Fair enough.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, December 29, 2005 - 03:15 pm: Edit

What the ISC COULD do is have a technology that ties in the PPD lock with phaser targeting. Say a -1 to phaser fire for EACH PPD that is currently locked.

Yikes! And dang that make a lot of sense.

So they don't get the Ph-5 but do get the All Weapons All System Lock (AWASL).

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Thursday, December 29, 2005 - 03:44 pm: Edit

That is a nasty little proposal. Ph-1s tied into the PPD lock system...yeah, that could very well do them just as well, if not better, than independently-targetted Ph-5s (at least, for the PPD-equipped ships; the gunline is going to pay the price).

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, December 29, 2005 - 04:09 pm: Edit

Unless we have a PPD-light (two pulse).

OR if targeting data can be lent giving the gunline a value of 1 ECCM when A PPD SHIP has a current PPD lock. (other PPD ships can use either/or)


On the other hand this would just bring the rear ships phasers into equal effectiveness as the more forward gunline ships.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, December 29, 2005 - 04:25 pm: Edit

Another possibility would be to tie the DRM bonus to consecutive phaser firing. First phaser fires; a hit means that the second phaser (must be fired on the same target on the same or the immediately following impulse) gets a -1 DRM. If the second phaser hits, all subsequent phasers fired at the same target in the same or immediately following impulse get a -2 (maximum possible benefit). A miss starts the count over. This is not an Aegis function and all phasers firing during the same impulse using this method must be designated before any dice are thrown. All phaser damage in one impulse is treated as a single volley even though there is a minute delay between each shot.

This would be another method that would allow Gunline ships to benefit from the technology.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, December 29, 2005 - 04:27 pm: Edit

Deleted by author - accidental double post.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, December 29, 2005 - 04:46 pm: Edit

Thinking about it more I'd add these things.

Phaser benefit only comes on the second, fourth, and sixth pulses (phaser targeting reads the first pulse then locks in with the second and so on). DRM is -1 for each PPD locked on the target.

Wave Lock Device: This is a PPD without the bulky plasma device. It does no damage but does give the ship the Wave Lock Phaser bonus. This might also give a bonus to bolted plasma. I can lock for two impulses. If lock isn't achieved on the first impulse then no benefit can be gained (see above two impulse lock rule). Energy is one point. Small units would carry one (it a box you can hit) and larger non-PPD units carry two.

This would have a firing arc of FA only so enhanced phaser fire would only be used in the FA arc. This fits with the ISC battle doctine well though.

ANOTHER ISC thing I thought might be cool is to allow the PPD to fire pulses within the Myopic zone but with out a wave lock (I.e you role for each pulse on the R4 column). Still no R0 firing though.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, December 29, 2005 - 09:03 pm: Edit

Anyone want Hydran Gatling improvements?
Quite honestly a 3 point cap on a Ph-G would still be a hellish weapon in the X2 period.
But we could go with 3 times the phaser-2 table, four times the Ph-6 table or even five times the Ph-3 table.

My fav' (Ph-H) is 4Ph-6 but with rapid pulsing for 6Ph-3 shots...but then I'm like that and I'ld limit fighters to a different Ph-H (3Ph-6 shots and no rapid pulsing).

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Thursday, December 29, 2005 - 11:10 pm: Edit

We may be running down the same road as Sup 2.

Improve EVERYTHING, and you end up with unplayable ships.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Friday, December 30, 2005 - 12:42 am: Edit

Good stuff, Jessica! I like the Klingon, Romulan, and ISC concepts a lot. I need to think on it a spell.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, December 30, 2005 - 07:55 am: Edit

I think we can get away with only three kinds of basic X2 Phaser.
Ph-1s doing what Ph-2s used to.
Ph-5s doing what Ph-1s used to.
And Ph-6s doing what Ph-3s used to.


I think that's just about right...although a Ph-7 would be fun. That is, an improved R16+ table so the weapon can shoot out to R100. But that's mostly so the base Phaser can be called the Ph-8.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Friday, December 30, 2005 - 08:03 am: Edit

Well, of course you do, MJC. After all, believing otherwise would risk you and I agreeing on something...and that would just make me feel dirty.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, December 31, 2005 - 01:36 am: Edit

Thanks...Now I've an image branded on my brain I'll never get rid of.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Sunday, January 01, 2006 - 08:22 pm: Edit

So anyway, I think the Ph-R should use Ph-1/Ph-5 power requirements, but put out Ph-3/Ph-6 firepower. I think it would be a good trade-off for being able to fire while cloaked.

The Orions should definitely NOT get it any time soon.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, January 01, 2006 - 09:09 pm: Edit

Fire While Cloaked should imediately negate teh double range bennefit to R+5 for one impulse after fire has taken place. This does give the Cloaked ship one movement phase to turn or whatever. Of course that both good and bad forthe cloaked ship. For one, the cloaked ship might want to maintain the same shield heading but no get closer. A side slip might fix that, might make it worse. He might HET 180° but needs the hit on the #3 instead of the #4. But this sort of complexity is a good thing.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Sunday, January 01, 2006 - 09:20 pm: Edit

Agreed. Does eliminating the double-range mean lock-on for that impulse (after die roll)?

And in order to minimize his exposure he'll be tempted to fire as many phasers at once, plus it will be at short range. That will limit his "tactical" fire.

All the same, this will discourage enemies from getting too close to a cloaked ship.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, January 01, 2006 - 09:26 pm: Edit

A crafty Romulan might just fire a few phasers to invite less than optimum fire from his opponant. Then he can decloak in realative safty and launch plasma!

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Sunday, January 01, 2006 - 11:41 pm: Edit

Let's say a Fed (for sake of argument) approaches to within 3 hexes of a cloaked Rom. The Rom fires under cloak (with double-range penalty for no lock-on), so effective range is 6 hexes (with Ph-6 fire he can scratch shields). The Fed however rolls for lock and gets it, then fires Ph-5. With a +5-hex penalty his effective range is 8, which is at the Ph-5's "sweet spot" outer range ring.

Is this balanced? If not, how to balance?

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 01:13 am: Edit

Firing Phasers whilst cloaked!?!


Come-on!
Lets look at something do-able for X2, like Phasers that have their own semi-active target aquisition sensors that allow the Phasers to fire as though they had the fire control "on", even when switched "off" ( and all phasers able to fire whilst using low powered fire control ).
The trade off would be Ph-1s instead of the all Ph-5 suite of Conventional Romulan Doctrine.
Rapid pulsing with the fire control off as well.


Even allowing Phasers to be fired the impulse before a ships complete the fade in (with or without the abuility to fire the impulse after fade-out starts ) would be a huge bonus for the Romulans.
Lets just give them fire control off and save `em a point of power ( Gawd knows they'll need it if they plan to cloak ).

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 01:38 am: Edit

MJC: Didn't you read Jessicas proposal for the Ph-R? It's a weak phaser but has a heavy Passive Sensor suite. We've been discussing it for a while. I don't think it will fly, personally, but there is little harm is discussing how it would work if it could fly. The proposal as stated is not that outlandish. She's not saying torps can or even the Ph-5 or Ph-1 can. We're trying to keep it reasonable but allow and explore for the possability.

RBN: It depends on the strength of the Ph-R. If it's about a Ph-2when fired from a cloaked ship then it's about even.

What strikes me as a highly useful thing with the Ph-R is flying cloaked through asteroids. The Romulans could rival the Tholians for asteroid field mastery.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 02:21 am: Edit

Interesting point, Loren.

I'm thinking the Ph-R would make use of passive sensors the cloak system might use to monitor ambient space-time-energy.¹ If they exist, these sensors tell the cloak how to modify its "signature" for maximum effectiveness. These sensors could tell the Ph-R what's nearby that might be targetable. Although the Ph-6 power cost might be half the Ph-5, the extra power is used to maintain a "pseudo-cloak" (resulting in a +5 hex modifier with no double-range modifer) for the following impulse.

This application would be uniquely Romulan and could only be used on ships that are designed around a cloaking device. Orion ships are "plug-n-play" so to speak so might not be able to benefit from the Ph-R.

¹ This is not intended to be "technobabble," this is how I understand its workings in the SFU.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 03:50 am: Edit

Even a new Romulan Gizmo would be better than firing phasers whilst cloaked.
• Plasma Knockdowns with the S-Bridge and X2 Scout Channels.
• Partial turn cloaking. (Carl M. can explain this ) but basically the sum of the impulse under cloak ( including the fade periods ) can not be greater than 16 but the cloak costs have as much to run. You can do the same with 24 impulses and three quaters the power cost.
• A tripple final turn power setting for the Plasma-R that creates a torp with a base 150 point warhead.


There's so many possibilities for X2 Romulans to make them wholly unique; something that sails so close to the wind, like firing phasers whilst cloaked, is going to push X2 towards the round filing cabinet.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 08:25 am: Edit

Jessica and Loren, I think the Ph-R should be further developed. Plus Jessica's other phaser ideas. I still think we're only scratching the surface on phasers.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 09:12 am: Edit

I'm glad to see that my ideas have sparked some interest in divergent evolution of phasers for X2; like I said before, my hope is that this could turn X2 into a really interesting setting, with significant differences in the tactics used by the various races.

And for the record: I cannot express how overjoyed I am at MJC's opposition to this proposal, as it only makes it that much more palatable to the board at large. Keep up the good work, MJC!

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 11:07 am: Edit

I seemed to me that even with an excelent passive control system the targeting would be poor at best when compared with the Ph-1. Since a Ph-2 is much the same as a Ph-1 but with poor targeting it stands to reason the the Ph-1's fired through cloak would fire as Ph-2.

An improved rig might happen but never as good as a Ph-5.

One thing though, this heavilly diverges from Trekdom although I suppose there might be some way to make it work out. If ST6 is in the time of X2 then the Klingons have developed such a thing and the Romulans have probably developed something better (such as the Ph-R). Nothing is much mentioned of the Romulans in this time. Further, improved cloaking (X3) perhaps negated the useability of this technology so we get be to the "No fire while cloaked" situation in TNG.

I know SFB diverges from Trek but the influences are still important. Trekdom still matters to a degree.