| By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 04:36 am: Edit |
MJC, shields are not a weapon, the ASIF is a shield.
| By Jeff Johnson (Jeffro) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 11:41 am: Edit |
Back to the "requirements" theme...
I've gleaned from the posts here a few things that are major issues in the X2 designs. Please correct any misconceptions and add anything that's missing.
1) X1 designs were mostly built to lead fleets during the big Wars. The X1 ships would not normally travel alone and would not (historically speaking) duel with dreadnoughts.
2) The X2 designs are built for the aftermath of the General War, the ISC invasion, and the Andromeda invasion. Because they are dealing with a totally different economical and strategic situation, they have a mission that is comparable to those of the pre-war CA's and DD's.
3) The meanest duel on the block for an X2 ship is with the Orion X1 ship.
4) Small fleets of X2 ships will fight larger fleets of non-X-ships.
5) X2 ships of the major powers will duel each other quite a bit as well.
Will this cover about 95% of the actions that the X2 ships will be involved with during the trade wars period??
| By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 12:05 pm: Edit |
It all depends on what the trade wars are, but your premises are acceptable. There is a fair amount of convergence between this topic and the X2 Timeline topic. The most detailed discussion of the trade wars I could find in the X2 Timeline topic is here: http://www.starfleetgames.com/discus/messages/23/5926.html?1070226581 under 9/3/03. Being a year old its time to update it.
I like that this requirements topic exists but we should avoid going too far into timeline here. Better to capture discussions of the trade war in the timeline topic.
| By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 12:45 pm: Edit |
I'm a little dubious about saying X1 ships rarely travel alone and about the Orion being the "meanest duel". There are already a number of "historical" scenarios published in which at least one side has a lone X-ship (often a small ship but sometimes a cruiser). That doesn't seem that uncommon. Dreadnoughts almost never travel alone (well, except for DNLs) but there are even a few published scenarios with lone Dreadnoughts, though those are very unusual cases.
There's no doubt the Orion CAX (or is it CX? I don't remember off hand) is a monster. But I'm not convinced it's the biggest monster out there. The ISC CCX certainly outclasses it in firepower, as do the Hydran X-cruisers once their fighters are factored in.
I did once watch a Hydran DGX beat an Orion CAX in a duel, and the Orion made no gross errors that I could see. That was before the CL23 errata came out, which might have changed things (it would certainly have changed the tactics since both sides made extensive use of overloaded phasers), but I'm not positive the same outcome couldn't be reached under the curent rules as well.
| By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 08:56 pm: Edit |
Jeff J., to answer your points:
Quote:1) X1 designs were mostly built to lead fleets during the big Wars. The X1 ships would not normally travel alone and would not (historically speaking) duel with dreadnoughts.
Quote:2) The X2 designs are built for the aftermath of the General War, the ISC invasion, and the Andromeda invasion. Because they are dealing with a totally different economical and strategic situation, they have a mission that is comparable to those of the pre-war CA's and DD's.
Quote:3) The meanest duel on the block for an X2 ship is with the Orion X1 ship.
Quote:4) Small fleets of X2 ships will fight larger fleets of non-X-ships.
Quote:5) X2 ships of the major powers will duel each other quite a bit as well.
| By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 09:53 pm: Edit |
I don't thin anyone's going to sell off warships except as scrap.
| By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 09:56 pm: Edit |
Depends on how the history is defined. I can see the Klingons, for example, selling off alot of that old crap they had (they never get rid of anything, it seems like) if the neutral zones are much wider, and there is a market for former Klingon colonies to buy Klingon ships for local defense. Gives them some money in the bank to fund their new stuff with. But, as I said, it depends on how the history is defined. Until we really know that, we're sort of stuck.
| By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 10:03 pm: Edit |
Quote:1) X1 designs were mostly built to lead fleets during the big Wars. The X1 ships would not normally travel alone and would not (historically speaking) duel with dreadnoughts.
Quote:2) The X2 designs are built for the aftermath of the General War, the ISC invasion, and the Andromeda invasion. Because they are dealing with a totally different economical and strategic situation, they have a mission that is comparable to those of the pre-war CA's and DD's.
Quote:3) The meanest duel on the block for an X2 ship is with the Orion X1 ship.
Quote:4) Small fleets of X2 ships will fight larger fleets of non-X-ships.
Quote:5) X2 ships of the major powers will duel each other quite a bit as well.
| By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 10:56 pm: Edit |
Jeff Tonglet (and everyone else who thinks X-ships don't operate alone;
Sorry, but I've got to disagree with you. Here's a list (with commentary) of Scenarios in Module X1 in which at least one race had an X-ship travelling alone (sometimes a Cruiser, sometimes something smaller) and which is set after Y183:
SG59.0 - Y187. This is an "SG" scenario rather than a specific historical "SH" scenario, but the scenario description makes clear that the sceanrio is typical of something that historically happened several times. A small ISC echelon (CS, DD, FF) traveling ahead of the main body is engaged by a single X-cruiser. "On such patrols, the X-cruiser would be the first unit to encounter the encroaching ISC forces, and the commanders of these ships were anything but timid in using their technological edge."
SH160.0 - Y184. A small Hydran squadron (Lord Bishop, Mongol, and Tartar) is engaged by a Lyran CCX carrying 4 PFs on its mechlinks. I suppose you could say the Lyran wasn't really alone because it was carrying PFs, but it certainly wasn't part of an "X-squadron" and was the only true ship on the Lyran side.
SH161.0 - Y186. An Orion LX, a Klingon FX, and a Tholian DDX all fight it out for control of a freighter. Not X-cruisers, but all 3 races have lone X-ships.
SH162 - Y186. During the War of Return, a Usurper FZX and a Kzinti FKX duel in a nebula.
SH163. - Y187. Border skirmish between a Hydran KNX and an LDR DWX.
SH164. - Y189. A Klingon B-10S (without its escorts) and an ISC CCX (without the rest of its echelon) join forces against the Andromedans. This one's a little different in that the Klingons and ISC weren't expecting a fight. They were trying to negotiate a truce and each race sent only its flagship. The Andromedans crashed the party. But it is another example of an X-cruiser operating without any other of its own ships present.
You want an example that's not in Module X1? Okay, how about:
SH118.0 - Y186. This is from Module C2 and involves a Kzinti CCX attacking a small Usurper X-squadron.
From the Captain's Logs we could add:
SL156 - Y185. A Klingon D5DX returning from a drone bombardment mission takes on a Fed DDX + FFX. As in SH.160, the Klingon does have 2 PFs on mech links. (CL 16)
SL201 - Y199. A Hydran DGX and an ISC CSX gang up on an Andro Satellite Base with a couple of small ships. This is a little different in that the Hydrans and ISC are allied against the Andros. But they are initially attacking from opposite sides and can only disengage in opposite directions, so it seems likely that they coordinated to arrive at the base simultaneously but traveled to it separately. (CL23)
It might be objected that in many of these examples, there was some special circumstance that caused an X-ship to travel alone contrary to doctrine. But that's kind of the point, isn't it. The original X-cruisers may have been intended to replace Dreadnoughts as fleet flagships. Later on, X-ships may have been intended to operate in X-squadrons. But sometimes doctrine bumps up against recalcitrant Reality. And sometimes Reality requires ships to be used in ways that were not initially intended. I submit that there is an abundance of published material to support the notion that while X-ships operating alone was the exception rather than the rule, it was an exception that occurred reasonably often.
| By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - 02:41 pm: Edit |
I think it’s about time we start keeping track of what we agree on. I’m not looking for 100% agreement, 80% will do. If we can set some boundaries on what X2 is it should reduce our circular arguments and give us a framework for the details.
I’m going to start a numbered list and start tracking the items that we have basic agreement on. Where possible please engage in discussion in the appropriate thread.
I will track the status of each new agreement, starting with Pending and moving to Accepted. After an appropriate amount of discussion, or lack thereof, I will update the status and repost the list.
For simplicity and consistency I think it would be best if a single person managed the list. If you would like to add an item to the list feel free to make a suggestion in this topic. If it survives peer review I’ll add it.
| By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - 02:41 pm: Edit |
| # | Category | Status | Detail |
| 1 | Requirement | Pending | GW; X1 and X2 must be balanced by BPV to play against each other |
| 2 | Requirement | Pending | The X2 period should be fun |
| 3 | History | Pending | X2 Ships first appear in Y205 |
| 4 | History | Pending | The major conflicts during the X2 period are referred to as the Trade Wars |
| 5 | History | Pending | GW ships remain the bulk of the fleet and remain in production Y205-215 |
| 6 | History | Pending | X1 ships remain in production Y205-215 but make up a dwindling percentage of the fleet |
| 7 | History | Pending | X2 ships start rare and slowly increase as a percentage of the fleet |
| 8 | History | Pending | X2 ships are less expensive to operate and maintain then X1 ships |
| 9 | History | Pending | There is a neutral zone |
| 10 | History | Pending | The Tholian Home Galaxy never deployed X1 technology to the fleet |
| 11 | History | Pending | The Xorkaelian Invasion is out of scope for this discussion |
| 12 | Hull | Pending | GW and X1 ships cannot be upgraded to X2 |
| 13 | Hull | Pending | X2 ships will be general purpose designs, not optimized warships like X1 |
| 14 | Movement | Pending | X2 ships are strategically faster then GW ships |
| 15 | Movement | Pending | X2 ships can operate longer and further from base then GW and X1 ships |
| 16 | Movement | Pending | X2 ships are better suited to making the trip to the LMC |
| 17 | Movement | Pending | X2 ships cannot move more than one hex per impulse |
| 18 | Weapons | Pending | X2 ships operate the longer ranged P5 as their primary offensive phaser |
| 19 | Systems | Pending | X2 ships will have the ability to detect the Andro RTN |
| 20 | Systems | Pending | X2 ships have an advanced structural integrity field that mitigates internal damage |
| By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - 07:58 pm: Edit |
I think 1 can go straight to unanimus consesnus...it's an SVC dictate.
2 is in a similar boat. None of us would debate X2 if we didn't want to have fun whilst playing it.
R0.200 covers then next three is not four.
| By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - 08:29 pm: Edit |
Tos, that is an awesome generic list not favoring any particular proposal. I agree with the entire list.
#10 doesn't really need to be there though. That is an age old fact. If there is any doubt then let me make it extra clear. There was never any X-Tech in the M81 galaxy at the point the Seltorians began the hunt. We might not have seen everything that existed but none of it is X-Technology as defined in SFB.
| By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - 08:33 pm: Edit |
Tos,
You say "...starting with Pending and moving to Accepted" But what about moving to Rejected? You appear to be making a tacit assumption that all of these will eventually be agreed upon; sort of an X2 "Brezhnev Doctrine".
| By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - 08:49 pm: Edit |
There are two things on that list that I think should be rejected.
I would prefer that X2 not be able to detect the RTN. I think that should be a specialized "Scout" function. Ships that can do everything are munchkin, at least in my opinion. Even X2 ships need limitations in order to be interesting.
I'm also not wild about #11. While we know next to nothing about the Xorks, we also know next to nothing about what "the Trade Wars" actually encompass. Yet we speculate endlessly on them.
| By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - 09:29 pm: Edit |
11...I don't think the Xorks are out of the scope of this is the XOrk solution is simple ( or simplistic ). Since I think the X2 vessels are designed with the ability to refit later; the "I gotta get me a bigger hammer" solution that would emediately jump into the minds of the Admirals would be simply to ignore the treaty and invoke the refits.
I think we can talk Xork so long as the solution is outside of responding directly to Xork abilities. In this I think there is flavour as the Xork have this advantage and beat us so we build up a different advantage in order to fight them.
I think the real problem with Xorks is that people don't read ( or don't write ) the bit clearly enough that say Y220 or some such.
18...Some races will still use Ph-1s. 12Ph-1s has parity with 8Ph-5s or there abouts.
19...It's a product of the S-Bridge. If X2 ships don't have an S-Bridge then there is support to hunt the RTN and thus it'ld be silly to let them hunt the RTN. Also not that they could only hunt the RTN whilst alone but since X2 vessels will be alone a lot, that is not so much of a problem.
On this I would say to A.T., the ability to find more trouble is not the ability to do everything.
17...I still think speeds greater than 32 can be playable but even just speed 32 would be new and interesting.
Otherwise I agree with everything or else abstain.
| By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - 09:40 pm: Edit |
I do think that the first thing to develope is Y205 and what would be developed for what is known about that time.
Discussing the Xorks specifically is a hinderence. The people of Y205 know vurtually nothing of the Xorks and will continue to know nothing for many years to come.
Discussing contigency for a future enemy is another matter. Discussing the Xorks specifically is putting the cart before the horse and distracting from the real developement path.
NOTE: Since the Xorks have not been published yet they can and will be whatever they need to be once that which come first is developed. That which comes first has not been fully developed yet and it needs to be based on the past not the known future. A speculative future would be considered but that would likely be more about defending against another Andro attack than something they know nothing about.
| By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - 11:10 pm: Edit |
Loren,
I guess part of my disagreement is in "developing Y205". We aren't going to be doing that development, SVC is. I think we're kidding ourselves if we believe that any particular idea (whether for X2 technology or for history and background) we come up with will be in X2 as published. Some will probably make the cut, and some won't. But I don't think we have any idea which ones will survive.
| By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - 11:48 pm: Edit |
Alan, the majority of us are here to develop X2 circa Y205. While we expect SVC to throw out our efforts the odds of making a material contribution increase as we move toward consensus. If this objective does not align with your own then please share with us your objective.
As Loren has pointed out we have been through years of confusion when one person is discussing Y205 and another person is discussing Xorks. Suffice it to say that when posters are discussing different eras it makes things particularly difficult to agree on. After years of discussion I grow impatient for agreement.
I think we can all agree that X2 Trade Wars will be published before Xork Wars and that the Xork Wars will be built upon the foundation we create in the Trade Wars. If you have comments that pertain to the Xork Wars we want to hear them, but to avoid unnecessary confusion we ask that you post to the Xork thread to share your thoughts.
| By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, December 22, 2005 - 12:10 am: Edit |
Tos,
I'm sorry if I'm causing trouble. That's not my intent. But I'm just not as convinced as you are that consensus really does increase the odds of making a material contribution. Once we reach consensus on, let's say, the phaser-5, does that stop all further discussion about possible X2 phasers? But what if someone has a really cool idea for X2 phasers, somewhere down the line? Is it out of bounds for him to bring it up for discussion, because "we've reached consensus"?
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think we have a better chance of making a material contribution by keeping the discussions open and encouraging reasoned arguments about the merits of various ideas. That's why I'm in no hurry to reach consensus.
Part of my problem may be that I misunderstood your purpose in posting that list. It seemed to me to be an attempt to determine the areas that were no longer open for discussion. If I've misinterpreted, I apologize. But what is the purpose of your list?
| By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Thursday, December 22, 2005 - 12:43 am: Edit |
I'm not interested in muzzling discussion on in-scope topics. I am interested in limiting the circular chicken or egg discussions that repeat ad nauseam.
You are welcome to challenge any accepted item you like, but if you want your idea to overthrow an established and accepted idea you had better be prepared to make a convincing argument. If your idea is such an outlier that no one but you agrees with it then at some point you will be forced to ask yourself why everyone but you is crazy.
For now everything is pending. I intentionally created a largely contention free list to demonstrate that there are indeed some things that we agree on. This gives us a foundation upon which we can build upon.
You may have noticed that a couple ideas were challenged. I posted these challenges in the appropriate threads for the purpose of generating discussion, and then reaching a consensus. Everyone has their say before anything gets marked accepted.
We have been brainstorming for years and I’ve lost my patience. For me it’s time to start building. You are free to ignore me and my methods if you wish, I have no authority here, but I’ve personally had enough of the circular arguments and would like to make an effort to bring us together and identify, and bury, the outliers.
| By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Thursday, December 22, 2005 - 05:11 am: Edit |
Tos, an "established" and "accepted" idea? Established and accepted by whom? Us? Who are we? No offense, but until SVC says it's so it ain't so no matter how much hand-holding, hugging, and cumbaya singing we do with our agreements. In the end, those of us who contribute to the X-Files populate a small percentage of SFU players. Who's to say that the rest of SFU playerdom gives a crap about X2?
That said, SVC has granted us a forum to discuss the topic of X-ships and we should continue to do so. Because it's fun. Because it allows us to express our creativity, individual and mutual. It's not a waste of time to post here, but right now it probably is a waste of time to attempt to form a consensus on anything X2.
X1/XP is another story.
| By Roger Dupuy (Rogerdupuy) on Thursday, December 22, 2005 - 06:33 am: Edit |
Tos bro...I am with you in spirit. I stopped reading and contributing to this thread as it has been nigh impossible to break it down. There will always be that difficult line between 'free discussion' and 'mandate'. I am willing to contribute in my own limited way.
May I then re-re iterate that your #2 category so important. There will be no product development if no one gets that "Wow!" feeling from it. Of course, it has to be balanced with the rest of the game but if it 'balanced' but 'boring' then no one will buy it.
So, guys think 'wow' and let's get the creativity flowing.
| By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Thursday, December 22, 2005 - 10:27 am: Edit |
Brodie, I’m here to design X2 to my liking, and to do so by forming a consensus. I find the distraction of being an amateur game designer agreeable. As XP proved I have no expectation that anything we create will get published. SVC is a successful professional game designer. Like us, he wouldn’t be doing it if he didn’t enjoy doing it. It is not a surprise that he reserves the right to have the final say on the future of SFB.
For me it’s not about getting published; it’s about the process. What is the point of arguing the merits of 16-20-24-28-32-64-128-256 point photons if we don’t know how to integrate the answer into the whole? I’m tired of arguing details suspended in a vacuum that have no meaning without a point of reference. I’m tired of talking past each other because we each approach the problems from our own personal perspective and can’t fathom where the other party is coming from.
For me the choice is to start building X2 or retire from this topic.
| By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, December 22, 2005 - 10:51 am: Edit |
Agree with all, in principal at least, except 19 and 20. Detecting the RTN should remain a function of the scout. As for 20, I don't think that only an ASIF is the answer; there are other options. I have had good success with regenerating shields, for example, and I've seen other ideas put forth as well. Modify that statement to say something like "X2 ships will have advanced systems to mitigate damage", and I'd agree.
Now, about 11. Guys...drop it. The Xorks, per SVC, are not something we should even be worrying over. We don't need to, and all they do is detract from the discussion. To have ANY chance of getting something on the board to work with, we need to keep as narrow a focus as we can. That should be what he's told us we can work with; X2 ships for Y205. Nothing else is pertinent. Steve will work out the details of history. All we have to do is find something fun and balanced that people would like to play.
I'm forced to agree with Brodie, though. Concensus isn't going to happen. We've been at this for what, three years now? And we're no further along in getting even two people to agree on a single design. The reason, quite frankly, is that too many people want to put their stamp on SFB history with this module. Too many would-be X2 Czars, in other words, with no true intention of concensus, but rather an agenda to convince others to see things their way. Not everyone is guilty of this, of course, but enough are that it's causing circular arguing. Even things as basic as who has X2 tech have yet to be agreed on...never mind what phaser to use, in what numbers, or how does the X2 photon look, or what is the BPV range an X2 ship should have. These are really basic issues, and we've reached concensus on none of them.
I think the discussion is good and worth while, but I give us virtually no chance of reaching concensus. As for SVC not listening to what we say, well, that depends on where you are. I found that XP had exactly what I had lobbied for or agreed with, from the partial battery drain to "free" x-drones included with racks. So, from my perspective, SVC listened and published what I wanted. Others, no doubt, agree...others like Tos do not. Same thing is going to happen with X2. He'll do something that some of us agree with, and some of us don't.
| Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation |