"Federation Starwasp class fighter" Topic
21 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please use the Complaint button (!) to report problems on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Spaceship Gaming Message Board
Areas of InterestScience Fiction
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Showcase ArticleThese were the Heavy Droids I was looking for.
Featured Profile Article
Current Poll
|
MacrossMartin | 25 Oct 2016 4:36 a.m. PST |
Hello again, all! Those who know me well may tell you that my inner muse is not some diaphanous nymph, who coyly entices me to draw, paint, or build things. No. She's a large, scary woman, who won't take no for an answer, day or night, and yells at me until I make whatever she wants. Thus, rather than recovering from a bad night with a cold, today I make this…
Behold the littlest of the new Studio Bergstrom Trek-inspired designs; the Federation's Starwasp (you come up with a name, then,) fighter. These little guys will be produced as part of Studio Bergstrom's Fleetscale Fighter range ('Drew? Have I got that right?) and we are targeting for them to be about 15mm long. Here's a rendering for a better idea:
And, just for the sake of equality, the Klingon adversary:
The artwork, by the way, shows the design direction I'm aiming for in the "Klingons on the Starboard Bow!" rulebook. Of course, there's still a long way to go. If she keep yelling at me tomorrow, I'll try to churn out artwork for the Klingon fighter, too. In between sneezes… :'( Stay tuned! |
stumer | 25 Oct 2016 5:16 a.m. PST |
The usual range for fleetscale fighters is 9mm-12mm (3/8"-1/2"), so we'll see if we can squeak those 15mm fighters down into that size to be a bit more compatible with the rest… ;-) |
Cosmic Reset | 25 Oct 2016 6:13 a.m. PST |
Really like the designs, but 15mm is just a touch big for me. At 9-12mm, as stumer mentions, they would be perfect. |
Darkrazor | 25 Oct 2016 6:15 a.m. PST |
I am in agreement 15 mm does not fit into most fighter designs from most manufacturers |
LoudNinjaGames | 25 Oct 2016 6:22 a.m. PST |
Very nice. Wonderful thing about digital models is it eases the resizing chore a bit. -Eli |
boy wundyr x | 25 Oct 2016 7:18 a.m. PST |
Very cool, and they can always be re-purposed into other settings (I'm in the no-fighters camp for ST). |
LoudNinjaGames | 25 Oct 2016 9:06 a.m. PST |
BTW, I love the source art. Any links to a high resolution version? -Eli |
emckinney | 25 Oct 2016 9:29 a.m. PST |
I love the look, but it's way too small to carry anti-spam weapons. No shields? |
billclo | 25 Oct 2016 10:46 a.m. PST |
I used some of Drew's Star Caster fighters for Klingon Post-TNG fighters to counter the Fed's Peregrines, but there's no reason you couldn't use them for earlier fighters.
Still, you are off to a good start. :) |
Lion in the Stars | 25 Oct 2016 10:48 a.m. PST |
The most heavily armed SFB fighters only pack about 6-7 drones (missiles). Well, 4-6 standard anti-ship types and 2 anti-fighter types, with the dogfight drones half the size of the antiship drones. Torpedo-carrying fighters would carry a single photon or small plasma torp plus a pair of anti-ship drones (or anti-fighter plasma). The exception to the usual arming scheme was the Hydrans, who packed a massive set of energy weapons (and carried 4-6 fighters per ship). Hydran fighters carried a gatling phaser (does damage as a phaser-3 but fires 4x a turn instead of 1x), plus a dual-barreled fusion cannon with reloads. Each fusion cannon could spend both shots in a single attack to use the overload damage line. 3 Stinger fighters could gut a Klingon D7/K'Tinga in a single attack. At least in SFB, all shuttlecraft are too small to carry shields, up until the fielding of the early X-cruisers (so about the time the 1701A entered service). And even then, I don't think that the basic X-shuttle carried shields, just the Hydran's Stinger-X. Or I might be conflating the two generations of X-cruisers, so it wasn't until the 1701B that shuttlecraft got shields. |
MacrossMartin | 25 Oct 2016 6:10 p.m. PST |
I might have guessed I had the size off… 12mm it is then! Actually, I might see if it can be smaller than that, because there's also a Strikecraft (Heavy Fighter) to do yet, which will be a bit bigger. Boy Wundyr – I too was in the 'no fighters in Trek' camp, until they showed up in DS9. I'm including them in KotSB! but am determined to prevent them becoming too powerful. I see no canon evidence that fighters dominate starship combat, so in KotSB! they will be mostly limited to precision strikes – slipping beneath shields to disable weapons, sensors, etc. I certainly don't want the game to devolve into Pacific carrier battles. Eli – here's the artwork at a larger size:
- glad you like it! emckinney – I forgot to detail the shield generators!! Well spotted. They're located in the fore and aft ends of the pylon supports. If it's warp capable, it has to have navigational deflectors at the minimum, after all. – anti spam weapons?? billclo – Agreed! I saw your earlier posts about those. They are very nice. I'd call them sublight fighters, simply because of the lack of nacelles. Lion – Thank you for the SFB fighter insights. That comment about "3 Stingers could gut a D7" – is exactly what I want to avoid in KotSB! There's just no canon evidence that fighters should be that powerful. Am I right in recalling that for a while fighters and carriers dominated SFB? If fighters were such a threat, we'd see ships in the TNG era bristling with small, fast-firing anti-fighter phasers and disruptors. I've included pulse phasers (as in Prelude to Axanar) and Klingon drones as purely defensive weapons (Klingons have photons, don't panic, Klingon fans,) in KotSB!, but I intend to playtest the out of small craft to ensure they keep to their proper station in the Trek universe. :) - Martin |
Lion in the Stars | 26 Oct 2016 10:33 a.m. PST |
Well, in SFB the fighter squadron sizes were pretty limited, even a big heavy carrier built on a dreadnought hull only carried 24 fighters. It basically worked out that a heavy carrier group would use ~6 fighters for point defense, ~6 more to escort the attacking fighters, and ~12 torpedo fighters in the attack wave. Cruiser hulls only carried 12 fighters total, so they might have 4 fighters on defense, 4 on escort, and 4 on attack. Combine that with the limited fleet sizes in SFB (max of ~10 ships in a "fleet"), and you end up with fighters being dangerous but not overwhelming. You might have 2 fighter squadrons (24 total fighters) as part of a fleet, IF the centerpiece was a heavy carrier. Otherwise, you'd only have 12 fighters with a cruiser-hulled carrier and a dreadnought in the battle line. Plus, the carriers each have 2-3 required escorts that aren't so hot in a fleet battle. A smart Klingon, when facing Hydrans, would earmark his drones (missiles) to deal with the fighters, in addition to his flank phasers. Though you really don't want to get within phaser range of those Stinger fighters if you can avoid it. Heck, I might even set up a scatter-pack (shuttle packed with 6 missiles) targeted on fighters. Then there were the Fast Patrol Ships, basically spacegoing PT boats. Heavily armed but really fragile, pretty much the smallest ships that could carry significant shields. 3 missile hits would kill a PF outright, where those same 3 missiles would probably only knock down a shield and do minor internal damage to a cruiser. PFs are about on par with the Defiant, though the Defiant has extra torpedoes over what a PF usually carries. The Hydran fighters are something of an exception to the general SFB rules, they are massively overgunned compared to everything else in space. How overgunned? Well, those overloaded Fusion Beams are nearly as powerful as starbase heavy phasers at point-blank range. Yeah. But those same Hydran fighters are a significant portion of their warship's firepower, Hydran ships are somewhat undergunned compared to a Federation ship of equivalent class. And Klingons have disruptors, not photons, dangit! |
javelin98 | 26 Oct 2016 1:39 p.m. PST |
I love it! Well done, MM! |
Mutant Q | 26 Oct 2016 8:58 p.m. PST |
I LIKE IT! Given that they had the Peregrine in the Dominion War, I don't think the idea of fighters ever left Star Fleet. However, since they're mission is rather utilitarian (switching between military to exploration/diplomacy as needed) they don't produce them in any large number unless the need arises. Since the Federation tries to avoid war, that doesn't happen often. |
MacrossMartin | 26 Oct 2016 9:51 p.m. PST |
Lion – again, thanks for the SFB insights. An important difference between SFB and my objective with KotSB! is the scale of the battles. In KotSB! ten ships is around 2-3 squadrons, rather than a fleet. I want a rules set that lets players put 20 or so ships per side on the table, and comfortably decide an action in an evening. In KotSB! the Ark Royal class carries a full wing of 72 small craft – fighters, strike craft and shuttles. Therefore, I must be careful to limit how much each of those little guys can do. It remains to be seen if I am successful at containing their potential, and still making them worthwhile. Thanks Javelin and Mutant Q! I like it. I was debating with myself last night if I might try scaling it up to turn into a 1/48 scale kit. I think that Starfleet goes through 'Hawk' and 'Dove' cycles, depending on the perceived threat. Certainly, they enjoyed several decades of relative peace in the lead-up to the first Borg incursion, resulting in a fleet that was unforgivably arrogant and fatally inexperienced in matters military. I think fighters go in and out of 'fashion' at Fleet Procurement, depending on technology, the seniority of their advocates, who they're fighting, and, most importantly, special effects budget. ;) The sharper-eyed my have noticed that I wrote in the wrong dimensions in the artwork – she's only half those sizes! Must have pressed 200% on the replicator… ;) - Martin |
retzlaffmd | 27 Oct 2016 8:51 p.m. PST |
I think he meant photons as in torpedoes, not as in phasers, though if he meant to type phasers you are absolutely correct, Lion… |
MacrossMartin | 28 Oct 2016 5:25 a.m. PST |
Klingons certainly do have Photons in canon 'Trek. Does that make them Photon canons…? :D Thank you! Thank you! I'm here all week! Try the Gagh! But seriously, folks… I know there's a fair amount of revisionist head-scratching caused by trying to be faithful to the canon timeline. Klingons appear to not have photon torpedoes in the original series, but it is not explicitly stated that they do not have them. Certainly, by the time of The Motion Picture (2273) Photorps are fitted to Klingon cruisers. By the same argument, Klingon ships could also carry phasers (as they do in SFB), but there is no canonical evidence for this. I'm trying to stick, within reason, to weapons and systems that ARE confirmed by canon evidence, or at least, hinted at. Otherwise we eventually wind up with pages of weapons, and rule upon rule to commit to memory for their different effects and special abilities. That's the kind of thing that slows a game down, and prevents a fleet-level encounter from being timely, and fun. My opinions, of course, may differ wildly from the reader's. But IDIC, I suspect, has its foundations in wargaming. :) - Martin |
Sargonarhes | 28 Oct 2016 5:27 a.m. PST |
I've seen this profile design before, including the name….
Ok maybe it's not really the same, both look like a Y-wing only more sleek. Maybe the anime fighter is better armed than the rest. |
Lion in the Stars | 28 Oct 2016 1:57 p.m. PST |
Yeah, Klingon ship-board heavy weapons are disruptors, not photons. At least according to Franz Joseph. And they pack phasers as their secondary weapons. If you're going for WW2-sized fighter complements, then yeah, you're going to have to do something for reducing their individual effectiveness. I forget, do the Movie Trek ships have missiles? If not, then you already have a balance factor: SFB drones (missiles) are 50% more powerful per hit than a standard-loaded photon torpedo. Even if your fighters carry two photon torps, they're going to be really marginal against most ships. One fighter will probably knock down a shield, and it will take probably 10 more fighters to completely destroy a cruiser (barring a lucky critical hit). |
MacrossMartin | 29 Oct 2016 6:19 a.m. PST |
Sargonarhes – hey, there's only so many combinations of fuselage and twin nacelles… :) Actually, that was a point raised by the designer of the USS Franklin in ST Beyond. Everyone thought his ship was a homage to the Loknar, but it was pure coincidence; as he said, there's only so many ways you can combine a saucer and nacelles before running into someone else's idea. Lion – until I see evidence of Mr. Joseph's time-travelling activities, I'm not accepting his interpretations as canon. ;) 'Missiles' yes, if you mean photon torpedoes, which, in canon, are very different animals to those in SFB. Canon Photons are guided and self-propelled, while SFB ones are more like a 'blast' or bolt of energy (I believe). Small craft in KotSB! come in three categories – Fighters (anti-small craft) Strikecraft (anti-ship) and Shuttles (for, erm, shuttling). Strikecraft work more like torpedo bombers, to keep the WW2 analogy; they can hurt capital ships, but are very vulnerable to fighters. Shuttles in KotSB! don't do the whole 'suicide' thing, because they are instrumental for carrying assault teams and moving crew members (particularly Admirals) off dying ships to safety. Phew… the Klingon L-13 Battleship is nearing completion, so keep watch. My next thread will be on that hippo of a ship… - Martin |
Lion in the Stars | 29 Oct 2016 11:16 a.m. PST |
No, I mean thermonuclear-warhead missiles, as mentioned in several of the Trek novels. They're not significantly faster than a ship, though (maxing out at 32 cee, roughly Warp 2.7 IIRC), which is part of why SFB calls them 'drones'. Photon torps are just as fast as phasers, so even if they are guided, they're effectively direct-fire weapons in SFB. |
|