Federation Commander

In the tactics manual Patrick covers cornering an opponent with plasma (under Romulan Tactics). In that he points out the target will get a HET to escape if he is careful, so that even cornering is not a way of ensuring a hit. Now Patrick was clear at the start of his Romulan section that this section is tourney focused, and other scenarios may be different. The cornering issue, however, sounds quite generic. What Patrick says about cornering is true. But this is in my opinion worth expanding upon.

My main plasma experience is with Gorns (but again cornering someone is generic, not Romulan specific). Unlike Patrick it is mainly in non-tourney games, where we play on much larger maps, but still fixed/location so there are indeed corners/edges. The following is based on that scenario, rather than a Romulan tourney scenario.

In a game with say 3 cruisers vs 3 cruisers (roughly the tourney setup points wise give or take) then the Gorns will probably have 6 plasma S and 6 Plasma F. We have chased the craven enemy towards a corner by appropriately herding him there with some of our plasma, the how is not important here, but a read of Patricks generic plasma section will give you the clues and building blocks. Depending on who you fight, and how well you played you should have at least half your plasma left, hopefully a bit more. We are fairly close behind and plasma should hit quite early for high strength warheads. But the perfidious enemy has read the tactics manual and knows how to get away from even this position. The enemy can HET if you launch your plasma in a lead pursuit, and just run if it trailing. So what to do?

You have 6+ plasma left, a large map to run on whilst reloading. Launch everything - leading and pursuit. Pick your target and fire 60+ points trailing and 90+ points leading. One way or another one lot will hit. You launch the bigger lot to hit him if he carries on as he is (I'm assuming with the rest of his ships). If he wants to HET from the bigger group then he will still get hit by the trailing group (with 5 less power for phasers) and have split from the other 2 ships which may be a positional disadvantage. If needed you now start running whilst rearming. In all likely hood you will not have long to wait, as the plasma you launched earlier in the game is probably coming back on line next turn and more the turn after.

Patricks comment about cornered opponents being able to escape are true if all you can do is fire a single plasma (or throw it as a single stack). In a single ship duel you will have a problem. With a 3 Romulan ship (plasma R) force if you have used some Plasma R to herd the enemy and get him cornered but your fleet can now only rake up 1 Plasma R you haven't achieved much. In many ways this is why I prefer the ships with 2 plasma S rather than a single plasma R. It gives you the ability to throw out decent plasma and still maintain a decent plasma threat. Again read the bit about Plasma in the tube being better than launched plasma in the tactics manual, I personally find that a key aspect of plasma.


An additional point as you are still approaching a potential 'trap' point. Give a serious look at the power position of the enemy, and the ship you are hoping to plasma. It will be running at speed 24, and need a HET (to escape a single plasma/stack). If you have been herding and phasering the enemy for 2 or 3 turns it may be out of battery. For some empires that may mean they are running out of power, especially if they are arming or holding heavy weapons. For example, if your Fed opponent is still holding overloaded photons, that he armed at the start of the game and has not had chance to fire, then he may be another 8 power down. A Fed cruiser will be paying 24 + 8 = 32. No batteries, 5 for the HET = 37. A Fed CA will not be able to HET, and the Fed NCA will only have 1 power max left afterwards, so even if he does HET he will not be running for long before big plasma catches him. Do you think you can draw out any extra power before launching? Is he the sort of person who might reinforce some phaser fire on his already weak rear shield? or me-to accel if you accel in at him?

A further possibility in multi ships games, much more aggressive and considerably more situational, but is something I have done at least once.

You have the enemy against an edge/corner. Lob out your main plasma strike in a lead pursuit against your preferred target, but instead of the extra stack trailing the main target fire the rest of the plasma against the other ships in a trailing pursuit. The amounts you will have to figure out given the situation.

The idea here is that the main target now pretty much has to eat the plasma or spend energy to HET and speed back towards you (you will make sure you have or can cut of his HET route). The other enemy ships are safe to keep running, but if they HET with the main target they spend 5 power and eat some plasma, hopefully leaving them with no great offensive ability for the moment, and having used the free HET up which can bite them later in the game.

You then have all your ships against just 1 of his, and whilst you have no plasma you probably have more than enough phasers to waste the target, who having HET'd and accel'd maybe able to do little. It is even possible you can just tractor him and wait for the plasma to catch him. This allows you to use your phasers against any other ships that did HET round to help the target.

You should have an escape plan before doing this, as it relies a lot on what the other person does, but it can be unexpected and can be amusing as the other guy works out whether he can or cannot afford to HET with each ship and what the consequence will be etc.

I've enjoyed reading your thoughts on Plasma. Hopefully others will join in. I've never played Plasma in a campaign setting. We've usually stuck to Feds and Klingons in campaigns. I'm hoping to get back into actually playing in the coming months. Cheers!

We did the classic Fed vs Klingon (using all the older ships and no 'new'/'war' vessels) as our first ever significant campaign. Boy did I get bored of Feds after a while. It was also where we really came to the conclusion that the 'standard' map is just far too small for FedCom with its faster speeds and more emphasis on multiple ships than SFB. Klingons just kept getting thumped by Feds, as they lack the room to maneuver. As we played other campaigns with other empires we played around with map sizes quite a bit but never went back to the 32*40 map.

We don't play FedCom much now (after 5 years or so playing every week the other guys wanted to do other stuff), but our last full campaign was won by Gorns, largely due to strategic aspects (2 other players were too focused on my Andros, and let the Gorn player get too potent). But they were certainly in their element assaulting the Fed 'home' world with its Starbase and DefSats, and they were able to hold off the largest Andro force that I ever fielded in a single battle.

No matter who they are opposed by,
always felt the Fed Com rules were a tad
bias toward the Feds.
They kind of cover up the Feds SFB flaws,
and dampened some things the Klingons relied on.

The tactics for plasma in the tactics manual are largely tourney focused. Probably the best parts regarding plasma are in the Romulan section, which is very explicitly tourney focused. There are a few sections there which are good advice generally though, even for non tourney games. However, I wish to post some stuff that is more explicity about the games I tend to play. This was originally going to be about 'herding', but a few other bits started getting bigger as I was typing.

Whilst the tactics manual says the standard tourney map is time tested, it was time tested in a different game, most 'testing' in FC has shown serious balance issues in the tourney, and not just for plasma. As I've noted elsewhere I view the small tourney size map as being pretty unsuitable for FedCom. Not just for plasma, but just generally. Partly due to increased speed of the ships compared to SFB (at least as I remember) which effectively shrank the map relative to that game. but also due to size of game. The amount of room to have a good 1 vs 1 duel on is not the same as the amount of room for a good fleet vs fleet action. The small map significantly advantages just a few empires, and makes many empires play to a style they never appear to have been designed for. Over the years we have migrated from the tourney size 'standard' map to a sort of location map that is 7*7 panels (large hexes) or about 56*63, which still feels a bit small to me. Ideally for a simple open map with pure tourney like playstyle then I'd say 99*99 would be better for squadron+ games (~3 turns movement in any direction) but this may be impractical for FtF play - no problem online of course. However, most of our games are not simple kill all on an open map as we have been more campaign focused, which mitigates to some extent the smaller map size. If we went to small hexes we would be on more or less a perfect size map IMO, but we much prefer large hexes and counters. Nothing to do with age, failing eyesight and arthritic hands!

So what does map size have to do with plasma. Well it significantly changes the dynamics of the game and what will or will not work as a tactic. In particular regarding the plasma you need to launch at any given time and the issues faced whilst reloading.

A bit about map edges.

Bane and boon. I've seen some argue the fixed map is realistic, as it defines what you are fighting over, others that space is big and open maps are more realistic. I tend to the latter myself, however, there are reasons I will go for map edges. In our campaigns games where fleets start getting involved it can get impossible to keep floating, it is quite possible for ships to be on every edge, so who floats where? Disengagment in FC is largely impossible without map egdes, it doesn't have disengagement by speed as SFB used to have (though we implemented a house rule for that) so disengagment still nearly always required map edges to head for when you wanted to disengage. With 3 or 4 players we couldn't really afford to prolong games between 2 players more then needed, and open map games do take longer if both sides are being cautious - and that tended to be the case in our campaigns where losing ships had long term consequences.

Whilst I accept map edges, I don't want to feel that one side or the other is nobbled purely on the basis of map edges and weapon arming cycles. We might fight over an 'area of space' but not in an area half of what one side needs to reasonably use its weapons. Weapon arming cycles IMO should just be about the tactics of the 3 turn arming plasma cycle vs a contantly firing disrupter and how it affects who is attacking or defending at any point in time, the energy involved etc, and not whether a wall prevents me running whilst that 3 turns go by. Clearly at some point that wall will happen, but as much as possible I would like to feel that I had the room but the enemy has out played me over a few turns and I finally ran out of the space that was otherwise big enough. So whilst getting trapped against the map edge is somethhing that happens, and even something that each side looks to use, it should be something that requires some real effort and not merely because your weapons take a while to heat up.

So lets assume the larger 99*99 map. The 2 sides start about the traditional 30 hexes apart, across the map center. Gorns are one side with their 3 cruisers, some other empire on the other with their 3 cruisers.

Turn 1 I arm up and advance . They do the same. They are at speed 24 because .. well that is obvious. I am at speed 24 because you need to be generally speaking when playing Gorns - if you can't press home on the enemy (who is speed 24) then you are no threat, nor can you keep away when needed.

Now we have a quick look at the tactics manual, as I say some of what it says in there is perfectly valid here as well, it is just the different scenario requires you to look at it a little different. I hope no one minds me quoting a few bit of this?

The way to know you have launched enough is to ask
yourself 'if he ignores my plasma and keeps coming, will I
be satisfied with the result?' If the answer is 'no,' then you
have launched too few torpedoes. The converse is also true.
To know if you have launched too many, ask yourself 'if he
just evades this launch, will I be satisfied with the result?' If
the answer is 'no,' then you launched too many.

This is the same question you ask on the larger map. However, generally speaking the answer for any given amount may well be different.

On a small map; if you launched and the enemy keeps closing after using a few phasers and taking the rest on an offside shield he is now getting close to (or into) overload range unless you turned away to avoid range 8 or less. A quick glance tells you that you will hit the map edge within the turn. Not good, you either face off against his direct firepower or get trapped shortly. You have little room to avoid an imminent overload volley, and can't really afford to go launching more plasma that he can still outrun, and then wait 3 turns to rearm with no where to run. So in order to answer yes to 'would you be happy if he continued' you have to have done significant damage.


On a larger map; you have a bit more leeway. If he continues in he has taken the shield/internal damage, and you are moving away. You have a glance around and see ~45 hexes at least to any map edge. You can launch more plasma, maybe a couple of Fs head on. See what he does again. What ever you do you have at least an extra turn before map edges are an issue. That means plasma launched now will be already partially rearmed by the time you get 'trapped' and launch a big whack to really force him away. All the time he is getting degraded by the plasma dribble and phaser fire. If he does run away when you let rip then he can't be so sure he can trap you either before rearming - you have more space and some of your plasma already part armed.


So the big difference is that on a larger map smaller amounts of plasma are quite viably launched, without putting you in a bind. Without the immediate threat of a map edge the benefit of the enemy taking the plasma damage is considerably lower. Again to quote the Tactics manual.

This can work because [...] of the tactical difference between
taking a small amount of internal damage to engage versus
taking a down shield or small amount of internal damage
to start turning around.

[...]

however, after two
impulses of turning off, the Federation choices are no longer
the same. They can turn back in and try to engage again,
but unless they can turn back in and engage immediately
(e.g., the Romulan made serious movement errors), then
turning back in and accepting significant damage from the
plasma-R will no longer generate commensurate positive
results.

Here the manual is saying in essence that it is fine to take 'some' plasma damage if it means you engage the enemy. But you shouldn't if that isn't the case. The difference is that on the small map you need to force them to turn to make the cost too much. On the larger map the fact that you have the distance to keep moving provides the same issue for the enemy - he takes damage but without succesfully engaging. On the small map you were advised to launch 1 Plasma R and maybe a couple of F's (the F's to provide the extra 'umph' that forces the turn). On a larger map the R alone will do, if he doesn't turn he takes it and still doesn't get to engage in a reasonable time frame.


Having realised that it takes smaller amounts to achieve a good result you will find that it takes less to make someone turn away, if there is no imminent map edge to get you against. This means that a smaller launch will turn them, you can then pursue whilst having significant plasma left. That is not to say the pursuit is easy by any means. Each enemy presents different challenges, drone throwers are difficult to pursue, photons provide the ever present threat of a sudden HET and kill ships before you can launch more plasma, wide arc disrupters or lots of rear firing phasers can be painful even when pursuing.

[maybe to be continued, getting late and tired]

Follow up to above. A quick look at what ships I prefer.

We'll start with the easiest bit, Gorn over Roms. Moving on..., well ok a quick explanation. Roms are not for me the plasma empire, Gorns are. So if I am wanting to play plasma I go straight for Gorn. Roms to me are the sneaky cloaking empire who happen to also use plasma. Except the cloak is largely useless and you pay a hefty premium for it. We did play-test a good bit the early cloaking changes that were proposed on these forums (which I think are not too dissimilar to the ones more recently published in a communique?). Those rules looked like they made cloak a lot better and probably worthwhile, possibly too good as they made void almost a total non-issue. With better cloaks I would be very tempted by Roms, but I'd still see them as the sneaky cloaky empire and not the empire I'd choose for playing plasma per se.

When it comes to Gorn there is something that I need to cover. The cost of their ships, or their cruisers at the very least. I can happily put my hand on my heart and say that for the last 5/6 years whilst we have played the type of games we tend to play that plasma is as good as any other heavy weapon. I accept the tourney is a very different beast. If I look at the Gorn cruisers (BC/CM/CS) and compare them too any other standard heavy cruiser ship (i.e. not Tholian N**, ISC, Andro) then I see the 2 plasS and 2 plasF as being pretty much the same as 4 photons, 4 disrupters or heavy weapons of other cruisers. I don't think the plasma is better or worse, just comparable. However, the Gorn cruisers are pointed quite notably higher, and unfortunately noticeably above the 150 pt mark. There is no doubt in my mind that the Gorn cruisers are badly pointed irrespective of peoples views on plasma.

This can screw the Gorns in points based games as 150 pts tends to be synonymous with 'heavy cruiser', it is partly what kills them in a tourney - plasma isn't good due to failings in the tourney scenario and you are forced to play 2 cruisers and a 1 smaller ships vs other peoples 3 cruisers (or 4 hydrans cruisers), of course you don't have to take cruisers, but they are core ships. It isn't great in non tourney games either, a few times when we have just played a one off game and gone for say 300 pts there has then been a quick discussion to say Gorn cruisers count as 150pts (or some equivalent). Other Gorn ships may be wrong, but I tend to focus on the Cruisers as they, IMO, are the most important ships in the game in a number of ways, so them being poorly pointed tends to be very noticeable.

How you deal with that is up to you. Fortunately for us, with an emphasis on campaigns, the idea of fights having to be between equal point fleets has much less prominence. We have used the points values to feed into various reinforcement/production rules for campaigns, but the difference tends to get lost, or be fairly minor in the systems we have played with.


In light of that I am discussing on the basis that the points issue is not a problem as such, and that a Gorn cruiser = any other cruiser.

Ok so I am on a large map, for sake of discussion I'm going with 99*99 again. It is multiple ships per side. What ships do I like, and why. I am just looking at cruisers here as what I think largely covers everything I'd be looking at for any ship.

Before diving into the ships a quick note on how a game goes. I find the Gorn play style splits into 3 basic phases.
1) You are packing heat and trying to force the other guy to turn and get behind him, whilst not getting into 'his range'.
2) You are pursuing, hopefully to a corner to deliver a good strike.
3) You have insufficient plasma to be offensive and maybe running whilst rearming.

For the first phase your front firepower is not important. You need to be able to fire plasma and phasers whilst not being committed head on at the other guy - you are often not wanting to close to overload range or some other range where you get walloped. You want to instead launch and circle, capable of turning and running if needed or turning and pursuing. Maintaining that option is vital, and that is best done with the enemy to port or starboard, not in front.

For the last phase (or hopefully not last phase, but just a temporary one before going back to number 1) you really don't want to face the other guy. Having firepower out the rear half is nice to help discourage pursuit.

The second phase is where front half firepower is good, or more accurately the ability to dump everything as you make your main strike is nice.

The Gorns offer 3 major heavy cruisers. The BC, CM and CS. These are very similar ships, but for the way I like to play Gorns there are some key differences.

1) Phasers. The BC has the extra wing phasers and loses the 360 that other 2 ships has. This means it has an extra phaser, which can be good when you start losing them. It also means that in theory you have a slightly better phaser volley down the font and rear centerlines. For the most part, however, I've found this to mean little. Getting the centerline is not that easy with turn mode D as you will often not have move initiative, but as noted above centerline does not really play to the tactics, and even if you do you are not exactly awash with power to use that extra phaser. You will probably be speed 24, holding or arming plasma on a constant cycle, and in need of some accels and maybe batteries for reinforcement etc. A 6th phaser may be beyond what you can afford anyway.

All 3 ships have other wise identical phasers. They can all fire some out of any arc, which is good, but non can exactly bring large number out of any arc. The BC is IMO the better ship for its extra phaser, but only by a minor amount.

2) Power. This is where the BC loses out big time. The other 2 are 40+4 compared to 38+4. That is pretty significant. Plasma (for either side) is a fast moving power hungry game, and every point of power is a big gain. Not much else to say here.

3) plasma. Here it is. The whole point of the plasma discussion. You have 3 choices, the CS gives you the nice big PlasR, but only 1. The others give you 2 PlasS. I'll cover the CS first.

Forget it!

"What, but the tactics manual says it is all about the plasR."

Yes, but that is the Romulan section, and explicitly the tourney scene. If the play-test rules for cloak become reality then for Roms I would, I imagine, also go Plas R with them. Partly because with Romulans I prefer (for purely style reasons) to play the real Romulans in their Eagles and not the later "look at my curvy ship" Romulan pretenders. But also as noted the Roms are about cloaks IMO, and the way Gorns have to play and how you would play with cloaks are not likely to be the same.

"But the Gorn section says that lack of plasR is a disadvantage"

I disagree. Of course bear in mind the Gorn section may have still been focused on tourney games, not what I'm talking about.

Why don't I think the plasR works. There are 2 reasons. First it is FA, and that is a problem. It means that in order to threaten someone you need to point at them. That may be fine in some cases, say an initial approach where you launch at range (cos the plasR has the range) and then maybe turn aside if needed, but there are times when you will not have that space to turn in and launch; without putting your self in a position that is hard to recover from if the enemy keeps coming. The 2nd reason is that you get 1 plasR vs 2 plasS. Once you have launched that plasR you have no great threat, or ability to follow up. You have to be able to retain sufficient threat to put off the other guy coming through the plasma. Depending on size of battle you may see a plasR get phasered down, and with (maybe) only some PlasF left limited ways to make the other guy think twice about still carrying on. Even if he does turn, you have little left to make any great pursuit. You chase him as he runs from the Rs and then as it runs out what do you do? The other guy starts turning and you lack the plasma which really says 'turning on me is bad'. You get him to an edge/ corner and then what? - you have no good plasma to catch him whilst he is trapped. For me the CS with its plasR is the wrong ships for this type of fight. They may work on smaller maps, but not here.

The CS has another weakness, that I'll cover more below - its plasFs arcs.

OK so we have dropped the CS as a ship to take. So that leaves us with the BC/CM. Given what we have said above, I like BC for its extra Ph1 and really like the CM for its extra power. What about the plasma, they both have 2*S and 2*F. However, they are a million miles apart in usefulness.

Like the Kzinti and their BC/NCA we have a design board that have taken a ship with great weapon arcs and 'improved' it by changing to a useless forward focus, but then gave you more power! Argggh! Power yes, but why ruin a perfectly good weapon layout!

OK that pretty much gives it away as to my thoughts on the plasma. Basically look at what I was saying about the 3 phases I see with the Gorn tactics in this type of scenario. Forward focus is not where it is at. You want to be able to drop big plasma from side arcs if needed during the early stages. In the late stages (or indeed early on if you get it wrong) the ability to drop a plasF back at someone is golden. The CM has FP big plasma, which are not bad, way better than FA plasR, but they just lack the ability to reach around and get someone who is outside the forward half. In the early stages it can very easily happen that you will need to work hard to get someone to run away with enough ships to then turn on them yourself. Whilst circling it can readily happen that they criss-cross that FH line. Equally later on as you try to transition back from phase 3 to phase 1 you will find a need to launch as you are starting to turn back round, and before you are facing them.

What about that 2nd phase, where the forward firepower may be more useful? This is where the CM is better. But maybe not by as much as it might appear. By the time you have run someone to an edge/corner you will be down some plasma. So long as you have planned things right you just ensure that the side you have your remaining plasma on is the side you will have bearing for that launch. The BCs plasS have a front overlap, albeit a bit narrow, if you have 2 of them left on your ships. Even if you can't launch a plasF due to LS/RS arcs you will probably find that having 1 left in the tube is a very useful thing anyway, as the enemy fleet turns on you, as you can drop it back at a pursuer.

The BCs arcs, both LP/RP on the plasS and the LS/RS arcs on the plasF are just so much better IMO. Full 360 coverage with plasma provides so much flexibility.

Overall it is a tough call (and I find the same with Kzinti BC/NCA). The extra power of the CM is just so useful, but the plasma arcs just so mess with the ship and what to me seem the best tactics for the Gorn. I've yet to decide on whether either is better than the other.

Once you have launched that plasR you have no great threat, or ability to follow up.

You have carronades. They're not as powerful as heavy seeking plasma, but if you turn someone and get close, you can actually hit with them, and the enemy can neither phaser them down nor run them out. Think of them as a pair of overloaded disruptors that always hit.

The real issue with the R Torp is that, as they said in Highlander, there can be only one. So if your plan is to turn them, pursue with carronades, and only reload the heavy torps as two turn Fs, then you're shorting yourself a bolted torp later. The R torp is more important for Romulans because they have no carronade.

The BCs arcs, both LP/RP on the plasS and the LS/RS arcs on the plasF are just so much better IMO. Full 360 coverage with plasma provides so much flexibility.

I haven't really played Gorns all that much, but I've faced them quite a bit. In my experience, yes, the BC can be more of a problem to deal with.

I've played a number of Gorn/Klingon matchups, and the Klingons, I think, are better equipped than most races to go after Gorns. Expanded disruptor arcs and broad phaser arcs mean that the Klinks can run out the Gorn's heavy plasma and still give the big lizards a lot of grief without ever having to get turned back around. And if the Gorns plan on closing to range 5 and carronading, they find that the Klingons have quite a bit of disposable power for buying acceleration.

You have carronades. They're not as powerful as heavy seeking plasma, but if you turn someone and get close, you can actually hit with them, and the enemy can neither phaser them down nor run them out. Think of them as a pair of overloaded disrupters that always hit.

Chasing with carronades really doesn't fit into the overall tactics I'm talking about.

Carronades have a range of 5. Someone outrunning plasma is moving fast, so unless you started more or less at that range you are not going to get the shot. If you did get that close before they turned from the plasma R then you have probably missed the point; the idea is to get them to run before they hammer you. Using the Plasma R to make them turn from that sort of range so you can put 2 carronades per ship into them is really not going to cut it; they probably just hit you with 4 heavy weapons plus maybe some phasers, and you hit them with 2 carronades, then having used both the R and the two Fs you have nothing to discourage them turning back on you for a close range fight, which given the range you are currently at is not good.

Add in the that your carronades are centerline based and you have another reason to not base a plan on them. Your turn mode D ships are struggling to centerline against someone who will always be speed 24.

That's not to say the carronades are a total no-no, they just don't form part of a plan for this type of game. They are more an emergency tactic..

The plasR cruisers are really the wrong ships for this style of play on a large map.

Carronades are opportunity weapons. You use them when an opportunity presents, you don't really plan to use them unless you're taking on a drone thrower. They're good for taking down drones and saving your phasers for hitting back.

I've played a number of Gorn/Klingon matchups, and the Klingons, I think, are better equipped than most races to go after Gorns. Expanded disruptor arcs and broad phaser arcs mean that the Klinks can run out the Gorn's heavy plasma and still give the big lizards a lot of grief without ever having to get turned back around. And if the Gorns plan on closing to range 5 and carronading, they find that the Klingons have quite a bit of disposable power for buying acceleration.

Ignoring the bit about carronades, as that just isn't what Gorn tactics are about IMO.

It's hard to say who is the worst. Each of the direct fire empires presents very different challenges. Here's my take on comparing Gorn vs Feds or Klingons.

Fed:
Depends a lot on whether they go for standard photons or overloads on turn 1. On a larger maps the overloads are not the clear game winner they are on the small map, irrespective of who they face. So that is the first thing the Fed has to decide on.

If they overload then you face 2 challenges. First is you absolutely 100% must make them turn before they hit range 8. If you let them get the range 8 shot then you have more or less lost the battle, as this isn't a small 1 vs 1 where photons may not work out. With multiple ships per side there is sufficient photons firing to say that you will be relying on fluke to escape an instant game losing attack. You are not capable of delivering a similar strike back at the same time the Feds fire and they will be able to use the large map to their advantage whilst rearming with a now significant edge in ships.

The second issue is that if you can turn them before they fire photons then you have to be wary about just how close you chase them. Again, you must not let them get a photon strike and then run away, that means you must watch out for any possibility of a HET on you. Obviously if you turned them they are still holding those overloads. For the most part you cannot expect your plasma in the tubes to put off a HET in this case. They can HET and shoot before you can launch, that allows for serious damage before you can effectively respond. You must either ensure that no HET can ever put them into range 8 before you can launch, or you must ensure that you always have enough plasma spaceborn that they must keep running away (as it will impact before they can shoot you if they HET). The latter requires an acceptance that you are preemptively launching plasma against a running target who is not going to get hit. The trick is to launch enough to discourage the HET whilst keeping it limited enough that you still have enough plasma for a good attack at the map edge/corner. See earlier post for the questions to ask your self every impulse, but tweaked slightly (given X launch, will I be happy if he HETs, will I be happy if he doesn't).

On top of that some of their ships have good phaser 1 suites and can shoot back at you, whilst you must dodge their drones. They don't have many drones, but enough to be slightly awkward. The overload photons will, however, at least leave a lot of their ships short on power, which is good. This limits their ability to accel and either shoot or reinforce against your phasers. Try and press them as well as you can so that when the decisive moment comes they are hopefully out of batteries at least.

Basically feds with overload photons can be dealt with due to range issues and power demands on them, but I know from experience that even the slightest mistake can quickly cost you the game in dramatic style.

Feds with standard photons to start with are interesting. With no range 8 hard limit they always have the choice to take the longer range shot. You want to avoid the range 12 shot if possible, whilst it doesn't look that great it can be nasty with mass photons. Even a 3 cruiser tourney style squadron can fairly reliably whack a shield down, and put in some internals. It isn't the instant game loser the overloads are, but given you will not be scoring any great damage for a while it can put you at a disadvantage. If you lose a front half shield then clearly chasing the Feds is more difficult.

Whilst they will need to rearm this is no more power intensive than holding the overloads, plus if they fired from longer range then they probably have the extra distance and room to stay safe whilst doing it. If they have taken the long range shot at least you don't have the problem of getting too close to any overloads later, it is pretty hard to overload photons against whilst avoiding your plasma ships.

In the type of games we play the long range shot is not so painful as the game gets bigger, as we will tend to have scouts at the point, and the -1 jamming pretty much cripples the photon beyond overload range.



Klingon:
Klingons, like Gorns, suffer on a smaller map and are potentially a lot better on this type of map. The empires which are usually very good on a smaller map are short range/crunch empires and your initial game is about trying to force them away as they try to close and before they get a good shot in. Here you face someone who will not be looking to close, and you can't just mooch around waiting, you have to go get them. If you are playing a larger game then the disrupter empires can dish out noticeable damage from even long range, and plenty painful damage from mid range. On the other hand their damage output doesn't suddenly go astronomical at shorter ranges. This makes for a different game compared to the short range crunch empires.

EM will possibly be important very early, you want to try and get to plasma launching range without giving away too many shots, that can be awkward as the arming of plasma at the start plus EM doesn't leave much ability to go fast, and certainly not enough to handle drones as well. Spending turn 1 keeping away may be the best thing, look to attack on turn 2. Three enemy cruisers can drop a shield and do internals at range 9-15, six or seven ships can really pile the pain on, but this is noticeably affected by dice shifts. Either EM or Scouts can get you close without too much damage (relative to the size of battle). Alternatively you just charge in ASAP and take your licks, at some point you have to drop EM and get hit anyway, so if you can dive straight in then at least you save the power, and retain more freedom to deal with drones.

Once you launch plasma and turn the klingons around you will have drones as your first problem. They tend to have a few more drones per turn than Feds, and can maintain the launch rate for pretty much for an entire chase across the large map. If you get too close (range 6 or less) you may well be hit immediately after launch unless you veer off. Have a read of the tactics manual and the section on dodging drones, as that is what you ideally want to be doing, spend a power or 2 dodging past them and don't spend a power per per drone shooting them or veering away. The Klingon will clearly be trying to make this awkward, but if you don't understand how to dodge drones then your pursuit will be severely hampered. What you do not want to do is turn away, your turn mode D ships are in no way set up to recover from that against klingons. If you must turn away then consider turning away with just the ship that needs to, and carry on with the rest. Depending on the situation this may not be as bad as it sounds. Larger battles involve multiple stacks of ships anyway, and in our games we've found they often split up for a variety of reasons (Damage, terrain, different turn modes etc), so having 1 ship turn away may just mean it is then able to join another part of the battle. Alternatively you may be able to turn in a way that you will be wanting at some point anyway to head off a klingon turn.

Some klingons are obviously renowned for their wide disrupter arcs. For campaign style play they are not a given by any means, but for tourney/points based play they probably will be. Whilst they certainly present a challenge, it is not quiet as horrendous as it sounds. In order to use them they will have to turn, and that offers a chance for you to close a hex or two. It also means that if you have preemptive plasma in space already then they may be forced to buy more accels, or turn the way you want. The more accels they keep buying the less they can hammer you with. In some ways they are less of a challenge than the better Fed ships. Fed NCAs can put 6 Ph1s backwards without turning, the D5W has to turn for a decent shot, and even that only puts 4Ph1s and 2 disrupters at you (8 power, barring overloads). Remember whilst this type of shooting hurts it doesn't really prevent you pursuing. In much larger battles you just accept someone gets hammered each turn, do what you can to make it harder and minimize it, but you will be doing the same back to him. Between power demands, reinforcement, rotation, ship positioning etc you can make it hard for the klingons to seriously prevent you doing what you are trying to do just because of their weapon arcs. Again, in a battle with scouts their shooting will be less effective as well.

Where the Gorns have an edge against klingons is when the klingons are finally trapped against an edge/corner. Whilst they can HET back from a plasma launch, they can't escape Gorn ships so simply. Klingons are lacking in point blank firepower to really make the Gorn anchor (or range 0 launch) so difficult. Facing the wrong way, in need of going speed 24 and up against a corner and with no instant ship vaporizing firepower the klingons will find the Gorns a terrifying opponent, so long as the Gorns have managed to pace the earlier plasma launches well and have enough left. If the klingons HET they lose 5 more power (MP equivalent), if they carry on they can't bring the firepower to bear. Either way they face tractors or range 0 launches. That is not to say the Gorn have to do that, they can just launch from range and then run and reload as per the earlier post, but the couple of times I've done Gorn vs Klingon the end has been via a 'go for the jugular' in or approaching the corner. Launch and reload works better against short range empires, against the likes of klingons it feels better to not go through the whole process again, so get stuck in. Accept you are going to get hurt a lot, but that your plasma launches are going to hurt the klingons a lot more, plus you will almost certainly have more plasma coming back up shortly.


Because the klingons are so much more vulnerable to a point blank exchange than Feds (with overloads at any rate) they must work hard early in the game to weaken the Gorn, and make them launch too much plasma to allow for the aggressive attack at the end. If the Gorns are forced to run and reload then the extra range and mobility of the klingons will probably swing the game their way, so long as their ships haven't been too badly damaged and reduced to lower speeds when the plasma start coming out again. For the klingon I'd also suggest that whilst they can use their drones to make pursuit quite difficult, it may be better to ease up on that and ensure that they can launch a full spread if the Gorns close, and another straight after. A lot of drones to face alters what constitutes enough plasma to make a point blank attack run a good idea, don't run out of drones as you reach the corner. It's trying to get a balance between making it hard to catch you and having something to get out of jail when they do.



Overall I'm not sure who is harder to handle. Feds may be easier from one perspective but also an awful lot less forgiving on the Gorn. Feds with overloads have a hard range limit on their effectiveness which plays to your strength, but if you get caught the wrong side of that limit your game can be over in the blink of an eye. Klingons feel like you are on more of a clock, and harder to get to do what you want, but at the same time they are more forgiving of mistakes you make, and can die very fast if they get it wrong.

Scouts.

A few times above I've mentioned scouts. Special sensors are very good, and in the larger games they have been pretty much a 'must have' ship in our games. At times in our campaigns their presence or otherwise has noticeably affected who moves/attacks whom, not because we have given them any special campaign rules, but just because of the impact they can have in the resulting battles when only one side has them.

Whilst we have used scouts extensively, my experience in Gorn vs XXXX games is much more limited, but based on how I've seen scouts work here is my view.

Overall I think the plasma empires gain a bit more from the presence of scouts than direct fire empires. There are a couple of reasons for this.

On this larger map as a Gorn player you are generally looking to reduce the damage you take as you try and herd the other guy to where you can hit him in a corner or against an edge. This is a process that can take a few turns, against empires who might be able to shoot back at you quite well. Scouts can make a fair reduction in the damage you are taking over a number of turns, and can affect the threshold at which key things (like down shield) happen. Whilst an enemy scout can equally reduce the phaser damage you are inflicting, for you that is less important than getting him where you want to him to be for your plasma. For the enemy shooting you is pretty much all he is relying on.

A few empires can lob drones at you making pursuit/herding awkward. Whilst a single scout can't hope to deal with all of them, an ability to handle a couple each turn is quite useful, against Fed/Klingon especially. It saves power for the ships that really need it, and scouts are never short of power.

Whilst sensors can affect plasma, 25% per warhead, that is no where near as efficient as direct firepower defense. A single sensor can use defensive jamming on a ship that benefits it against a whole fleet. The average damage reduction will depend on weapons and range. E.g. Scouts affect photons badly, and indeed there were a number of Fed vs Gorn battles in one of our campaigns where this really got to the Fed player - doubly so as an area of asteroids became a key strategic battleground, asteroids plus scout was a Fed killer. Mid range disrupters lose 25% firepower on average, and Ph1s 50%, which can mitigate against klingons quite well.

At the point you are routinely looking at scouts then the ability of sensors to scale well against direct fire, but not against plasma is very nice. Losing 25% on a warhead isn't good, but when you have launched 12-15 warheads and the enemy only has 4 sensors it is less impressive. Where the plasma defense makes a difference is early on. You are not looking to launch lots of plasma to turn the enemy aside, so the 25% can force you to launch more to overcome the increased defense he has against them.

storyelf wrote:

Basically feds with overload photons can be dealt with due to range issues and power demands on them, but I know from experience that even the slightest mistake can quickly cost you the game in dramatic style.

I agree. Actually, one reason I don't play Feds more than I do is that they're less interesting to me. Feds end up being about what happens with that first photon torpedo volley. I find them more interesting as opponents, but that's just me.

Spending turn 1 keeping away may be the best thing, look to attack on turn 2.

In my experience, this can be very true. Once you get them spun all the way up, the S torps hold for 2. So on turn 2, you've got more reserve power to play around with, and thus more options.

DNordeen wrote:

Carronades are opportunity weapons. You use them when an opportunity presents, you don't really plan to use them unless you're taking on a drone thrower. They're good for taking down drones and saving your phasers for hitting back.

All weapons are opportunity weapons. It is the skill and fighting spirit of the Captain that creates the opportunity.