Trading weapons systems

[TJHairball]

So I've been doing some thinking about what, as a Klingon player, I might want to trade weapons systems for. The Klingon fleet carries around several different kinds of weapons. Would I want to swap out one of them for something new that my ships don't already carry? What's the worst thing I'd be willing to swap out.

24" Disruptors: No.
15" Disruptors: Plasma-Ds.
Drones: Photon Torpedoes.
Phasers: No.

I wouldn't want to trade Disruptors for anything less than Phaser-4s, which are generally not mounted on moving ships and so probably aren't a real option. I like how they give me superior firepower against anyone at long range except for dronespam, and dronespam wouldn't be reliable against Federation cowards hiding behind their walls of anti-drone and numerous aft-half phasers.

I don't like the small disruptors, though - I'd cheerfully trade the 15" range disruptors out for practically anything else, one for one, especially since my small ships are likely to blow up as soon as they draw attention. I'm willing to go as low as bidding for the same dice in Plasma-Ds, which at least would be useful as auxiliary anti-drone systems, or if I'm against Gorn/Romulans, at least chewing up defensive fire for my drones. Take that, you Kzinti - what, you ran out my regular anti-drone? EAT PLASMA, MANGY FURBALLS!

I don't really like drones. However, they're very powerful, and useful both for and against drones. I would happily trade Drone turrets for Phaser-1 turrets - which are almost as effective at taking down drones - or even just additional FPS Phaser-1s. I could be happy carrying nothing

I would never want to trade them for plasmas at the current exchange rate (a Plasma-F for 1 AD of drones); however, photon torpedoes have one thing that would make me tempted: Overload.

Trading drones for photons means I would be able to overload disruptors and photon torpedoes with a single action. Disruptors and photon torpedoes synergize. 6" would suddenly be a scary place to put yourself against Klingons; I'd be willing to trade the drones for having that cool trick up my sleeve, though I'd almost certainly regret it every time I faced a drone-chucker fleet.

Between Romulan plasma torpedoes, Federation Kirovs and DWDs, and the prospect of eventually playing Kzinti and Gorn with more drones and more plasma torpedoes, I want to keep my phasers. I would, however, trade my assorted AP and AS Phaser-2s for Phaser-3s with either more AD or better arcs; my phaser-2s are rarely used offensively.

I would go as far as to trade 1 AS + 1 AP pair of phasers for a single turreted phaser, honestly - I'm rarely attacked from both flanks at once, and more often from the front than the rear. But phasers are too useful to give up on the whole.

What would you trade from your chosen fleet?

 

[Sgt_G]

Well, if things stay true to the SFB/FedCmdr roots, you should never see photons or plasma on Klingon or Kzinti ships, nor drones or disruptors on Romulan or Gorn ships, nor disruptors on Fed ships, not cloaks on anything besinds Romulan or Orion ships. Ergo, you have nothing to worry about.

 

[Myrm]

Nothing in terms of tech from other Powers.

I've been through this with older version of SFB that did allow you to purchase/swap SSD boxes including tech from other Powers. Bluntly it made the game an absolute mess, with players able to routinely pay extra points to cover the blind spots in their ship tech and designs it fundamentally altered the game - as well as homogenising it - Klingons with ESGs, Gorn with gatlings, Romulans with ADDs, Feds with disruptors. Tactical differences went by the by. It also made Orions pointless. Orions (and WYN from memory, though that may just be their Orion ships) live by their flexibility - if other powers got that flex the Orions simply lost their place. There is now a strong element of 'tech doesn't move around' - there are a few examples - photons to the Tholians etc but not at a general access level.

THe problem with this is the game is set in a universe where the ship design comes from a system based on a strategic scale, so many players feel trapped by not being able to customise ships but there is a reason for it and being able to ignore the constraints at a tactical level takes a lot away from the game (IMO). There are races for those that wish to customise - a feature worth a bucket of points, so I really would stick with them in the first instance for this sort of thing rather than tweak existing powers.

 

[Da Boss]

Well, if things stay true to the SFB/FedCmdr roots, you should never see photons or plasma on Klingon or Kzinti ships, nor drones or disruptors on Romulan or Gorn ships, nor disruptors on Fed ships, not cloaks on anything besinds Romulan or Orion ships. Ergo, you have nothing to worry about.

Although apparently Federation seem to get most peoples weapons - Drones, Plasma torpedoes, Gatling lasers etc.........actually suprised they don't get disruptors as well.

Loads of people get drones......

at the OP

You could always throw up some Hosue Rules (Clearly labeled as such) for your own use and anyone else who wants to experiment with such ideas..

 

[billclo]

Well, if things stay true to the SFB/FedCmdr roots, you should never see photons or plasma on Klingon or Kzinti ships, nor drones or disruptors on Romulan or Gorn ships, nor disruptors on Fed ships, not cloaks on anything besinds Romulan or Orion ships. Ergo, you have nothing to worry about.

Although apparently Federation seem to get most peoples weapons - Drones, Plasma torpedoes, Gatling lasers etc.........actually suprised they don't get disruptors as well.

Loads of people get drones......

at the OP

You could always throw up some Hosue Rules (Clearly labeled as such) for your own use and anyone else who wants to experiment with such ideas..

Well the Feds don't get as many of those plasma torps or gatling phasers as many may think. The plasma-equipped ships are rare, and use plasmas bought from the Gorns. The Gatling phasers, they are restricted to escort ships and certain high quality fighters due to difficulty in producing them (low production rate). You shouldn't see in a regular game many ships with those techs running around (unless your opponent is being a butthead).

I also lived through the era where players could routinely modify their ships and it was a nightmare. I am so glad those rules are gone. Yes, we had fun fooling around and tweaking our ships, but it took away alot of the flavor of each Empire.

 

[Captain Jonah]

Having other races weapons in a ship isn’t the problem. Lets face it, over the general war there were enough wrecks floating in other peoples space to equip several Fed ships with Klingon Disruptors, Lyran ESGs, Romulan cloaks etc.

The restriction form the background is having the technology and infrastructure to repair and maintain them along with fitting them into the fleets tactical deployment.

The Federation have a few of most peoples weapons because they have an advanced enough tech base to just about handle the support for them and the training to use them. The Hydrans can help with Phaser-Gs, the Gorn send a few crates of Plasma-Fs and a few techs plus a pallet of Tribbles etc.

The Orion in the SFU have the option to use many weapons but for background reasons tend to default to the local weapons. Orions in plasma space tend to come with plasmas because the spare parts are easy to get. An Orion in Romulan space with Phaser-Gs needs to get spares from either deep in Fed space or all the way across in Hydran space. Not easy.

In terms of fleets, the weapons tend to favour the tactics and vis versa.

In ACTA-SFB Klingon’s with overloaded photons and doubled front shields would be even more gross than the Kzinti are.

The feds wouldn’t bother with Disruptors, they are not mobile enough to keep a target in arc all the time and would lose out on a lot of firepower.

I also remember the days of swappable weapons. :lol:

In a campaign at one point I allied with the Feds, sold them Plasma-F fighters and got some Phaser-Gs in return. I had a very very tough DN in that campaign with its LS/RS and turret Phaser-Gs. Oddly now I think about how drone proof that ship was in relation to this game I get all nostalgic. :roll: :wink:

 

[Greg Smith]

The restriction form the background is having the technology and infrastructure to repair and maintain them along with fitting them into the fleets tactical deployment.

And yet Scottish Star Fleet engineers are regularly able to pull off miracles. Including wiring a stolen cloaking device into a Constitution-class cruiser and getting it to work. Tech slosh obviously isn't in the Scottish Engineer's dictionary.

 

[Da Boss]

The restriction form the background is having the technology and infrastructure to repair and maintain them along with fitting them into the fleets tactical deployment.

The Federation have a few of most peoples weapons because they have an advanced enough tech base to just about handle the support for them and the training to use them. The Hydrans can help with Phaser-Gs, the Gorn send a few crates of Plasma-Fs and a few techs plus a pallet of Tribbles etc.

When you see that Drones are apparently dead easy to fit, maintain and use - for half the races only of course - it all seems all a bit odd

however I do get that there are two primary reasons against too much fo this going on (except apparently for the Federation :roll: :wink: )

1. Game balance
2. Giving fleets a "unique" aspect

 

[Captain Jonah]

Well in terms of Scottish engineers. There is a super secret agreement in place between all the powers restricting Star Fleet to only have one in service at a time.

If a second one is spotted all the other powers declare war :lol: :wink:

As for the "tech slosh" though if any engineer is going to know about getting sloshed it is going to be scotty (only one ever drunk in the series I think).

Game balance wise well. Take out all those silly short range Plasmas. An F is a one box weapon, Gs and Ss are 2 box weapons and the R is a 4 box weapon. So the standard plasma fit of 2 S and 2F torps is 6 heavy weapon boxes. Photons with Rom FH arc or Gorn F/P and F/S or how about those PH/SH mounts :twisted:

So 6 photons centrelined on the cruisers, 8 on the BCHs, 5 into the F arc off centreline and at least one sideways. Or how about the DN 10 Photons. Mwahahahahaha. Or just fit them all with Drones bought from the allied Drone chuckers, that would make those darned Furballs upset :twisted:

Yep Game balance. :roll: :wink:

 

[TJHairball]

Well, if things stay true to the SFB/FedCmdr roots, you should never see photons or plasma on Klingon or Kzinti ships, nor drones or disruptors on Romulan or Gorn ships, nor disruptors on Fed ships, not cloaks on anything besinds Romulan or Orion ships. Ergo, you have nothing to worry about.

It's odd to me, because even way back when, there was some more bleed-over in technology in Star Trek than that. I'm familiar with Star Trek and not so much the Starfleet Battles game, so I'm used to the idea that Klingons have photon torpedoes and cloaks, and that that little center hole Klingon battlecruisers and birds of prey mount on their chin is a torpedo tube. And drones are, well, totally new to me.

Obviously there are some things different, but it's mostly intended as a hypothetical question for the tactical sorts out here, rather than the timeline junkies. If you were offered the choice of a replacement for the (weapon systems X)es that you ran out of parts for, courtesy of, say, your local Orion black market suppliers as you forged your way on the far end of space on the wrong end of your usual supply chain, what would you be willing to take?

 

[Iain McGhee]

My favourite "Frankenship" actually exists in the SFU. It's the Anarchist, a Klingon D7 captured by the Hydrans and fitted out with Hellbores, Fusion Beams, Gatling Phasers and Stinger fighters (SFC version, FC one might be different).

 

[Totenkopf]

Well, if things stay true to the SFB/FedCmdr roots, you should never see photons or plasma on Klingon or Kzinti ships, nor drones or disruptors on Romulan or Gorn ships, nor disruptors on Fed ships, not cloaks on anything besinds Romulan or Orion ships. Ergo, you have nothing to worry about.

It's odd to me, because even way back when, there was some more bleed-over in technology in Star Trek than that. I'm familiar with Star Trek and not so much the Starfleet Battles game, so I'm used to the idea that Klingons have photon torpedoes and cloaks, and that that little center hole Klingon battlecruisers and birds of prey mount on their chin is a torpedo tube. And drones are, well, totally new to me.

Obviously there are some things different, but it's mostly intended as a hypothetical question for the tactical sorts out here, rather than the timeline junkies. If you were offered the choice of a replacement for the (weapon systems X)es that you ran out of parts for, courtesy of, say, your local Orion black market suppliers as you forged your way on the far end of space on the wrong end of your usual supply chain, what would you be willing to take?

Simple answer, no. Outside of video games and isolated incidents, a well equipped and well organized military force would not resort to using "black market" or "scavenged" equipment/weapons. If such a force is so beyond the reach of their supply lines that they cannot get adequate replacements, then that force is probably faced with larger problems logistically than not having enough guns and ammo. So in the context of does it make TACTICAL sense to do so, no. Might it make sense to someone whose sole concept of "tactical" is Call of Dookey? Yes.

 

[ErikB]

Oh I don't know. The sail driven Royal Navy captured a lot of ships and pressed them in to service.

Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ships_of_the_line_of_the_Royal_Navy

For instance, the 1755-1785 list of captured foreign vessels in the Royal Navy is

Alcide 64 (1743, ex-French Alcide, captured 1755); sold 1772
Lys 64 (1746, ex-French Lys, captured 1755)
Duc d'Aquitaine 64 (1754, ex-French Duc d'Aquitaine, captured 1757)
Foudroyant 80 (1750, ex-French Foudroyant, captured 1758); broken up 1787
Raisonnable 64 (1756, ex-French Rainsonnable, captured 1758); lost 1762
Bienfaisant 64 (1754, ex-French Bienfaisant, captured 1758); broken up 1814
Belliqueux 64 (1756, ex-French Belliqueux, captured 1758); broken up 1772
Modeste 64 (1759, ex-French Modeste, captured 1759); broken up 1800
Centaur 74 (1757, ex-French Centaure, captured 1759); foundered 1782 with the loss of most of her crew
Temeraire 74 (1749, ex-French Téméraire, captured 1759); sold 1784
Formidable 80 (1751, ex-French Formidable, captured 1759); broken up 1768
Courageux 74 (1753, ex-French Courageux, captured 1761)
Belleisle 64 (1760, ex-French Belleisle, captured 1761); sold 1819
Saint Ann 64 (1759, ex-French Saint Ann, captured 1761)
San Antonio 70 (1761, ex-Spanish San Antonio, captured 1762); sold 1775
Prince William 64 (ex-Spanish Guipuscoana, captured 1780)
Gibraltar 80 (1749, ex-Spanish Fenix, captured 1780) – broken up 1836
Princessa 70 (1750, ex-Spanish Princessa, captured 1780)
Monarca 70 (1756, ex-Spanish Monarca, captured 1780)
Diligent 70 (1756, ex-Spanish Diligente, captured 1780)
San Miguel 70 (1773, ex-Spanish San Miguel, captured 1780)
Prothee 64 (1772, ex-French Protée, captured 1780)
Princess Caroline (ex-Dutch, captured 1780) – Scuttled 1799
Rotterdam 50 (ex-Dutch, captured 1781) – sold 1806
Caesar 74 (ex-French César, captured 1782) – Blew up 1782
Hector 74 (1755, ex-French Hector, captured 1782)
Glorieux 74 (1756, ex-French Glorieux, captured 1782)
Pegase 74 (1781, ex-French Glorieux, captured 1782)
Caton 64 (1777, ex-French Caton, captured 1782)
Argonaut 64 (1779, ex-French Jason, captured 1782)
Solitaire 64 (1774, ex-French Solitaire, captured 1782)

And in the Great War the Germans liked the Lewis Gun so much the had factories to convert captured guns to their own ammunition.

And here is an article about T-34 tanks in German service in the second world war:-

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/panzerkampfwagen-t-34r-soviet-t-34-in-german-service.htm

 

[gord314]

Pretty sure what he means by tactical is if you view this game as say a math problem without any concern for back story or anything, what weapons would you trade disruptors for one to one?

 

[Totenkopf]

Oh I don't know. The sail driven Royal Navy captured a lot of ships and pressed them in to service.

Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ships_of_the_line_of_the_Royal_Navy

For instance, the 1755-1785 list of captured foreign vessels in the Royal Navy is

Alcide 64 (1743, ex-French Alcide, captured 1755); sold 1772
Lys 64 (1746, ex-French Lys, captured 1755)
Duc d'Aquitaine 64 (1754, ex-French Duc d'Aquitaine, captured 1757)
Foudroyant 80 (1750, ex-French Foudroyant, captured 1758); broken up 1787
Raisonnable 64 (1756, ex-French Rainsonnable, captured 1758); lost 1762
Bienfaisant 64 (1754, ex-French Bienfaisant, captured 1758); broken up 1814
Belliqueux 64 (1756, ex-French Belliqueux, captured 1758); broken up 1772
Modeste 64 (1759, ex-French Modeste, captured 1759); broken up 1800
Centaur 74 (1757, ex-French Centaure, captured 1759); foundered 1782 with the loss of most of her crew
Temeraire 74 (1749, ex-French Téméraire, captured 1759); sold 1784
Formidable 80 (1751, ex-French Formidable, captured 1759); broken up 1768
Courageux 74 (1753, ex-French Courageux, captured 1761)
Belleisle 64 (1760, ex-French Belleisle, captured 1761); sold 1819
Saint Ann 64 (1759, ex-French Saint Ann, captured 1761)
San Antonio 70 (1761, ex-Spanish San Antonio, captured 1762); sold 1775
Prince William 64 (ex-Spanish Guipuscoana, captured 1780)
Gibraltar 80 (1749, ex-Spanish Fenix, captured 1780) – broken up 1836
Princessa 70 (1750, ex-Spanish Princessa, captured 1780)
Monarca 70 (1756, ex-Spanish Monarca, captured 1780)
Diligent 70 (1756, ex-Spanish Diligente, captured 1780)
San Miguel 70 (1773, ex-Spanish San Miguel, captured 1780)
Prothee 64 (1772, ex-French Protée, captured 1780)
Princess Caroline (ex-Dutch, captured 1780) – Scuttled 1799
Rotterdam 50 (ex-Dutch, captured 1781) – sold 1806
Caesar 74 (ex-French César, captured 1782) – Blew up 1782
Hector 74 (1755, ex-French Hector, captured 1782)
Glorieux 74 (1756, ex-French Glorieux, captured 1782)
Pegase 74 (1781, ex-French Glorieux, captured 1782)
Caton 64 (1777, ex-French Caton, captured 1782)
Argonaut 64 (1779, ex-French Jason, captured 1782)
Solitaire 64 (1774, ex-French Solitaire, captured 1782)

And in the Great War the Germans liked the Lewis Gun so much the had factories to convert captured guns to their own ammunition.

And here is an article about T-34 tanks in German service in the second world war:-

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/panzerkampfwagen-t-34r-soviet-t-34-in-german-service.htm

So...where are the rules in ACTA:SF for capturing ships? Oh wait, there aren't any...why is that? Because we're dealing with a different era/mentality than the one that drove the Age of Sail navies to recommission captured enemy vessels. So...did it make tactical sense THEN? Apparently it did, but does it make tactical sense NOW or more importantly in the SFU? Apparently not. So if your purpose in bringing this up was simply to point out that it might perhaps would be nice to be able to recommission captured ships in ACTA:SF or in the SFU and then to reuse or otherwise appropriate and acquire weaponry from another faction...I can answer you in one of two ways, and you can have your pick of which you prefer. Wish in one hand, shit in the other. See which one fills up faster. Or alternatively, just because I wish money grew from a potted plant sitting in my back porch, doesn't mean it will or must. Take your pick.

To address your point about the Lewis Gun and the T-34 in German service.
1. They had to convert the captured Lewis Guns first, which does not happen in a field environment where one is beyond one's supply lines and must consider the possibility of using "alternative" weapons found either on the black market or from captured enemy equipment (I bring this point up ONLY because it was the context to which I addressed my response). So again...in case you didn't get it...you're comparing two different things in two different contexts.
2. I had already pointed out in my response that in isolated incidents this occurred, but generally this is not the practice of well equipped and organized military forces...so thanks for pointing out that such isolated incidents occurred.

 

[Totenkopf]

Pretty sure what he means by tactical is if you view this game as say a math problem without any concern for back story or anything, what weapons would you trade disruptors for one to one?

Definition of TACTICAL
1
: of or relating to combat tactics: as a (1) : of or occurring at the battlefront <a tactical defense> <a tactical first strike> (2) : using or being weapons or forces employed at the battlefront <tactical missiles> b of an air force : of, relating to, or designed for air attack in close support of friendly ground forces
2
a : of or relating to tactics: as (1) : of or relating to small-scale actions serving a larger purpose (2) : made or carried out with only a limited or immediate end in view b : adroit in planning or maneuvering to accomplish a purpose

"but it's mostly intended as a hypothetical question for the tactical sorts out here, rather than the timeline junkies. If you were offered the choice of a replacement for the (weapon systems X)es that you ran out of parts for, courtesy of, say, your local Orion black market suppliers as you forged your way on the far end of space on the wrong end of your usual supply chain, what would you be willing to take?"

I can deduce no such meaning of the word tactical from either its definition nor from his use of it, but it could just be because I find that silly little thing called context to be somewhat important, rather than that annoying thing that gets in the way of me wishing things meaning what I want them to mean.

 

[TJHairball]

(lots of examples)

And if those aren't enough, consider the history of the battleship Richelieu and the guns intended for use on its classmates. (Wikilink.) The Richelieu class mounted as a primary battery 15"/45 guns, which neither the Allied nor Axis forces were prepared to supply munitions for.

The Germans and British both fielded substantially less powerful 15" guns, respectively on the Bismarck and on the older British battleships; the Italians had a 15" gun with similar punch, but it was actually a slightly different caliber; and the remaining powers had never fielded 15" guns on their ships at all.

In spite of this, the Germans shipped the captured 15"/45 guns intended for use with the Richelieu class ships to Norway to use as coastal batteries, while the United States, after UK / Free French forces captured the Richelieu from Vichy forces, supplied it with custom-manufactured 15" ammunition.

But yeah, I'm interested in the tactical problem more than anything else. Call it an expedient; or suppose that you're refitting captured Romulan ships for expedient use by an ally or vassal, but are actually a [INSERT OTHER FACTION HERE] commander with its logistical resources; or maybe, like me, you're a fan of a certain nameless television series in which Klingons are seen using magnetic pulse weapons, plasma weapons, photon torpedoes, cloaking devices, and what-not; but just tell me what weapons systems you would be willing to replace with what on whose ships.

 

[Totenkopf]

(lots of examples)

And if those aren't enough, consider the history of the battleship Richelieu and the guns intended for use on its classmates. (Wikilink.) The Richelieu class mounted as a primary battery 15"/45 guns, which neither the Allied nor Axis forces were prepared to supply munitions for.

The Germans and British both fielded substantially less powerful 15" guns, respectively on the Bismarck and on the older British battleships; the Italians had a 15" gun with similar punch, but it was actually a slightly different caliber; and the remaining powers had never fielded 15" guns on their ships at all.

In spite of this, the Germans shipped the captured 15"/45 guns intended for use with the Richelieu class ships to Norway to use as coastal batteries, while the United States, after UK / Free French forces captured the Richelieu from Vichy forces, supplied it with custom-manufactured 15" ammunition.

But yeah, I'm interested in the tactical problem more than anything else. Call it an expedient; or suppose that you're refitting captured Romulan ships for expedient use by an ally or vassal, but are actually a [INSERT OTHER FACTION HERE] commander with its logistical resources; or maybe, like me, you're a fan of a certain nameless television series in which Klingons are seen using magnetic pulse weapons, plasma weapons, photon torpedoes, cloaking devices, and what-not; but just tell me what weapons systems you would be willing to replace with what on whose ships.

Great, so two long paragraphs just to express that you have no idea what context is either, refer back to the statement that YOU made to which I responded. Clearly a different situation than the one you describe here. As for being a fan of "a certain nameless television series", the things which you describe will never make it into this game because it would violate ADB's license on the Star Trek IP, so way to pay attention there too

 

[gord314]

As for the original prompt, I would trade everything in the federation fleet 1-1 for more phaser-1s. It would be nice to trade F photon torpedoes for FH phaser-1s, but I would take F if that was the only option. I would trade drones for turreted phaser-1s for sure, but probably just FH would do.

The reasoning for this only applies in the game ACTA:SF, it doesn't apply to SFB or FC, and it doesn't apply fluff wise. It works well in ACTA because you can take power drains and only fire phasers every turn without penalty.

 

[Nerroth]

You are able to capture ships in both SFB and FC; I don't recall if Starmada lets you do so as well. I'm not overly sure why there are no capture rules in ACtA:SF, though I hope the matter might be revisited at some future point.

One thing to bear in mind with the Age of Sail examples is that all of those (European and Euro-colonial) ships were built using fairly common construction techniques, with at least broadly interchangeable materials, weapons and (human) crews. Yes, there were the odd distinct ship types (such as the original six heavy frigates of the early US Navy) but even they would not have been overly challenging for a would-be captor navy to run.

It's a bit different once you start getting into rival spaceships built with alien technologies, exotic materials, and other logistical challenges. (Well, not quite as much with this early wave of fleets, but things get far more exotic the further in you go; and even now, of the seven starter empires, at least one, the Tholians, have web technology that no-one else in the SFU can operate or reverse-engineer.)