The U.S.S. Saladin DD

[carbon_dragon]

The Saladin has almost been my favorite ship (well second favorite) and I was dissapointed to see that it wasn't in the initial Call to Action Star Fleet. I always found it interesting (and occasionally frustrating) to play as well. Basically it had the firepower of a cruiser but with inadequate power. I'm thinking that the Saladin in ACTA would have to have some kind of special rule that basically gave it a power drain if it fired all its weapons. What do you think?

Likewise the original Dreadnought with its three nacelles was almost the Constitution with 50% more power (which made playing it a LOT easier). I got my original minis from buying the Star Fleet Battle Manual from Lou Zocchi. It was kind of fun moving those minis around the floor and estimating protractor angles to fire phasers but i'm too old to crawl around on the floor these days. I loved playing SFB till the rules just overwhelmed our group. I have high hopes for ACTA.

 

[archon96]

those were the franz joseph designs and will probably not be in for awhile do to the rights controlling them.

 

[Allerka]

The Ortega (I think it was the Ortega) was a replacement for the Saladin, so I doubt we'd see it. Good riddance too, that's one of the ugliest ships I've ever seen.

 

[Rambler]

Like Archon said. The Franz Joseph Designs, Single Engine Destroyer, Single Engine Scout, Tug, Unrefitted Heavy Cruiser and Early Dreadnought with the angled up Nacelles, are part of the SFU and I am sure will be in ACTA but, because there is yet another royalty to be paid. They will almost definitely all have to be in the same product be it a book or a Squadron Box.

Scouts are out as Playtest units now so we are waiting on rules covering Tug Operations now.

 

[Rambler]

The Ortega (I think it was the Ortega) was a replacement for the Saladin, so I doubt we'd see it. Good riddance too, that's one of the ugliest ships I've ever seen.

Well technically the Ortegas (DW) replaced the Burkes (FF).and the Kerasarges (NCL) replaced the Saladins (DD) and Texas (OCL) but does it really matter.

 

[Nerroth]

In Federation Commander, the "Franz Joseph" hulls were grouped together in Booster Pack #91, which is supported in the older Starline 2400 line by Squadron Box #91. (Part of the reason for this is that, under the terms of the licence, the FJ hulls each require a certain amount of logistical effort to handle. So, the amount of paperwork for ADB is streamlined if all five hulls are handled in one go.)

As the Squadron Boxes in Starline 2500 are mapped to their 2400-series counterparts, the best bet might be to see if and when SB91 is duplicated.

In-universe, it could be argued that both the NCL and DW are successors to the DD, in their own ways. The new light cruiser was designed in a way that allowed it to be built in the same slipways as the destroyers, not least since they used the same saucer, more or less. The war destroyer, on the other hand, was a destroyer-equivalent hull that could be built in yards originally designed to construct frigates. Both of these new ships allowed Star Fleet to increase the combat power of their battle forces, without overloading the cruiser slipways needed for even larger ships.

 

[carbon_dragon]

I would think the ships SFB has the strongest rights to was the original licensed ships from the Starfleet Reference Manual.

Anyway, it's more about aesthetics to me. Actually I always found the FASA designs were much prettier. The Romulan Nova and Whitewing, the Larson and Locknar, etc. The the SFB ships were typically more rugged. Ironically the Zocchi plastic ships were just about as rugged as they came. I seldom had anything break on them.

I like the NCL (new and old version) so it's not that I don't think SFB made great ships too (the B10 was a favorite) but they seemed to lack grace. Perhaps in such a warlike universe, grace took second place to practicality. The Saladin/Nelson miniature was a great looking ship. I even liked playing the Ptolemy Tug with the Battle pod.

I wonder if they've considered doing a real Janes Fighting Starships with not only the ship cards, but extensive story text about each ship. FASA did that sort of thing and I still have a monster book of all the ship descriptions from all the sources.

 

[Nerroth]

I would think the ships SFB has the strongest rights to was the original licensed ships from the Starfleet Reference Manual.

It's not that they don't have the right to use them; it's more that ships that are in the Star Fleet Technical Manual seem to require a certain set of paperwork each time they are used. (And in any case, most of the FJ designs are intended to fly in the Middle Years, as opposed to the Main Era; so one might not get the most out of them unless the ships from FC: Briefing #2 are ported over, too.)

Anyway, it's more about aesthetics to me. Actually I always found the FASA designs were much prettier. The Romulan Nova and Whitewing, the Larson and Locknar, etc. The the SFB ships were typically more rugged. Ironically the Zocchi plastic ships were just about as rugged as they came. I seldom had anything break on them.

I like the NCL (new and old version) so it's not that I don't think SFB made great ships too (the B10 was a favorite) but they seemed to lack grace. Perhaps in such a warlike universe, grace took second place to practicality. The Saladin/Nelson miniature was a great looking ship. I even liked playing the Ptolemy Tug with the Battle pod.

I might say that the 2500 series has allowed for significant advancements already. The Fed hulls are much more consistent as a fleet, with things like overall hull size and nacelle type scaled more "properly" than in the 2400s. Plus, there are hulls like the new SparrowHawk, which are (in my opinion) far superior than their older counterparts.

There are still a whole lot of ships out there to be brought over, for dozens of empires and in several distinct time periods (depending on just how broadly, or deeply, into the broader SFU that Mongoose end up going); so even if the current crop of minis aren't that appealing to you, I don't think it' would be entirely fair to write off the artistic merit of the entire setting based on the relatively small sample size we have at this point.

I wonder if they've considered doing a real Janes Fighting Starships with not only the ship cards, but extensive story text about each ship. FASA did that sort of thing and I still have a monster book of all the ship descriptions from all the sources.

There has been talk over on the ADB BBS about a product called Leanna's Fighting Starships, which would do just that. But there's no word just yet on when, or if, that project might be published.

 

[Jean]

The Franz Joseph ships require an additional royalty. For that reason they are always issued as their own group.

 

[carbon_dragon]

To some extent, the ships that appeal to me are the ships I already have purchased, painted, and in my case. Also as I said, I really like the Saladin/Nelsons. I may eventually buy some 2500s if I end up finding an opponent to play a lot, but I have SO many Star Trek miniatures from all sources that I'm going to at least start out with what I have. I have a few of the later ships, but not that many. And the War Destroyer may be more powerful, but it's not all that good looking a miniature IMHO.

I'll probably just use the Saladins with the War Destroyer stats for now. I have plenty of old light cruisers, Constitutions (even one based on the new movie), Dreadnoughts (no DNs based on the ADB BC with the lowered engines), 2 of ADB's Kirov BCs, and a few of the smaller minis. I have two of the old and two of the new NCLs as well. So I figure I have enough minis to try out some things and see how the system works, which I suspect will be very well.

I like having the variety, but I think staying close to its roots (CA, DN, DD/SC, Tug) would have a nostalgic appeal to more people than just me. After all, if they're welcoming back old SFB players that didn't want to handle a phone-book sized rule manual, those folks will probably have the original core miniatures so having specs for them will be useful for them to try out this new system. Then they can try to sell them new 2500 minis.

 

[Lincolnlog]

The Franz Joseph ships require an additional royalty. For that reason they are always issued as their own group.

So, was the royalty paid for the DN and the CA, or can you get around that by simply chaging the data from what was in the Tech Manual, and altering the appearance slightly.

I ask this, because as suggested in another thread, why can Mongoose put out say the DDM which is a slightly modified Saladin?

This would be a great whay to get a mini out in this class without having to wait for contracts and royalties to be paid. Or am I overlooking something?

 

[Jean]

Those ships are not subject to the royalties. We try not to "get around" paying people their royalties -- we just try to make sure we can properly account for them. This way, there are no hard feeling or questions of "did 'X' ship drive the sales and should we get more?" floating about.

The actual ships chosen to be released at a particular time all depend on SVC and Matthew.

 

[Lincolnlog]

Those ships are not subject to the royalties. We try not to "get around" paying people their royalties -- we just try to make sure we can properly account for them. This way, there are no hard feeling or questions of "did 'X' ship drive the sales and should we get more?" floating about.

The actual ships chosen to be released at a particular time all depend on SVC and Matthew.

Jean, sorry was not suggesting you do something dishonest. It seemed like there were already two ships from the FJD already in production. I simply wondered if the same production logic could be applied. If they are exempt, then that would explain their release. Although it is also puzzling why the most iconic of the line would be exempt. :?:

I can't speak for others, but fo myself the Saladin or the one of the later designs off the same basic hull form is very desirable. I guess that leaves kit bashing and home stats. :mrgreen:

 

[adm]

In the case of the DN, the released DN and the FJ DN are two different minis, for starters the FJ DN has the shuttle deck on the front of the engineering hull.

 

[Lincolnlog]

But that was exactly my point, why can't the DDM be subtly different. Why can the DN license be stretched and DD not?

Once again, not suggesting that Mongoose or ADB do anything dishonest. But what I am saying, is why can the CA and DN be produced, yes I mentioned before there were alterations and the DD not with minor alterations and come out as the DDM (which was not an FJD design).

 

[Rambler]

Well first just leave the CA out of the equation. ADB has Paramounts permission to use it the same as FJD has so it is a unique critter all its own.

The DN and DN+ are externally 95% identical so they are FJD IP. The DNG and DNH are structural rearranged (Shuttle Bays Moved, Second Deflector Dish removed, bulk and Weapon Ports added, Nacelles moved). There is enough systems added to visually affect the outline. Is it still similar yes but, it does deviate.

Where as the DDM and DD are 100% externally identical. It is arguable that the Photon Ports are still present on the DDM just the Weapon Systems themselves were removed and the space converted to extra storage. There is just not change externally over all the DD Hulls except the Scout which removed Phaser Bumps. So why would you go through the expense to produce a low volume mold for a DDM when you will be building a almost identical second low volume mold when Squadron Box 91 is released.

Just be patient the DDs are coming maybe not this year but they are coming. If you are just absolutely dieing for a Saladin kitbash one from the gluten of BCs on the market.

 

[nekomata fuyu]

The Saladin has almost been my favorite ship (well second favorite) and I was dissapointed to see that it wasn't in the initial Call to Action Star Fleet. I always found it interesting (and occasionally frustrating) to play as well. Basically it had the firepower of a cruiser but with inadequate power. I'm thinking that the Saladin in ACTA would have to have some kind of special rule that basically gave it a power drain if it fired all its weapons. What do you think?

From this description, I'd be tempted to give the Saladin a rule stating that it always suffers from power drain. This way you can fire to full effect by moving slowly, or can move at full speed by restricting your firepower in some way. If you also selected a special action that suffered from power drain, you would have to select 2 power drain effects.

I'm not sure if this would match up with anything in SFB, but I imagine that the above rule could open the door to a new special action too.
Overdrive Engines: In an effort to squeeze extra power from the engines, the captain orders them to be driven beyond safe limits. The ship may ignore the effects of a single power drain, but immediately takes a Dilithium Chamber critical.

This SA would normally only be of use to a ship with the power drain trait, but could also be used to offset the power drain of a special action if you can use 2 special actions at the same time for whatever reason.

 

[Nerroth]

In FC, the DDM is one of the eight Ship Cards included in Booster Pack #91, along with other DD variants (like the DDG and DDL). If we were to see a "Franz Joseph" set of ships appear in ACtA:SF, I would expect the relevant variants (or at least the ones applicable to the Main Era) show up at around the same time.

Hopefully, the Middle Years may be up for consideration by that time, which would allow ships like the DDM to serve in their "natural" environment. (A number of the Ship Cards in Booster #91, such as the DDM and DN, are assumed to be used with the contents of FC: Briefing #2, while the rest are Main Era Ship Cards applicable to the General War setting.)

 

[Myrm]

From this description, I'd be tempted to give the Saladin a rule stating that it always suffers from power drain. This way you can fire to full effect by moving slowly,

I'm not sure you could even manage that - the base DD was awful for underpower, worse than the War Eagle series early ship. I'd need to go back to the SSD to check the actual power level but I think you pretty much had to be at dead stop to fire most things and even then Im not sure you could get all the photons off. It was a dog of a ship.

Overdrive Engines: In an effort to squeeze extra power from the engines, the captain orders them to be driven beyond safe limits. The ship may ignore the effects of a single power drain, but immediately takes a Dilithium Chamber critical.

No. THis is a special ability of a race - the Orions, adding it as a special action removes their primary unique feature and also breaches SFU background in the process.

 

[carbon_dragon]

If I remember right, the Saladin had 15 power rather than the 30 (2 nacelles) that the CA had. I actually liked in SFB how the number of nacelles really mattered like this. With 15 power, it did kind of work like a power drain. BUT the Saladin could, for significantly lower point cost, deliver an unbelievable punch, at least once in a while. Yes it was challenging to play, but fun too.

I don't remember what if any the variants were. If I were making them, I'd maybe add some APRs at the expense of some other systems. There were a lot of interesting FASA ships like the Locknar frigate which were little more than Saladins with two nacelles which gives you a cruiser armed, cruiser powered, lightweight ship. Not much good for exploring strange new worlds, but pretty nasty in a fight. That was pretty much what a Miranda was right?

I just don't like destroyers which are essentially frigates with delusions of grandeur. The Saladin has some beauty and grace and elegance, and God knows the Federation needs some scouts so the Nelson is valuable in and of itself. And without the photons, the Nelson really doesn't have many power problems.

Lastly, the BC based DN might be cheaper for SFB to sell, but the original one was prettier (and plenty sturdy from a practical standpoint). Of course aesthetic views are subjective but I like them much better. I loved playing them too. It was like a CA with fantastic power capacity.