-around arcs (such as the Tholian CA or Romulan King Eagle) and those which historically rely to one extent or other on their front shields (like the Klingons and Federation).
Would that be an idea worth considering?
My thinking was that, if nothing else, it makes conversions somewhat awkward - not just for the Klingons and Kestrels, but for other potential candiadtes in the future.
By and large, the Shield score is based on the number of boxes in the #2 shield facing on the relevant Squadron Scale Ship Cards (as can be seen for comparison's sake over here). The Romulan SparrowHawk has a 24-point #2 shield on its Ship Card, go gets Shields: 24 over here. However, despite having a 22-box #2 shield on its Ship Card, the adjustments obliged by the current forward shield rule has seen it dropped to Shields: 18 in ACtA:SF terms.
(If you want to think of a potential future candidate, the Paravian War Cruiser shown in SSD form in the SFB Module C6 preview PDF has a 34-box front shield, and 20-box shields in facings #2 through #5. If that empire were not given a Klingon-esque front shield rule, it would get Shields: 20 in ACtA:SF. But, if it were deemed that the Paravians' heavy emphasis on their front shields was worth accounting for, it would get the Klingon front shield rule, but have some lower Shield score to compensate.)
However, rather than stick with the two options above - of leaving the rule in place and working around it, or deleting it and taking that dynamic out altogether - I was wondering if a third option might not be possible.
What if, instead of halving the incoming shield hits, the F arc offered only one-quarter protection instead?
Say in this case that the "regular" #2 shield values are converted over (so the D7 goes "back" to Shields: 22), but gets a reduced, but still notable, bonus in the F arc (which in this case would have an effective rating of 30 in the F arc if dropped to one-quarter). And since the D7's #1 facing in FC has 30 boxes, the one-quarter rule lands it in the sweet spot.
It wouldn't just have to be the Klingons, either. Other empires which have stronger front shields in FC, such as the Federation, could get a similar one-quarter rule; while those fleets with a tendency to put equally thick shields in all six arcs (such as the Archeo-Tholians or Eagle-series Romulans) would be left as they are instead. So, a Fed CA with the one-quarter rule would have an effective F arc of 32, which is close to the 30-box #1 arc it has in FC.
And in the above Paravian example, their CW would keep Shields: 20 and get an effective F arc of 27 with a one-quarter rule; a bit below its original, but a fairly reasonable approximation.
This sort of rule would better match the historical ship layouts, and really show the difference between those ships with all-around arcs (such as the Tholian CA or Romulan King Eagle) and those which historically rely to one extent or other on their front shields (like the Klingons and Federation).
Would that be an idea worth considering?