RE: FB2 Fleets (or "How I Learned to Hate the Savasku")

One, seemingly simple, fix may be to mandate that if a SV construct has
screen nodes, that ONE be powered at all times. AND mandate that all SV
at
mass 91 and above must carry a screen node. 

I have not playtested this, but it seems to be worth looking at. I
looked at
making all screen nodes manditory, but that usually takes half (or more)
of
the available power. The second part about mandating a screen node on SV
constructs larger than 91 mass was added as an after-thought to help
when
custom fleets are brought to a one-off game. I chose 91 for 2 reasons:
1) It
covered all the ships in FB2. 2) It is a seperation point between
Capital
ships and Cruisers.

This would go a long way to lowering the effectiveness of SV fleets
against
all species fleets. It tops the power curve. On average a screen node
takes
about 25% of the available power (give or take a point using the FB2
ships).
Thus, the SV construct would have only about 75% of power to apply to
weapons or drive.

I also like this because it does not take any changing of existing rules
(just adding two new rules).

I would, lastly, suggest one exception to this rule. A SV construct may
unpower the screen if it is engaging (writing orders to use) the FTL
node.

Situations not handled by this rule:
 - Constructs under 91 mass. Smaller ships are generally less powerful
in
comparison to larger ships, so have thier own drawbacks.

-----
Brian Bell
bkb@beol.net
http://members.xoom.com/rlyehable/ft/	   
-----

> -----Original Message-----
> From: aebrain@dynamite.com.au [SMTP:aebrain@dynamite.com.au]
> Sent: None
> To:	gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> Subject:	Re: FB2 Fleets (or "How I Learned to Hate the Savasku")
> 
> >>So, what I'd like to know is:  Have any of you who have more
experience
> >>with one or both of these alien fleets seen the same thing, or am
just
> >>being whiny?  And second, if I am being whiny, what sort of tactics
can
> >>you suggest for playing the Kra'vak effectively without having to
rely
> >>too much on fighters, and/or countering the advantages of the
Sa'vasku,
> >>particularly when playing Kra'vak.
> 
> The SV are too powerful vs the KV. You're not being too whiny, the
> play-testing
> was inadequate.
> 
> I speak as one of the play-testers.
> 
> All I can say is that there was a shipload of playtesting, but this
didn't
> come
> out.
> 
> OK, so what is the solution? Things currently being tried are:
> 
> a) Spicules come from the Defensive energy allocation pile. (Good as
far
> as
> it goes, but not enough)
> b) Cost of Stinger fire increased by 1 pt per die ( so at range 36" it
> costs
> 4+1 = 5, at 12" it is 1+1 = 2) *OR*
> c) Range brackets for Stingers decreased to 8" or even 6" instread of
12".
> So
> it costs 1 pt at 6, 2 at 12, 4 at 18 etc.
> 
>