Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24

Thread: [CODA] Starfleet Ops Manual ship comments and questions

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Manhattan High Security Detention Center
    Posts
    720

    Starfleet Ops Manual ship comments and questions

    well, I just got the manual it looks good, like the PG and the NG although for 30 Canadian bucks it si a bit thin but hey, life's expensive (!)

    My question is: are the ships in the SOM built according to the new guidelines in the upcoming Starship book? It seems to me they are since the first thing that jumped im my face was how much the ships had powerful torpedoes.

    Also for the Akira the text says that it can accomodate between 30-50 fighters, yet it has 1 shuttlebay with 7 size worth of shuttles

    Lastly, it seems to me that ships built more for exploration like the Miranda, Excelsior or Ambassador have more of a punch than the military-oriented ones like the Akira or the Steamrunner... Weird stuff... not impressed

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,923

    Re: Starfleet Ops Manual ship comments and questions

    Originally posted by Snake_Plissken
    My question is: are the ships in the SOM built according to the new guidelines in the upcoming Starship book?
    No, "Starships" had just started being written while this book was in development--the ships in "Ops" use components from the NG or a synthetic (best guess) design. Most, if not all, of these ships appear in "Starships" with their extended writeups and are built to those rules.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Manhattan High Security Detention Center
    Posts
    720
    wow... I have another question: what kind of crack the person who wrote the stats was smoking at the time?

    When I was reading the ship texts I immediately had the feeling of deja vu... then it hit me: Spacedock (!). The texts were lifted straight out of it. Which brings me to another point: a lot of the ship descriptions in Spacedock never reall matched the actual stats of the ship and I'm seeing the same thing in the SOM. For instance you'd expect the Saber class, a small design like the Defiant, to be agile, and it is described as a fast design in the text (granted fast and agile do not mean the same thing but they are often associated with one another), yet it has a -1 helm maneuver modifier !!!

    I really hope that the Starship book is much better balanced than that.

    On a side note: besides the totally crappy (yes I'm being very polite) ship write-ups, the rest of the SOM is quite good and I still recommand it. You have tons of new skills, excellent species write-ups, and interesting and pertinent info (as well as a very nice uniform chart)

    edit: fixed obvious typo
    Last edited by Snake_Plissken; 03-18-2003 at 12:41 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,923
    Originally posted by Snake_Plissken
    I really hope that the Starship book is much better balanced than that.
    Sorry but I can't provide any additional insight as to the write-ups in "Ops" or even the ship stats; I don't have the book. (WTF!? )

    I can say that the write-ups in "Starships" were done with great care.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Manhattan High Security Detention Center
    Posts
    720
    I can say that the write-ups in "Starships" were done with great care.
    and that sir, is good enough for me

    BTW any word on when it is coming out? It was supposed to be released in March but since the SOM just came out I'd figure it will come out a couple of months later.

  6. #6
    Originally posted by Don Mappin
    Sorry but I can't provide any additional insight as to the write-ups in "Ops" or even the ship stats; I don't have the book. (WTF!? )

    I can say that the write-ups in "Starships" were done with great care.
    So do you when it'll come out? rough estimate?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Heavy Metal Universe
    Posts
    1,147
    Didn't read the ship writeups in detail, but I saw some stuff that left me wondering: -2 Helm to the Sovereign? Why didn't they use the pulse phasers on the Borg ship in STFC? Oh well, Starships will be out soon and my ship building craving will soon be satisfied.

    I still have to look them into detail to make myself an opinion, but otherwise I agree, that's a great book.

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    Expanded Spacecraft Operations, a 100+ page sourcebook for CODA Trek

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Manhattan High Security Detention Center
    Posts
    720
    mon cher ami Baleine Tueuse

    I think that whoever designed the Sovereign stats must have seen advanced Nemesis footage where you can see the Enterprise fire what looks like red bolts of energy at the Scimitar. So that might have been the reason why.

    Also, most heavy ships have negative helm modifiers; the Sovereign in that regard is much like its predecoessor, the Galaxy. Because you have only so many points to spend you expect a ship like the Sovereign to max out in the tactical, then command bonii dept. then spend whatever is left on helm.

    But if I were you I wouldn't put too much stock in those stats. So far from what I've read on the boards most people agree that there's defenitely something wrong with them and I expect that it will all be corrected in the upcoming Starship book. Something similar happened with LUG when they released their Federation supplement and then later Spacedock which changed drastically all the stats.

    fortunately only the ship stats part sucks in the SOM, the rest is great so it is still a good buy.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM, USA
    Posts
    2,990
    The main problem I've seen with the ships have been mostly photon torpedo damage -- which on some ships seems about 2-3 points too high. The maneuver mods for the Savber were the only other glaring problem for me.

    Actually, the Sov and Akira stats, in general, looked good -- the latter works fine, if it's not a 'carrier' in your game.
    "War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

    John Stuart Mill

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Brockville, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    4,394
    Sorry guys, once again I am the voice of negetivity. Saw the book today flipped through it ...It is an awfully small book for the price. From what I saw, not worth the wait. Hope the FotR is better.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Germantown, Maryland
    Posts
    1,241
    Here goes my conflict resolution skills

    Not everyone will like the Official Decipher rules for ships, so if you have a problem with what is there just make your own as we have been for quite a while now.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    MetroWest, MA USA
    Posts
    2,590
    While it goes without saying that one can make up one's own stats...

    However, I think ships stats is a reasonable point of discussion. Obviously, one can make up any stat. But... Given this is an official Decipher product, it stands to reason that some people may have purchased it for (possibly among other reasons) the vessel stats. If those stats are, by concensus, "buggy", it helps to educate a consumer. Similarly, it gives an opportunity to discuss what they should be.

    Just my 2 cents.
    Last edited by Dan Stack; 03-20-2003 at 03:08 PM.
    AKA Breschau of Livonia (mainly rpg forums)
    Gaming blog 19thlevel

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM, USA
    Posts
    2,990
    Originally posted by Lt Cmdr Matt
    Here goes my conflict resolution skills
    What conflict? In general, I think Snake's right -- the stats are quirky. I just think they're workable, with only a little finagling.

    I'm not exactly certain what a finagle is. I know finagling is like tweaking, adjusting, scootching.

    Can you 'get yo finagle on?'

    Maybe I should go get some of the sleep I didn't get last night...

    "War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

    John Stuart Mill

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Germantown, Maryland
    Posts
    1,241
    The conflict this was a joke, hence the smiles.

    That is true Dan but...eh...I am just not the type of person to complain(loose terms) about ship stats, and at some point I had made every Canon Federation class, but those are gone now since somehow I lost them.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Heavy Metal Universe
    Posts
    1,147
    I'm not that much disappointed with the stats - and thanks cher Serpent Plissken for the Nemesis bit, I haven't seen it yet and that would explain things.

    I looked closer to the writeups prior to the session and they seem quite fine to me (I'm delighted the Akira is described as a carrier - I intend to use fighters in my game). I like that the Sov is tough beastie - I love that ship

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    Expanded Spacecraft Operations, a 100+ page sourcebook for CODA Trek

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •