Dynaverse.net

Taldrenites => Dynaverse II Experiences => Topic started by: Capt_Bearslayer_XC on March 20, 2006, 06:45:24 am

Title: SFC: F&E Rule debate #4
Post by: Capt_Bearslayer_XC on March 20, 2006, 06:45:24 am
Conjectural Ships.  *waits for moans and groans to pass*

Do we want to include these?

This means R-KCR, Fed PF's (and Tenders), F-BB, and all the other conjecturals on the shiplist. 

Also, do the Taldren abberations go away? (example: F-BCE)

I do not want the Taldren creations. (even if everyone wants them, they will probably go away)

But the Conjecturals have pluses and minuses. 

They will not be easily gained (such as the KCR where the Roms will have to convince the Klingons to build a C7 and then give it to them) and will definately be pricey.

But if the players want to see use them, they can be made available.
Title: Re: SFC: F&E Rule debate #4
Post by: KHH_Jakle on March 20, 2006, 07:27:04 am
Thing about the conjecturals is that many of them COULD HAVE been built...but for whatever reason weren't.

The KCR is a perfect example - the Rom's had a design for it, but couldn't get the Klinks to build one just for them.  There are a bunch of KR ships like that.

Then there are the unique ships - like the F-CAD or the Klink AD6

You may want to do a ship be ship decisioning....
Title: Re: SFC: F&E Rule debate #4
Post by: Hexx on March 20, 2006, 08:33:58 am
Actually you might have to do this on a ship-ship basis

Most conjectural ships I don't (really) have an issue with, but there's even a difference in CJ stuff
(as an example) Lyran CVD was considered, Lyran BCV's weren't- but would have been IF the Lyran's had decided to go wtih fighter's rather than PF's, and of course the infamous
Fed PF's are (according to sfb) beyond conjectural, never built, never looked at
never considered.

But there are of course some other ships- Everyone's (well my favourite) CVD's /CVP's
The Romulan-Klingon ships- the abiltyi for Rom Klink ships to be built and transferred
(technically as I understand it- any of these ships would have to be built by the Klinks and then "sold" to the Roms)
Stuff like the battle tugs- they can be built, are they going to be permitted on (very questionable)
"front line" duty?
Title: Re: SFC: F&E Rule debate #4
Post by: 762_XC on March 20, 2006, 09:11:30 am
Here's a list of the conjecturals from hardcore. Most of these can be categorized pretty easily.

Battleships - easily governed using modified F&E rules

F-BB
F-BBn
F-BBV
G-BB
G-BBF
H-MNR
H-MNV
I-BB
I-BBZ
I-BBV
I-BBVZ
K-B8
K-B10n
K-MB10
K-B11K
K-B11V
K-B10T
L-BB
L-BBF
L-BBT
Z-BB
Z-BBV
R-K10R
R-K10RF
R-KCN
R-KCNF

Mauler Dreadnoughts - dunno bout these. Anyone have this module?

K-MC8
K-MC8B
K-MC8K
K-MC8R

Medium and War Dreadnoughts - these I believe were all conversions. We could allow this, but I expect they would be expensive (5 points or more).

F-DNW
F-DNM
H-DNM
K-C5M
K-WD5
L-DNM
L-DNMF
L-DNMT
G-DNM
I-DNW
Z-DNM
Z-DNW
R-CNM

Tourney Ships - don't need

H-TLM
I-TCA
K-D7CT

Taldren Ships - right out the window

H-PAH
L-DNHE

Demonhawk/Omnihawk - Do we really need these? This is ADB trying to make more money.

R-DMH-AK
R-DMH-AE
R-DMH-AG
R-DMH-CK
R-DMH-CG
R-DMH-GK
R-DMH-GG
R-DMH-GE
R-MGH-KK
R-MGH-MK
R-MGH-GK
R-MGH-EK
R-OMH-KK
R-OMH-MK
R-OMH-GK
R-OMH-EK

Unbuilt KR conversions

R-KDA - only 3 D5's were ever received
R-KCR - no C7's were received
R-KCRF - no C7's were received

Other

F-NAL - not on the SIT, so I would say no.
G-DLF - not on the SIT, so I would say no.
G-DND - not on the SIT, so I would say no.
G-DNHph - is this real or is it Taldren?

Fed PF's should probably be in. Keep in mind we already have one Alliance race using the Third Way out of necessity.

Unique ships - easy, keep them unique.
Title: Re: SFC: F&E Rule debate #4
Post by: 762_XC on March 20, 2006, 09:14:28 am
Those might not be all the conjecturals - I went by Firesoul's "Production Availability" column, and I know there are more Taldren ships than that. But it gives us a starting point.

Ultimately if it's not in both 4.0 and on the SIT's I wouldn't even consider including it, possibly excepting the DNM's and DNW's.
Title: Re: SFC: F&E Rule debate #4
Post by: Skaren on March 20, 2006, 09:44:09 am
Keep it Simple,...
Title: Re: SFC: F&E Rule debate #4
Post by: 762_XC on March 20, 2006, 12:02:43 pm
Simple would be tourney ships only. The shiplist is probably going to be the easiest part.
Title: Re: SFC: F&E Rule debate #4
Post by: Hexx on March 20, 2006, 12:05:24 pm
Those might not be all the conjecturals - I went by Firesoul's "Production Availability" column, and I know there are more Taldren ships than that. But it gives us a starting point.

Ultimately if it's not in both 4.0 and on the SIT's I wouldn't even consider including it, possibly excepting the DNM's and DNW's.

As long as the Lyran's can build an ahistorical carrier based fleet I wouldn't have any issues with including CJ ships
And I'd second the idea that Unique ships stay Unique.
Title: Re: SFC: F&E Rule debate #4
Post by: Lepton on March 20, 2006, 05:48:54 pm
Is there a mechanism in F&E for incorporating these conjectural ships into its production schedule?  I'd say if the conjectural ships are not in F&E they need not be added in.
Title: Re: SFC: F&E Rule debate #4
Post by: 762_XC on March 20, 2006, 06:06:12 pm
That's what the SIT's do.

That said, bear in mind the SIT's include ships from every F&E expansion package. Stuff that needs special rules to handle it that is not included in basic F&E is probably not going to be used.
Title: Re: SFC: F&E Rule debate #4
Post by: Hexx on March 20, 2006, 07:30:13 pm
I think the "problematic" CJ stuff should be easy enough to weed out
Basically if t00l wants to fly it , it should be considered OTT.

But yeah, the SIT's have all the data needed for the CJ ships- most of which are simple(?) conversions.

The only "new hull" CJ ships I can think of (aside from hte BB's) are that Fed cruiser thing (unique) and the Omni hawks
(were they CJ? thought they built at least one..)