OBT Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Welcome to OurBattleTech.com - A BattleTech Fan Site

Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765  (Read 31484 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Takiro

  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,181
  • For the Last Cameron!
Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« on: February 24, 2014, 05:09:58 PM »
Downloaded the third Field Report 2765 only moments ago.





Be forewarned -






SPOILERS TO FOLLOW!!
Logged

lrose

  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,664
Re: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« Reply #1 on: February 24, 2014, 05:19:49 PM »
So far I've skimmed a few sections, mainly the naval and infrastructure sections and it looks interesting. There are some interesting tidbits about their naval construction capability, which we will need to make work with TR2800 (but it's fairly easy to do).  The fleet is decent, I actually like it's composition better then those of the DC or CC -lots of home built designs, few TH hand me downs- but that very fact makes it seem out of place compared to the other fleets.  The Defender is an interesting design, which leads me (again) to the  question of why were the house warships generally superior to the SLDF ones.   The Congress-D- eh, it feels like space filler, I would have liked to have seen more from the design and the fluff. 
Logged

Takiro

  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,181
  • For the Last Cameron!
Re: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« Reply #2 on: February 24, 2014, 07:09:16 PM »
Okay folks I wanted to give my initial impressions of this Field Report before I go to dream land. If I come off as cranky it is perhaps my lack of sleep to blame.

There is something a little off about the AFFS that much is clear. This theme is recurring and while appropriate it just doesn't come off right in the details to me. Could be lack of sleep and I can't put my finger on it so I'll give it a more extensive reread later.

The Navy is still too damn small and I agree with many of Irose's first impressions. I like the Naval and Fleet organization as well as the Defender class Battlecruiser while the Congress D left me feeling blah its here. Not sure how integration of these new designs and numbers will go for BTSD but again more numerous warships will certainly be.

No, Clovis Guard! The ground units of the AFFS left me wanting. Maybe Irose's exceptional unreleased Threat Assessment work on the Davion military is too high a mark to aim for but I was expecting more regional forces, like the Clovis Guard...

The Avalon Hussars, Ceti Hussars, Davion Guard, and March Militias are all ok at first glance. Liked the Tancredi Loyalists and the Robinson Chevaliers although I would prefer Irose's multiple regional force of the Draconis March.

The Arcadian Cuirassiers and their link to Demeter is a little bit of question mark to me but ok.

Two units I will be taking out to the wood shed.

The Syrtis Fusiliers in regards to the Haseks seem too big too fast IMO. While it doesn't give them outright hereditary rulership of the Capellan March, a canon fact that doesn't happen till well into the Succession Wars, no reader of this report would guess that the Haseks aren't the March rulers.

The Dragonlords. Their formation story is certainly plausible but the name aside from initial awesomeness don't fit. Where is the massive conflict between the Federated Suns and the Draconis Combine that could justify it? There is no notable war, historic incident, or extreme hatred that exists between these two powerful states at this time. Look it up! The War of Davion Succession which comes well after (100 plus years) the formation of this unit is the first. Oh and btw they are historically and at the time of this report enemies of the Taurians. Huh??
Cool name.
Logged

lrose

  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,664
Re: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« Reply #3 on: February 24, 2014, 08:01:22 PM »
Some more on the Congress the first 3 paragraphs are barely rewritten from the TR2750 entry on the Congress- I thought I had read that before.  What is interesting is that the weapons load matches the original stats from TR2750.  In TR2750 the Congress had NAC/30s on the Fore sides, but for some reason these were changed to NAC/10s in TR3057 (The stats in Bspace still showed NAC/30s).  So the design in the FR is a way to make the stats from 2750 canon. 
Logged

Trace Coburn

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 155
  • Родина и свобода!
Re: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« Reply #4 on: February 24, 2014, 10:23:11 PM »
Quote from: lrose on February 24, 2014, 08:01:22 PM
Some more on the Congress the first 3 paragraphs are barely rewritten from the TR2750 entry on the Congress- I thought I had read that before.  What is interesting is that the weapons load matches the original stats from TR2750.  In TR2750 the Congress had NAC/30s on the Fore sides, but for some reason these were changed to NAC/10s in TR3057 (The stats in Bspace still showed NAC/30s).  So the design in the FR is a way to make the stats from 2750 canon.
  Yeah, my sheer wild-assed guess would be that that’s a ‘two-step’, meant to reconcile the two sets of stats and explain away the ‘confusion’ between the TRO2750 and TRO3057(R) versions of the Congress.  Now it’s just a matter of saying that the ComStar adept who wrote the 2750 book ‘mistakenly’ gave the Davion-version stats for the SLDF Congress, and TRO3057(R) represents the Congress that actually served in the SLDF and then made Exodus.  ;)
  Newer players likely won’t care, but speaking for myself, if not long-term rivet-counting veterans everywhere, I appreciate that little act of fan-service and devotion.  8)
Logged

Developer-in-Chief, Renegade Tech 2.0

Dragon Cat

  • KU Player
  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,271
  • Not Dead Until I Say So
Re: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« Reply #5 on: February 25, 2014, 03:44:08 AM »
Now that I've looked at it I like it.

The AFFS got a lot of love for units and the two WarShips are nifty too the Congress D is a nice throwback to the 2750 original while the Defender is the Federated Suns pimped out version of the Dreadnaught.

One thing I'd really liked to have heard of was a Defender Block II version that started to take advantage of some modern tech - the Congress has two of them would have been nice to see.
Logged
My stuff, and my AU timeline follow link and enjoy

http://www.ourbattletech.com/forum/dragon-cat-collection/

The original CBT thread
Dragon Cat on CBT

Quote from: ColBosch on March 15, 2015, 05:35:30 PM

Really, as long as there is an unbroken line of people calling themselves "Clan Nova Cat," it doesn't really matter to me if they're still using Iron Wombs or not. They may be dead as a faction, but as a people they still exist. It's not uncommon in the real world, after all.

lrose

  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,664
Re: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« Reply #6 on: February 25, 2014, 06:44:00 AM »
Quote from: Trace Coburn on February 24, 2014, 10:23:11 PM

  Yeah, my sheer wild-assed guess would be that that’s a ‘two-step’, meant to reconcile the two sets of stats and explain away the ‘confusion’ between the TRO2750 and TRO3057(R) versions of the Congress.  Now it’s just a matter of saying that the ComStar adept who wrote the 2750 book ‘mistakenly’ gave the Davion-version stats for the SLDF Congress, and TRO3057(R) represents the Congress that actually served in the SLDF and then made Exodus.  ;)
  Newer players likely won’t care, but speaking for myself, if not long-term rivet-counting veterans everywhere, I appreciate that little act of fan-service and devotion.  8)
[/quote]

I'm okay with them trying to fix the TR2750/T3057 issues with the congress (but it would have been nice if they stuck to the Bspace stats which did not use DHS but had the NAC/30s in the FL/FR) I just wish the fluff was more interesting...
Logged

Trace Coburn

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 155
  • Родина и свобода!
Re: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« Reply #7 on: February 25, 2014, 07:13:42 AM »
Quote from: lrose on February 25, 2014, 06:44:00 AM
Quote from: Trace Coburn on February 24, 2014, 10:23:11 PM
  Yeah, my sheer wild-assed guess would be that that’s a ‘two-step’, meant to reconcile the two sets of stats and explain away the ‘confusion’ between the TRO2750 and TRO3057(R) versions of the Congress.  Now it’s just a matter of saying that the ComStar adept who wrote the 2750 book ‘mistakenly’ gave the Davion-version stats for the SLDF Congress, and TRO3057(R) represents the Congress that actually served in the SLDF and then made Exodus.  ;)
  Newer players likely won’t care, but speaking for myself, if not long-term rivet-counting veterans everywhere, I appreciate that little act of fan-service and devotion.  8)

I'm okay with them trying to fix the TR2750/T3057 issues with the congress (but it would have been nice if they stuck to the Bspace stats which did not use DHS but had the NAC/30s in the FL/FR) I just wish the fluff was more interesting...
  To each their own; I don’t really mind, since it strikes me as being part of the love-letter to the long-term fans and the older BT lore.  Besides, the old fluff was good enough the first time around; it establishes/reinforces the common origins of the two classes; and rewriting too much could have walked them into another Canon Minefield (not unlike the one that claimed the Davvie Congress).
  Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I’ll go back to the love-letter theory.  TRO2750 has been OOP for almost a quarter-century, and only got a pdf release within the last five(?) years IIRC, by which it would have been outside most peoples’ field-of-interest.  Most modern players first met the Congress in TRO3057R, which noticeably abridged the original fluff.  How many aerospace gamers who came to the game in the FanPro or CGL eras actually own a copy of TRO2750 and know the ‘full’ fluff?  This gets us the original and ‘complete’ stats and story of the Congress-class frigate, in ‘print’, in a product which is compliant with the modern version of the game.  IMPO, it’s new information, almost a revelation, to the newcomers who don’t have the book from 1990; and for those who do know the old lore, putting it back into ‘print’ is a sincere ‘thank-you’ for their loyalty and endurance.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2014, 07:14:39 AM by Trace Coburn »
Logged

Developer-in-Chief, Renegade Tech 2.0

lrose

  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,664
Re: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« Reply #8 on: February 25, 2014, 07:46:10 AM »
I didn't make myself clear- I don't have an issue with them reusing older fluff, you need some of that material since you can't assume people have TR2750 or TR3057, but since they did use it I wish they would have expanded the new material beyond the 2 very basic paragraphs that they added at the end.  What they did add I found fairly bland and uninteresting.  More details about their deployment or operations they were involved in would have been nice.
Logged

Knightmare

  • Terran Supremacist
  • Network Gnome
  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,459
  • Taking out the Sphere's trash since 3026
    • Our BattleTech
Re: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« Reply #9 on: February 25, 2014, 08:12:17 AM »
Quote from: lrose on February 24, 2014, 05:19:49 PM
The fleet is decent, I actually like it's composition better then those of the DC or CC -lots of home built designs, few TH hand me downs- but that very fact makes it seem out of place compared to the other fleets.

That's Alexander Davion's preference for the domestic over the foreign.
Logged
Quote from: Dragon Cat
WORD (of Blake) is good for two things. 1. Leaving inappropriate notes on other people's work. 2. Adding fake words (of Blake) to the dictionary.

Trace Coburn

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 155
  • Родина и свобода!
Re: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« Reply #10 on: February 25, 2014, 08:50:50 AM »
Quote from: lrose on February 25, 2014, 07:46:10 AM
I didn't make myself clear- I don't have an issue with them reusing older fluff, you need some of that material since you can't assume people have TR2750 or TR3057, but since they did use it I wish they would have expanded the new material beyond the 2 very basic paragraphs that they added at the end.  What they did add I found fairly bland and uninteresting.  More details about their deployment or operations they were involved in would have been nice.
  Which is when you get into issues like deadlines, word-count restrictions, not wanting to accidentally plant another detail-landmine for another poor bastard to step on ten years down the line....  :D  Don’t get me wrong, I would have welcomed those kinds of details just as much as you, but I can see why the writers chose not to try anything fancy or wordy, so I can survive without those details.  Hell, I Standard Answer #1 a lot of that stuff anyway.  ;D
Logged

Developer-in-Chief, Renegade Tech 2.0

lrose

  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,664
Re: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« Reply #11 on: February 25, 2014, 09:04:57 AM »
Quote from: Knightmare on February 25, 2014, 08:12:17 AM

That's Alexander Davion's preference for the domestic over the foreign.

Understood but it still doesn't make a lot of sense as far as the DC and CC are concerned- if anything the FS should have more TH castoffs then the DC or CC.  Why? Because the FS traditionally had better relations with the TH, while the DC and CC were fairly hostile, especially during the Age of War era, that's why the TH built more Castle Brians along the DC and CC (and FWL) borders.  During the SL, yes I can see the CC and DC having large numbers of TH castoffs, but not during the Age of War.  So where are the early DC and CC ships (besides the Narikami and Du Shi Wang)?  Maybe they were all scrapped, maybe they were all mothballed before 2765 but it would have been nice to see them.  And it would be nice to see more early Davion Warships- we have the Defender from 2360 and then nothing until the Davion I in 2510.  Maybe someday we will get an Age of War TRO with these ships.
Logged

Abele

  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,093
  • A Man in a Tin Suit
Re: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« Reply #12 on: February 25, 2014, 01:01:52 PM »
Perhaps the Fed Suns decided to not buy the crappier ships that the TH was dumping into the marketplace.
Logged
The Honor of Men cannot be bound by the words of Fools- Marco Hietala
I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand. - Confucius
May God defend me from my friends; I can defend myself from my enemies. - Voltaire
Chaos doesn't need a recipe, just a list of ingredients. - Drakensis
Kachi ni Fushigi no Kachi Ari. Make ni Fushigi no Make Nashi
Wielder of the Ferro-Carbide Bat of Doom™®©

lrose

  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,664
Re: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« Reply #13 on: February 25, 2014, 02:11:06 PM »
I hate to try and apply logic to battletech but the naval forces make absolutely no sense.  I asked over on CBT about the fleets and was told that by the time all of the FR's have been published we will have every warship class built between 2300 and present. So basically it looks like every IS state builds 1 warship class in the late 2300s and then halts all warship production.  (The FWL and LC remain to be seen but that is the case with the FS, DC and CC).  The FS goes on a ship building kick in the 2500s (Davion I, Davion II, Robinson, New Syrtis & Robinson), the DC builds one class of ships right before the RW and keeps in production (in improved form) after the RW and the CC builds 1 new ship during the late SL period.  We don't know too much about the FWL (other then that they build a BB during the 2550s) and the LC (Mako & Tharkad during the SL era). 

I just don't see what ships would be in any of the IS state fleets in the 2400s- They wouldn't have Back Lion Is (sold to IS statesprior to RW) , Aegis (sold to IS states in 2582), Dart(sold off around 2505 or Vincents (most likely- being introduced in 2432 it is too new to be sold off).   

All that's left are Vigilants, Essex I (maybe), Lola I (maybe) and Cruiser Cruiser.  So did these form the bulk of the IS fleets during the age of War?
Logged

Dragon Cat

  • KU Player
  • General
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,271
  • Not Dead Until I Say So
Re: Reviewing FR AFFS 2765
« Reply #14 on: February 25, 2014, 04:18:54 PM »
More than likely

Biggest problem age of war era was not that people were building up war fleets they were building nations.  FR FedSun points to that with Federated Boeing being built

I think you'd probably find half a dozen WarShips as the poster child's for the navy but the vast amount of production going on jump ships connecting the realms together.  In the early years I don't see the Succession States as stable entities instead I see the Lords fighting the PR game to keep there nations together.  To do that you need jumpships and solid lines of communication
Logged
My stuff, and my AU timeline follow link and enjoy

http://www.ourbattletech.com/forum/dragon-cat-collection/

The original CBT thread
Dragon Cat on CBT

Quote from: ColBosch on March 15, 2015, 05:35:30 PM

Really, as long as there is an unbroken line of people calling themselves "Clan Nova Cat," it doesn't really matter to me if they're still using Iron Wombs or not. They may be dead as a faction, but as a people they still exist. It's not uncommon in the real world, after all.
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »