Topic: Battle Tugs

[762_XC]

...are classed as support ships in the matrix. Shouldn't they be command ships? That was their purpose in SFB.

[Dfly]

in SFB some battle tugs were used as Command ships, but with the matrix we have now, it would mean you could take a BT and another tug in the same grouping if you move the BT to Command.
This was not something that happens in SFB.  I think changing that would mean re-alinging all the tugs and matrixes.

[762_XC]

True, but it also means now you can take a BT and a DN, which also never happened. A simple "one tug no matter what" rule would prevent what you suggest.

[KHH Jakle]

in SFB some battle tugs were used as Command ships, but with the matrix we have now, it would mean you could take a BT and another tug in the same grouping if you move the BT to Command.
This was not something that happens in SFB.  I think changing that would mean re-alinging all the tugs and matrixes.

I could just as easily treat BT's the same way that the G-DNP is treated - a command ship that also takes up the combat support slot.

[KHH Jakle]

...are classed as support ships in the matrix. Shouldn't they be command ships? That was their purpose in SFB.

FYI - this had come up once before but 'everybody' poo-poo'd it, saying tugs were rarely taken anyway.

[762_XC]

I don't see that as being an argument against it. The whole purpose of PBR in my mind is to provide a logical SFB-like context for fleet makeup, is it not?

Anyway they do get taken.

[Dfly]

sure,  1 tug max, and  never to be with a DN? and the BT falls under command and combat support

[KHH Jakle]

I don't see that as being an argument against it. The whole purpose of PBR in my mind is to provide a logical SFB-like context for fleet makeup, is it not?

I didn't see it as a decent argument either...but didn't feel strongly enough about it to push it.

And this is the purpose of PBR.

[KHH Jakle]

Maybe I'll just include this as a rider on whatever final version of PBR v 4.0 gets approved 

[Kroma BaSyl]

I see no point in further complicating the rules on this. BTs as support is fine as is. Making them Command/Support is OK I guess but unnecessary. However, if BT were treated as Command/Support the Light Battle tugs should not, just the full BTs IMO.

[KHH Jakle]

Making them Command/Support is OK I guess but unnecessary. However, if BT were treated as Command/Support the Light Battle tugs should not, just the full BTs IMO.

I would agree.  Just the BT's

[Nomad]

Leave the BT where they are.
They are rarely taken anyway.

 

[Green]

sure,  1 tug max, and  never to be with a DN? and the BT falls under command and combat support

Makes sense.

[762_XC]

FYI, from the source material:

(S8.331) There can be no more than one size class 2 ship (dreadnoughts, most CVAs and SCSs) in the fleet. Size-2 ships never appear with less than three other ships, two of them from the same race as the size-2 ship.

<snip>

(S8.46) TUGS: No more than one tug (including LTTs) can be included. This does not count tugs carrying cargo pods (or self-defense pods, but no other type) in a scenario where the mission is to deliver cargo. This does not count tugs carrying troop transport pods (or self-defense pods, or hangar pods with GAS shuttles instead of fighters, but no other type) in a scenario where the objective is to deliver troops.

Full battle tugs are invariably size class 2. An LTT with a light battle pod is size class 3.

[KHH Jakle]

FYI, from the source material:

(S8.331) There can be no more than one size class 2 ship (dreadnoughts, most CVAs and SCSs) in the fleet. Size-2 ships never appear with less than three other ships, two of them from the same race as the size-2 ship.

This was waived in order to allow Dreadnought's to be used in our 3v3 battles.

Personally, wouldn't bother me to forbid all dread hull's as a more literal translations.  But it was ignored in order to make PBR more palatable to the masses.  Keep in mind, this was also a year ago...

[FPF-DieHard]

Personally, wouldn't bother me to forbid all dread hull's as a more literal translations.  But it was ignored in order to make PBR more palatable to the masses.  Keep in mind, this was also a year ago...

This way leads to madness . . .   

[762_XC]

Given a three ship limit I can see waiving the three escort minimum rule. But why allow two or three size class-2 ships?

[KHH Jakle]

I don't see how you could get 3 - but you could get 2 (by your definition - which I am not saying is wrong): DN & BT

[762_XC]

You're right, you can only get two. But the question still stands: why allow two size class-2 ships?

[FPF-DieHard]

why allow two size class-2 ships?

Because 3 would be silly