Topic: Ships going in reverse!

[Dizzy]

It may be possible to add this so I'm testing the waters to see how you guys feel about it.

Having a comm button clicked would 'reverse' your ship speed up to the desired speed setting. Interesting eh?

[Hexx]

Yay retrograding !

Spd 4 should be more than enough I'd think.
Actually I do think.

Speed 4 it is.

[Dizzy]

Out of ALL of the FCA's the Feds built, just ONE shoulda had RA torps...     

[Lieutenant_Q]

Hexx, I think JTK has got to override your opinion on that one.

"Reverse engines!  All astern, One-half Impulse! Back Off! Back Off!"

[FCM_SFHQ_XC]

Speed 4 back is best I think.. while perhaps a bit more would be realistic, I do not think that more then speed 4 back would really be necessary.

[KBFLordKrueg]

It may be possible to add this so I'm testing the waters to see how you guys feel about it.

Having a comm button clicked would 'reverse' your ship speed up to the desired speed setting. Interesting eh?

*deposites 2 cents*
If such a thing is actually implemented, it should be costly to do so.
In SFB...
You had to either: pay a cost equal to your forward speed to stop, then pay movement cost to retrograde or be a dead stop already before retrograding. Same thing when you decided to change again.
I'd have to dust off the rulebook again to double check, but, I believe there was a turn mode penalty while retrograding also...I forget.
It's been so long since I've seen anyone try such a lame maneuver...

The point is, it should be power costly to change direction and it shouldn't be a "slam, full reverse" type of thing, it should take time to stop a faster than light starship, then re accelerate it back to that speed in reverse. 

[Age]

I would go for 5 that is what it is in SFC3.This would help if you are about to collide with a planet

[Lepton]

I reference "Balance of Terror" episode.  Engines full reverse. Emergency warp speed.  That means speed 31 in reverse.

That said. Reverse be dumb.  Don't waste your time.

[Nemesis]

Another example is The Corbomite Maneuver.  High warp in reverse.

[Julin Eurthyr]

Reverse in SFB is "worse"...

If memory serves -
To do a mid-turn change to reverse:

1.  Pay a breaking cost to bring ship's speed to 0.  Emergency Decel isn't enough for this.
2.  Sit like rock for 1/4 turn minimum
3.  Pay for a mid-turn speed change to begin accelerating in reverse.  Top speed is theoretical max (31), based on warp & 1 impulse formula...

It's easier to do one over a turn break, as you just had to be stopped at speed 0 over the break, possibly having to have been at 0 for a certain length of time.
Then, when you do your "normal" acceleration from stop, all you do is accelerate in reverse.

IIRC, even if it is possible, the AI can't handle it.  Bethke himself said to test retrogrades vs AI, perform the following test:

1.  Reverse all your firing arcs, so FA = RA, FH = RH, FP = RP, etc.
2.  Fight battle with that modded ship.

I'm not sure that the AI can handle the battle, even if the ship is limited to speed 4 or 6.  If it can, I'd say speed 6 max (as speed 4 keeps the retrograder safe vs. mines)

[Farfarer]

I used to use Retrograde a lot (read always) in SFB Red Hat Tournaments etc. at Cons, as I flew Klingon.  With all the stock Ph II and Disr, you could fly around backwards ensuring you had outgoing fire from everything each turn.  It seemed to be the only way to overcome all the "WYN AUX Cruiser" and other insufficiently playtested tournament cheese-boats.
Not sure Retrograde needed in SFC, but it sounds interesting.

[drb]

Hoi Folks,

  Reverse just as it is in SFB please. Typically the most effective use of reverse would be used by a ship, at the start of the mission,  with mostly fwd firing weapons, against a seaking weapon ship or a very aggressive enemy; either with more skill, larger ship, more of them, or it's a ship named Close To The Edge with its fearless CO.
  It is, without a doubt, something that would be hardly used, though it would be not only be useful, but make for some interesting battles as well, if used well . For new pilots, or rusty seasoned ones, it would be a sure fire way to prevent chasing plasma ships. Feds, I think, would be most able to take advantage of the retrograde tactic, though I reckon the thought would cross my mind, if reverse was an option, when facing Firesoul in a Lyran PFT, in any ship I may be flying in, really, the guy has my number or something.... However, I digress. Yes, it should cost a great deal of power to change from forward movement to reverse, inertia and all... but it is also very unlikely to change until it proves successful or not. (if not, one just keeps going off the map in reverse, no need to waste any power)

 The idea that reverse was left out of the game at all leaves me confused; what powered ship is unable to go in reverse? it is just intuitive. Besides, as Lepton observed, in was in TOS, and yes it is "dumb" though "unnessary for game play" may be more suitable, if out matched there is plenty of room and time to taco bell, if needs be, or you fly well enough to not need the option; just the same I would like to see SFB reverse in SFC OP.

Take care

drb

[Dfly]

As much as I would love to see it work like SFB, this isnt SFB.  If you do get it to work, I hope you keep the speed down to a bare minimum (4 works for me).

I would like to see that you must do an 'all stop', which would give you that sitting still for a bit, then reverse kicking in.  As per how much it costs, it could cost the same in my books as going forward since you can only go speed 4(if set at that, or a slow speed).

[KBF MalaK]

It's been a while since I had to crunch numbers for this game but reverse would have to be sublight (less than warp 1) but being realistic impulse speed is maintained by thrusters so if you could disable the 'station keeping computer' you should be able build up your forward impule speed and use thrusters to flip the ship around 180 degrees and 'drift' backwards. There's no tactical advantage to coming to a full stop (at the large energy cost) and backup.

But this game didn't have alot of stuff in it (like the positron flywheel effect).

[Bonk]

I'll echo the sentiment that it should adhere to the SFB rules if implemented. (Full stop, wait, then reverse) Also there should be an advantage in acceleration for the Feds with this maneuver to mimic the positron flywheel which made the feds the only ones able to commonly use retrograde movement (and they would be lucky to get away alive). Any time I tried retrograde in SFB it was a last ditch effort before death. I saw it used once with a fleet from the start on a floating map, but it did not work out. I gained on him to plasma kill range before he could do much damage with proxies.

A neat idea, but I doubt there would be much occasion to actually use it. What might be more fun would be to make a unique mission out of it, where you come on a bunch of pirates with photons and disruptors backing away from you at range 29 at the start. I think making a single mission where it is used creatively with AI ships would result in it being seen/used more.

[KBFKaz]

Bah! Forget about reverse. Just HET and give' er at spd 31. If it is implemented, I'll never use it anyway.

[marstone]

I can count the number of times I have retrograded in SFB on one hand, but it would be nice to have the option to do it. 

Being able to move out from a base, then retrograde back as the enemy moves in, could be usful

[FA Frey XC]

Bah! Forget about reverse. Just HET and give' er at spd 31. If it is implemented, I'll never use it anyway.

And this, my friends, is one reason retrograde isn't as big of a deal in SFC.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have retrograde, but I'm in agreement with the majority of posters - it should be a big deal to take a friggin STARSHIP from any forward momentum to a complete stop, then move backwards.

Regards,

[Dizzy]

Bah! Forget about reverse. Just HET and give' er at spd 31. If it is implemented, I'll never use it anyway.

it should be a big deal to take a friggin STARSHIP from any forward momentum to a complete stop, then move backwards.

Regards,

Along those lines... An HET performed at 31 with the net result of changing direction 180 or more degrees and continuing on at full speed... I'd say that's more stressful than stopping and going in reverse. I wrote a story once and in it explained the maneuver I did going full speed and changing direction was all about the transporters and warp engines moving space around my ship... and my ship not really moving at all.

Edit which brings me to my fav quote: Did the chicken simply cross over the road or did the road merely pass under the chicken?

[KBF MalaK]

Edit which brings me to my fav quote: Did the chicken simply cross over the road or did the road merely pass under the chicken?

That depends on which direction and speed the mass the road is on is rotating in space, and which direction and speed the chicken is moving.
 

[Nemesis]

Bah! Forget about reverse. Just HET and give' er at spd 31. If it is implemented, I'll never use it anyway.

And this, my friends, is one reason retrograde isn't as big of a deal in SFC.

Two more reasons are:

1/ No floating maps

2/ No narrow salvoes.  So a lucky roll with your photons does not knock out the opponents #1 shield at a range they can't effectively strike back. 

[Beeblebrox]

Edit which brings me to my fav quote: Did the chicken simply cross over the road or did the road merely pass under the chicken?

That depends on which direction and speed the mass the road is on is rotating in space, and which direction and speed the chicken is moving.
 

It also depends on whether you're smoking Christmas Tree, Black Gunjee, or Maui Wowie.


Maybe, to make reversing costly, it could cause damage to the ship.  The OP manual mentions that manoeuvres like high energy turns and all stop are stressful on the structure and engines--hence breaking down on HETs.  Why not penalize the reversing player with some hull damage or possibly some loss of engine power?  To me at least, that would sort of fit in with what I've seen in TOS. 

Captain:  Full reverse!  All engines astern!  Emergency power to the engines!!

[Cue sharply decreasing engine howl.  Bridge crew is slammed about the bridge.  Cue sharply increasing engine howl.]

Chief Engineer:  Captain, the engines can't take this kind of stress for long!

[CUT TO:  Security Chief]

Security Chief Beeblebrox swiftly unholsters disruptor and vaporizes the whining Chief Engineer.


While I'm here I have a couple of questions.  What is a narrow salvo?  I know what each individual word means but I'm unclear on what they mean in this particular combination.  In OP, do the starships engage at impulse or at warp?  I ask for two reasons:  1.  Unless phasers move faster than light they're essentially useless at warp speeds.  2.  When you cross the map border one of your officers tells you that you're going to warp speed. 

 

[Nemesis]

While I'm here I have a couple of questions.  What is a narrow salvo?  I know what each individual word means but I'm unclear on what they mean in this particular combination.

In SFB whether a weapon hits is based on a die roll (for most weapons the roll of one normal 6 sided die).  The narrow salvo option allows all weapons fired at that time to use the same roll.  So if you need to have a set number of weapons hit to have a useful effect (say all of your photon torpedoes) you could fire them as a narrow salvo and if the single die roll is a hit then all your weapons hit and you get a useful level of damage. 

One of my friends who played Fed always wanted to use a floating map (no borders) in SFB and thenwould retrograde and do narrow salvos until he got that lucky 1 on his die roll and knocked down your #1 shield at a range where only photons in a narrow salvo could do so.  He didn't like scenarios with a non floating map or a requirement to defend/attack a fixed location which removed his ability to do so. 

It was also good for bombarding starbases with photons.  Sit at maximum range and do either maximum damage which could overwhelm the shield reinforcement or no damage while sitting at a range which allowed you to reinforce your shields to cover all potential damage from starbase weapons.

For weapons with variable damage such as phasers that die roll establishes the damage for all the phasers not just 1.

In OP, do the starships engage at impulse or at warp?  I ask for two reasons:  1.  Unless phasers move faster than light they're essentially useless at warp speeds.  2.  When you cross the map border one of your officers tells you that you're going to warp speed. 

The documentation says it is at impulse speeds. 

OP is based on SFB which is based on TOS and TOS clearly has episodes of combat at warp speeds.  In the Corbomite maneuver (TOS) the Enterprise is moving backwards at maximum warp and firing phasers at the "buoy".

I think the "impulse only for combat" comes from the TNG episode with the "Picard maneuver".

[KBFLordKrueg]

While I'm here I have a couple of questions.  What is a narrow salvo?  I know what each individual word means but I'm unclear on what they mean in this particular combination.  In OP, do the starships engage at impulse or at warp?  I ask for two reasons:  1.  Unless phasers move faster than light they're essentially useless at warp speeds.  2.  When you cross the map border one of your officers tells you that you're going to warp speed. 

 

1) Narrow salvos come from the original StarFleet Battles game, when firing in narrow salvos (you must announce first) you rolled a single dice for all your weapons of the same type that you fired, rather than a dice for each weapon. So, you hit with everything, or missed with everything. Some weapon have varying amounts of damage depending on range also.
Narrow vollies could be devastating or a big nothing...

2) As far as the speed, combat takes place at sub-warp speeds. According to AFB (the designers of SFB) that is the reason for speed 31 being max. Beyond that,  Weapons and battle computers can't lock on due to distortion of space around the starship at warp speeds.
Of course, I have Star Trek episodes where they ignore this theory, so...


Hope that helps.

[marstone]

While I'm here I have a couple of questions.  What is a narrow salvo?  I know what each individual word means but I'm unclear on what they mean in this particular combination.  In OP, do the starships engage at impulse or at warp?  I ask for two reasons:  1.  Unless phasers move faster than light they're essentially useless at warp speeds.  2.  When you cross the map border one of your officers tells you that you're going to warp speed. 

 

1) Narrow salvos come from the original StarFleet Battles game, when firing in narrow salvos (you must announce first) you rolled a single dice for all your weapons of the same type that you fired, rather than a dice for each weapon. So, you hit with everything, or missed with everything. Some weapon have varying amounts of damage depending on range also.
Narrow vollies could be devastating or a big nothing...

2) As far as the speed, combat takes place at sub-warp speeds. According to AFB (the designers of SFB) that is the reason for speed 31 being max. Beyond that,  Weapons and battle computers can't lock on due to distortion of space around the starship at warp speeds.
Of course, I have Star Trek episodes where they ignore this theory, so...


Hope that helps.

Speed in SFB was at low warp speed, not truely sub-warp.  Old sublight romulan ships moved at a speed on 1 in SFB.  The speed max of 31 I agree with, it was the max speed that weapon fire was able to be done.  Going to above 31 was a disengagement (same as running off the map).  IIRC each speed number is one multiple of the speed of light.  Thus speed 3 was three times the speed of light (I think about warp 2).  I believe it maxed out at under warp 4 (but not sure)

[KBF MalaK]

In SFB (mine was made in 1982) the rules state that speed 31 was actually warp 9 (emergency power), and the ST:tech manual (also from the early 80's) said that warp 9 was the fastest possible speed reachable by a starship.

A long time has passed between the TOS era and the TNG era (400 years or so), so maybe it possible to fight at warp speeds (warp 10 is NOW possible with Transwarp drive), AND they've prolly miniturized the type 4 phaser so it can me mounted on a shuttle.

<Man, the TNG sure messed up 'canon' trek.

[Roychipoqua_Mace]

I remember the author of the Multiplayer Tactical Manual (the awesome SFC1 one) said that the warp speed in Starfleet Battles was the cube root of the speed unit.
Warp 1= speed 1.0
Warp 2= speed 8.0
Warp 3= speed 27.0
It seems like Starfleet Command is more based on speed 32.0 as being Warp 1, like how planets and ships are scaled.

[FPF-DieHard]

It was also good for bombarding starbases with photons.  Sit at maximum range and do either maximum damage which could overwhelm the shield reinforcement or no damage while sitting at a range which allowed you to reinforce your shields to cover all potential damage from starbase weapons.

This still works, with proxies.

Reverse would be cool, but I'd put this way low on the priority list of modifications.

[Dizzy]

Reverse would be cool, but I'd put this way low on the priority list of modifications.

Yup, the poll numbers just arn't there to make it a priority.