Disruptor Overload Output Modulator Siphon for Directed Antimatter Yield

The Klingon DSF, having received word of the many, many suggested upgrades for the venerable photon torpedo (most of which were attempting to bring its accuracy up to nearly the level of UIM-assisted disruptors), decided that the only way to safeguard the Empire from this looming threat was to begin upgrading their own weapons, which hadn’t seen an evolution since the development of UIM, many years previous.

The engineers got to work, and eventually crafted the DOOMSDAY device. It functioned by rerouting power from the antimatter containment field through the disruptor cannons, which were typically mounted just forward of the engines themselves. Only vessels which mount the disruptors in this fashion can use this device, which generally limits it to Klingon ships – much to the dismay of their Lyran allies, though their tri-maran ships can mount the system on their center-warp mounted disruptors. At the moment of firing overloaded disruptors (the system will not work with standard-load tubes, as the energy system is not saturated enough), the DOOMSDAY device pulls power directly from the warp nacelles, augmenting the disruptor bolts. Doing so causes the disruptor bolts to strike with substantially more power, though the system cannot be used for a period of time after firing, to allow the warp field to stabilize.

ARMING: To arm the device, the ship must allocate two points of warp energy per disruptor. This can come from reserve warp.

DAMAGE: This system doubles the impact of disruptor bolts throughout overload range. 10 becomes 20, 8 becomes 16, and 6 becomes 12.

RECALIBRATION: After firing disruptors in this manner, the warp fields of the vessel must realign to prevent breakdown, resulting in the ship being unable to use the system for a period of 64 impulses, to allow the over-saturated fields to bleed away their excess energy. For 32 impulses following the use of the device, the firing ship’s warp engines will produce 1 point less power (overall) per disruptor fired in this manner, representing the energy discharged through the disruptors. The warp engines do not take any actual damage; they simply do not produce quite as much power on the following turn.

UIM: The UIM module has the same effect upon DOOMSDAY-augmented disruptors as it does on normally overloaded disruptors. The DOOMSDAY system does not increase or lessen the chance of the UIM burning out.

_{(Note: This is not an entirely serious post; it just stems from the idea that there are so many threads for upgrading the photon torpedo, which is already pretty much even-up with the disruptor. If the photon gets an upgrade, so should its direct counterpart)}

By Mark Kuyper (Mark_K) on Wednesday, June 05, 2002 - 08:21 pm: Edit

Tom,
Is this compatable with the Gatling Opmitized Disruptor system? ie, can a Lyran DN mount 4 GODs and a pair of DOOMSDAYs?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, June 05, 2002 - 08:25 pm: Edit

In all seriousness, has anyone tried playing with the Heavy Disruptors from Starfleet Command? They work similarly to this; that is, double damage. I tried it, and made a table for 'em, and they're okay. They can only be used on SC2 units, and can't comprise more than a small amount of the ships disruptors.

By Tom Martin (Bheleu) on Wednesday, June 05, 2002 - 08:27 pm: Edit

Mark:

I see no reason why not!

Mike:

Haven't tried them, no. It's hard enough convincing a couple of our players to playtest Sabot Plasma ("speed 40 plasma? that's silly!") -- double-damage disruptors might push them over the edge, heh.

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Eagle) on Thursday, June 06, 2002 - 05:06 am: Edit

But combined they are great ideas for X2!!!

By John Pepper (Akula) on Thursday, June 06, 2002 - 12:45 pm: Edit

I personally like the Heavy Disruptor but, I think that there is little or no room for increased accurcy on a disruptor.

By Gary Plana (Garyplana) on Thursday, June 06, 2002 - 01:02 pm: Edit

Mike: IMHO, _all_ of the X-weapons from SFC-OP are overkill. I doubt that the Steves would let them into that game as anything less than X2 technology, but that's my $.02 worth.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, June 06, 2002 - 01:51 pm: Edit

Gary,

Yeah, that sounds about right to me, too. The only saving grace to the heavy disruptor was that it was mounted in limited numbers. I think the CBX had two, and four or six regular disruptors. They were cool, though.

By Robert Snook (Verdick) on Thursday, June 06, 2002 - 03:03 pm: Edit

I've yet to see much of a correlation between SFC weapons and SFB weapons. I've launched twin R's at a cruiser and it took them with crippling it. Also, I've hit a rear sheild on a light cruiser with a 50 pt. mauler and barely took the shield down. There just doesn't seem to be the same damage value for the weapons between SFC and SFB to try to directly transfer weapons.

By Mark Kuyper (Mark_K) on Thursday, June 06, 2002 - 03:07 pm: Edit

Robert,
Thats because SFC ships have twice the internals. Imagine my surprise the first time I hit something with 6 type IVs and it didn't go BOOM!

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, June 06, 2002 - 03:50 pm: Edit

In the first edition of SFC, the ships had twice the shields, too.

By Matthew J. Francois (Francois42) on Thursday, June 06, 2002 - 04:24 pm: Edit

For all of its flaws, though, SFC has had some good effects. It got me back into SFB after about a two, three year hiatus, and allowed me to finally find the website and message boards.

I just wish I'd found it sooner!

(Anyone on these boards get into SFB BECAUSE of SFC?)

-Francois
francois@purdue.edu

By Glenn Hoepfner (Ikabar) on Thursday, June 06, 2002 - 07:06 pm: Edit

In regards to the Doomsday device (name may need to be altered if ever accepted)so that this topic may get back on course, I like it. I would think 2 pts lost per Doomsday enhanced disruptor fire may be better than one, but overall could find itself in an SSJ issue or maybe something even a little more permanent. Even the name is creative.
Note: I don't like disruptors. They never did much for me (Not because I don't respect them. On the contrary, I've lost to disruptors many times. I just don't play them very well). So, my motivations are not selfish. I just like good creative ideas that are not overblown.

By Adam James Villatorio (Merlinfmct87) on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 09:33 am: Edit

Matthew Said:

---

Quote:

(Anyone on these boards get into SFB BECAUSE of SFC?)

---

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 11:07 am: Edit

Cool! Welcome!

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 10:12 am: Edit

I became interested in SFB after playing SFC OP. I had added the OP+ ships list and the server package. I enjoyed some aspects but there was little tactical variety. The AI just closed and hosed. This last weekend I purchased the basic game and will add the advanced missions and several other modules soon.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 01:13 pm: Edit

You will find SFB to be very different.

There is no computer to keep track of the details (and details can make or break a game).

Also ships aren't nearly as durable here. SFC doubled the internal damage a ship could take compared to SFB.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 02:54 pm: Edit

John,

Thanks for your comments. The details are what attracted me to the game. The success has less to do with fast finger flexes and more to do with learning and thinking. Also the scenarios in SFB are balanced better. I won't be facing a Klingon B-11 with an FF.