"Full Thrust Fleet Compositions" Topic

Hey all,
I am about to get into Full Thrust with a buddy of mine, and while we are waiting for a double intro fleet pack (ESU & UNSC), I found this archived thread on /tg/ on building a fleet in Full thrust (1200 CPV) [WARNING: a NSFW image is in the thread (about 1/5 down the page)] : link and I found it interesting (although it gets derailed quickly) and would like to continue it by asking all of you:

1. What fleet would you build at 1200 CPV?
2. Why you did you build the fleet that way? and
3. What is the point value of a 'standard' battle for you?

I am really interested in how players compose their fleets (most BatReps I've seen are capital-heavy, and fighters are not too common).

Any other tips and tricks for a new player would also be appreciated :P

To get things started:

1. I would build a ESU cruiser-heavy force, with an escort carrier to bring a few fighters along and provide aegis support





2. I chose ESU because they are tough and dependable, with good range on their weapons. I feel the survivability of cruisers (shields+hull) would make up for the lack of speed and pure damage output that escorts have, while capital ships are too big and expensive, and the CVE's ADFC and fighter support makes the force as 'rounded' as can be.


3. A 'standard' battle for me has been ~150 CPV since I have only played a quick game of a destroyer+frigate. Maybe 1200-1400 CPV? (the CPV of the ESU and UNSC intro fleets)

Link to semi-official ship stats: fullthrust.star-ranger.com

I haven't plater FT for several years but when I did, I didn't worry about points systems or any such nonsense. I just selected ships almost on a whim to fit a story line that I dreamt up. Usually no more than half a dozen or so ships on a side. Any more than that and the mechanics start getting clunky.

Above all, the thing about FT is to have fun and experiment with different ship type combinations and story lines. Remember that some of the best games do not involve simply blasting the enemy out of the sky …

@MajorB while that is true, my friend and I cannot get together often, maybe once every 6 weeks, so random battles suit us well enough. I do want to do campaigns (both story- and logistics-based), but it will be unlikely that it comes to be since we would keep forgetting what we were doing :(

Also, even if you did not use points, your limit on half a dozen ships is in line with what I am asking about (and I will certainly be changing the fleets up in every battle). Thank you for the input :)

my friend and I cannot get together often, maybe once every 6 weeks, so random battles suit us well enough.

All the more reason not to use points then. Points will give you "balanced" battles, not random battles.

I do want to do campaigns (both story- and logistics-based), but it will be unlikely that it comes to be since we would keep forgetting what we were doing :(

Who said anything about campaigns? I certainly didn't. I was talking about a story line for a single battle.

@ MajorB when I say random battle, I mean a one-off battle without connection to anything else (a random reason for it to happen, if you will). I brought up campaigns because you spoke of story lines (plural), something that would indicate a string of connected stories (ie a campaign).

Me and my friend like balanced-ish fights, and will use points for now.

We are obviously divided by a common language!!

We use Points for some games. We have found the old board game Imperium is a good random battle generator. Play the game a usual. When a battle is called for break out the miniatures and go at it. Found I needed far more Cruisers and Destroyers in my fleet. I too play an ESU Fleet most of the time. Mix of old and new style ships. Enough in the Fleet to make up just about any size force I want to put on the table.

I find that I tend to gravitate towards 1500 or 2000 pts battles. I also usually use the rule that I borrowed from Jim Klein in that no more than 50% of the points can be a capital ship (BC or bigger). Sometimes that is mighty inconvenient, and it can be interesting other times.

I haven't done many fighter battles; 2 measly squadrons isn't enough to do very much against medium-large ships. Against small ships, they're meh, okay.

I have been using the 1500 point range for some play testing lately, and that seems to work okay. Not too big, not too small.

Also, if you were not aware, there are re-issued Fleet books available at Emerald Coast Skunkworks (I helped edit them) if you care to take a look. :) As well as the newer rules compilation Full Thrust Project Continuum.

emeraldcoastskunkworks.wordpress.com

Usually no more than half a dozen or so ships on a side.

If one is thinking two-player, this is a little restricted, but a nice quick setting.

I'd say 'per player' instead of 'on a side.' IF, and a big one, you can have players without a lot of interaction, 'opposite sides of the table,' resolve at the same time.

Otherwise, it can be a bit of a long turn.

Doug

@dmebust that sounds like a decent system, but due to time between battles, I feel we couldn't keep keep track of a board unless it was in vassal. I was thinking of using a modififed BattleFleet Gothic campaign system (map in MSpaint, hidden orders, etc). Also have plans for a more complicated system that would include logistics and promote scouting ahead of your forces.

@billclo I am aware of Continuum, and have actually read it front to back about twice now. Still appreciate the link.

Why would two fighters be bad? From my understanding, they are 6 BD* that move fast and are difficult to shoot down, and which can shoot down incoming missiles rather well.

Thanks for the responses so far

I use BSG minis and full thrust lite.

SovietCanadian,

I'm not saying that 2 fighter squadrons are bad per se, but you give up a fair bit to get them (18 mass on the CVE and considerable weapon capacity). 12 fighters is 12BD*, not 6 though.

SC, where are you in Canada?

I have a load of fleets for FT, and our club is always looking for new gamers.

We are in Southwestern Ontario, Kent Essex Gamers Society.

I tend to play with more ships a side and with more fighters, especially when playing NAC. I have fewer fighters for FSE,and virtually none for the NSL. The ESU faction is somewhere in the middle.

Brian

We have gamed a lot of battles with FT. Fighters can be nasty. You should establish guidelines on using DIY or official designs. It can become very unbalanced if it's just a free for all.

@billclo okay, I see what you mean. I still think they will be handy, but some battles with them will prove their usefulness.

@bhall389 I'm in southern Ontario as well, Kitchener-Waterloo area. Sadly it is a 2+ hour drive (one-way) to reach you. I'll look at making it to KEGSCON though.

@John Leahy I can easily foresee some broken designs that would be a terror to face. I think we will stick to the Star-Ranger stats for now, and will definitely figure out rules for making custom ships sometime in the future.

Nothing to add I'm afraid except to say how very much I'm enjoying this thread. I'm playing around with the idea of trying a small FT game in my local club in the next couple of months and as nobody including me in the club have ever played it before, all these ideas and suggestions are really helpful.

I do have one question but as I don't want to hijack this thread on SovietCanadian, I'll start a new one of my own.

I tend to build different style fleets depending on the setting. My star trek fed fleet and the NSL fleet are both more or less based on ww1 fleets, so tend to be squadrons of similar ship classes. The NAC fleet is based more around a single capital ship with escorts in a task force style. I do use "points" but not necessarily even fleets depending on the scenario. If you are interested, some ships can be found here. link

@Cuchulainn Building imaginary fleets is fun, isn't it?

@tmasion That can certainly be a way of playing, I will look into something like that (A single large Capital ship, with some escorts and frigates covering it). Also, I've seen that ozkriegspiel blog before, the BFG ships amused me greatly. Nevertheless, thanks for the link!

I think the discussion is going to die off around now, but thank you to everyone who spoke up! I've got some new ideas now about how I would like to build a fleet, and I am happy I sparked some interest in others (Cuchulainn).

If anyone wants to add anything, I'll stick around and be sure to respond for a while yet.

A buddy and I were doing DIY fleets back when the first two or three rule sets were out. I showed up to a game with my ships all shielded. he showed up with his armored. That was a brutal game for me.

I remember designing 3 large carriers. The were really just a way to bring a load of fighters to action. Basically, they dropped off their fighters and fell back. That was nasty since my opponent had few fighters. We tried a large variety of designs. We had fun and some games that were not so fun. That is why I believe a basic set of guidelines should be created showing what is permitted and what is not.

Thanks,

John