Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Jem'Hadar Attack Ship From SS Rebuild Question

  1. #1

    Jem'Hadar Attack Ship From SS Rebuild Question

    If this has been covered somewhere else, I apologize. I’m working on a “New Dominion Fleet” as a little after war surprise, and I tried to rebuild the Jem’Hadar Attack ship, but came up 8 spaces short. Can someone point out how I’m wrong?
    Thanks!

    Jem'Hadar Attack Ship
    Size 3
    Structure 15
    Space Points 39
    Impulse: DIIU-3 5
    Warp: DIPU-5 5
    Atmosphere Capable: 2
    Cargo Units: 29
    Life Support: Class 3 5
    Operations: Class 3 5
    Sensor System: Class 3a 4
    2xDPB-2 10
    PFF-2a (13/1) 6
    Perk: 5
    -8

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Manhattan High Security Detention Center
    Posts
    720
    I redid the math and I'm also "over-budget" although only by 4 pts. Ops and life support cost 4 each (3 basic + 3/2 rounded down = 4); since it's classsified a 'fast' ship it gets a -1 bonus for the warp engines (4 instead of 5) and finally the atmosphere capable option costs 3/2 rounded down (so 1).

    Though not technically wrong I also find highly peculiar that it has a -2 helm penalty.

  3. #3
    Thanks for the recheck, Snake. Can we get an official note on this?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,011
    Originally posted by Snake_Plissken


    Though not technically wrong I also find highly peculiar that it has a -2 helm penalty.
    I believe they choose this helm modifier to prevent them from succeeding in ramming attacks too often or to have an explanation for the Jem'Hadar not making any use of their "famous" ramming tactic e.g. during the battle for DS9.
    “Worried? I’m scared to death. But I’ll be damned if I’m going to let them change the way I live my life.” - Joseph Sisko - Paradise Lost

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Flint, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    483
    Originally posted by Snake_Plissken
    Though not technically wrong I also find highly peculiar that it has a -2 helm penalty.
    I happen to like the fix that you suggested in a previous post Snake: classifying the Attack Ship as a Heavy fighter for determining the maneuver mods. This was for all intents and puposes how they acted on-screen wasn't it? Big nasty fighters, but fighters nonetheless. In a similar vein, I have readjusted all of the scouts with higher base maneuver mods in my series because I can see no reason for the overall -2 penalty.
    "If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me."
    - Alice Roosevelt Longworth

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Manhattan High Security Detention Center
    Posts
    720
    I believe they choose this helm modifier to prevent them from succeeding in ramming attacks too often or to have an explanation for the Jem'Hadar not making any use of their "famous" ramming tactic e.g. during the battle for DS9.
    I can remember at least one occasion where a Jem'Hadar fighter rammed an allied ship; in that case it was a Vor'Cha cruiser and the attack severed on of its wings from the main body. I am sure that there were many other occurences as well.

    The negative modifier comes from the fact that fast attack craft are treated as warships. The maneuver modifiers category for warship, I'm prett sure, was intended for large ships like Starfleet explorers or battleships like the D'Deridex- but not light attack crafts. As I once mentionned a fix could either be to treat light attack crafts, which are usually size 3, as escorts, frigates or scouts- or you could use the 'fighter' category. Or then again create a special category for light attack craft.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Flint, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    483
    Originally posted by Snake_Plissken
    As I once mentionned a fix could either be to treat light attack crafts, which are usually size 3, as escorts, frigates or scouts- or you could use the 'fighter' category.
    :tap: :tap: :tap: Is this thing on?
    "If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me."
    - Alice Roosevelt Longworth

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Manhattan High Security Detention Center
    Posts
    720
    :tap: :tap: :tap: Is this thing on?
    LOL!

    'testing 1-2 1-2 testing'


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,923
    I'll take a look. Pretty sure I didn't do this one.

  10. #10
    Thanks Don.

Posting Permissions

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