Topic: PBR Consideration: Conjectural Ships, Part II

[KHH Jakle]

ok, start fresh:

Flag all Conjectural Starships and allow their use only by agreement of both teams.
This would impact:
* Battleships (BB's, including the Klink B10 series)
* All the 4.0 Ships that never were
* Taldren Creations
* a bunch of other ships, yet to be determined....

As a side rule, any single construction ships would be flagged and restricted to only one per squadron, unless they already fall in a restricted group

Again, this topic is from the perspective of PBR being a tool to create realistic, historical formations.

This is open to debate.

[Kroma BaSyl]

I don't like the CJ flagging idea. They have become a part of the game, and the current PBR rules restrict them adequately.

[KHH Jakle]

Then you would be ok with "The ships that never were" being available for standard play (provided they were bucketed on the matrix accordingly)?

I personally won't be surprised if this is the consensus, but I just want to feel this item out

[Kroma BaSyl]

Then you would be ok with "The ships that never were" being available for standard play (provided they were bucketed on the matrix accordingly)?

Correct

[762_XC]

Leave them in. Battleships play a big role in Advanced for races with sucky X-ships.

Or, just remove Advanced all together and lower the BPV average.

[FPF-DieHard]

Tugs absolutely should be command ships

[762_XC]

Tugs absolutely should be command ships

Battle tugs and Carrier tugs should be, since they have higher command ratings.

[Corbomite]

Flag all Conjectural Starships and allow their use only by agreement of both teams.

So how many fleet configs should be brought to the fight before the arguing commences? One you hope your opponents will agree to because it gives you the edge, one you hope to sneak by them because they are unaware of the ships' capabilities and one that has no "conjectural" ships at all so you can just get in to play and have some fun?

Its hard enough coming up with one fleet sometimes, three is too much work.

[Nomad]

Tugs absolutely should be command ships

Battle tugs and Carrier tugs should be, since they have higher command ratings.

Carrier tugs should be under carrier with carrier restrictions.

Battle tugs should stay under Combat Support Vessels.


All conjucture ships should be mostly command ships. Maybe a few Combat Support Vessels. But none should be unrestricted.

[FPF-Bach]

Again, this topic is from the perspective of PBR being a tool to create realistic, historical formations.

This is open to debate.

I was under the impression that the league adopted PBR rules in order to limit cheese vs actually trying to create historical formations.  Was that the case or not?

[KBF-Butcher]

Again, this topic is from the perspective of PBR being a tool to create realistic, historical formations.

This is open to debate.

I was under the impression that the league adopted PBR rules in order to limit cheese vs actually trying to create historical formatations. Was that the case or not?

Basicly the league adopted PBR rules so we can try something different something with more real formations that would be more fun.
So the PBR rules gave the divisional league something new to go on as people were starting to get bored without them although many TBPV in the first  2 noPBR cycles forced u to take ship combos which where legal with PBR.
It might though limited cheese as well but i dont think that was the initial intention.

In any case i beleive that this PBA league is the best league ever run and im sure everyone enjoy the best 3v3 battles that taking place in the Universe.
I call it the major league and its sad it begun now and not some years ago when sfc had many fleets and people.
 

[Kroma BaSyl]

Again, this topic is from the perspective of PBR being a tool to create realistic, historical formations.

This is open to debate.

I was under the impression that the league adopted PBR rules in order to limit cheese vs actually trying to create historical formatations.  Was that the case or not?

Both, historical because that was how cheesy combinations were controlled in SFB.

[KHH Jakle]

Ok, I'll drop this

[FPF-DieHard]

Battle tugs should stay under Combat Support Vessels.

Do Battle tugs have Flag Bridge?  If they do, they are command ships.

[KHH Jakle]

A F-DWC doesn't have a flag bridge, but it's a command ship.  It just doesn't need a Flag Bridge to command a 3 ship formation.

I think the impetus here is to have Battle Tugs (where the tug is an Old Heavy Cruiser Design) looked at as DN's because in a 3 ship formation, that's the place it would hold.

[762_XC]

All battle pods have a flag bridge. In F&E they add 2 to the command rating of a tug, which means a full sized BT has a 10 command rating (same as a DN).

They were used as substitute DN's and should be treated as such.

[[ISC]GreyWolf]

I believe the Tugs should be much as other ships...

I agree with Carrier Tugs in carrier group.
Battle Tugs, in my opinion should be in the Command VAriant group.
Marine tugs should be in Command Support, etc.

[FPF-DieHard]

I believe the Tugs should be much as other ships...

I agree with Carrier Tugs in carrier group.
Battle Tugs, in my opinion should be in the Command VAriant group.
Marine tugs should be in Command Support, etc.

Sounds good here. 

[Kroma BaSyl]

I believe the Tugs should be much as other ships...

I agree with Carrier Tugs in carrier group.
Battle Tugs, in my opinion should be in the Command VAriant group.
Marine tugs should be in Command Support, etc.

Sounds good here. 

Agree.

[KHH Jakle]

I believe the Tugs should be much as other ships...

I agree with Carrier Tugs in carrier group.
Battle Tugs, in my opinion should be in the Command VAriant group.
Marine tugs should be in Command Support, etc.

With the exception of the Battle Tugs being in the Command group, all of the above should already be the case.

Battle Tugs will be moved to Command