Yeah but before you go to far down this line of thought on firing while cloaked/fading.

IIRC there is a spot on the auto rejection list for firing while cloaked. So I won't hold my breath on a fire while cloaked weapon. The only weapions that can fire while cloaked are in the simulators and IMO should stay there.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 12:13 pm: Edit

Kenneth, I would suggest that the Auto-Reject list isn't intended to be a constriction on X2 but is probably a "Likely to be rejected" list in the case of X2.

SVC does want X2 to be very different so the table is a bit more accepting of concepts.

“Fire Through Cloak” needs to be approached conservatively. It must be something that is tactically useful but not become the main mode of combat for Romulans. Too powerful and it would be nothing but that.

The Petrick in my head causes me to consider the strategic implications as well. Romulans can plant cloaked vessels in shipping lanes and totally surprise freighters and escorts. A phaser three can severely damage a ship at high warp but there is time to stop the moment anything pops up. But with any fire while cloaked weapon the Romulans could weak havoc on a fleet racing to an emergency (they set up) or cripple an escort before it raises shields. In both cases where the transit rout is known the cloak vessel doesn't have to wait too long. Ships can run all the time with shields up and the "Cloaked Phaser" unit is the exact unit to exploit that weakness.

After this thought I believe that any "fire while cloaked" weapon that is useful beyond the first battle (as opposed to the ST6 device which was defeated) would be a cause for immediate war. If the Feds didn't jump right in the Gorns would and the ISC would be seriously threatened by this dastardly weapon that can only be intended for stabbing people in the back (their PoV).

Alternatively, there is the new political situation of the Romulan Republic. Perhaps some new Imperial faction develops this and it is used on only a few vessels. The threat of war looms but the official Romulan government says it isn't their doing and they are trying to uncover the perpetrating house. The House that employs the weapon technology (almost indistinguishable on ships as it is a module that ties in with the special bridge) doesn't use it to attack shipping and or in the way that is strategically threatening to the Romulan neighbors because of the internal difficulties it would cause.

Of course, you have to ask, is the Romulan Republic really doing all it can to find this rogue house or is it lackadaisical because it is really being issued by the ruling House? Or is it a combined effort. Or it is a secret weapon by some house that the ruling house is aware of and wants but can’t be open about such a desire in order to avoid war. Or is that the initial set up? One never knows with those wryly Romulan rascals!

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 12:55 pm: Edit

The simple solution to firing at high-warp ships is as follows: the passive rig used to target these phasers cannot track high-warp targets.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 12:56 pm: Edit

Jessica's multiple-different phasers proposal has merit.

The big problem is game balance.

Game balance amongst X2

Game Balance vs Standard tech.

I'm not sure allowing Roms to fire phasers under cloak plays nice with Standard GW-tech.

Moreover, standardizing the phaser model(s) used on a ship makes game balance headaches smaller.

Omega, as a sidelight to SFB, can afford more variance because there's a smaller playerbase to complain and because the game-balance situation is simpler than X2.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 02:13 pm: Edit

Hard to balance is OK if the result is a good fun thing. I think it should be as hard as is worth it the quality of play.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 07:13 pm: Edit

L.K.:

Just to be clear, SVC once mentioned that a single point of damage upon a ship moving at strategic speeds was worth about 900 points of damage so "serverly damage" should really read "utterly vapourise"


I think practically anything is better than Phasers that can fire whilst cloaked ( and if we mention ST6, IIRC it was plasma and not phasers ). Even phasers that can still be fired upto 8 impulses after they've been destroyed ( to match Plasma but it could be 4 or 6 impulses to be different ) would be less likely to cause game headaches.

Seriously, people have declaired it balanced ( or balancible ) and still haven't mentioned whether the Romulan ( or even the opponant ) gains or loses G13.37 Fire Adjustment.
And having the GW ship fire through a +5 range bonus might work for most GW races and their Ph-1s but some GW races (the Kizintis, Hydrans & rear Klingon Phasers ) are Ph-2s & Ph-3s. And we are not required to build something that can play nice with X1, we are required to build something that can play nice with GW.

By Herb Diehr (Direwolf) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 07:57 pm: Edit

Firing through cloak is not a good way to play nice with GW ships. It was fun in the movies, but doesn't work well in this context.

Multiple types of phasers is not an all bad idea, if you consider the range of time from 205-250.There's time enough to go from a P-V and VI to a VII, as Michael suggests, and even upgrading the tired old P-IV to a shiny new P-VIII!

For ships, the concept seems clear enough for the 205-215 era. What about the later years? Also, ground weapons and static defenses? They won't stand still. There is room for new mine technology. Also, DefSats. Unpopular with many, but in a campaign setting, needed.

Will Hydrans and Kzinti's keep their fighters? Lyrans their PF's? What will they be like?

Any ideas?


Herb Diehr

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

I hope we don't mention ST6, because this was not (as far as I'm concerned) intended to be a duplication of the film concept.

• It was Klingons in the film; this is Romulans
• The film was firing heavy weapons¹; this is only a specific type of phaser
• The film cloak couldn't even be tracked until they did the fancy wake-homing torpedo thing; you can pretty much follow a game cloaked ship but can't hit it very well
• The film version was intended to be an ambush weapon

Consider that the weapon is effectively limited to about 3-4 hexes. Consider that a ship moving at a tactical speed of 31 is moving at just under 1 hex per impulse. Speed 31 roughly equates to Warp 3.14 (assuming the classic speed = cube of the warp factor). If strategic speeds are Warp 4 or higher, then the minimum tactical-equivalent speed is 64, or 2 hexes per impulse. If you're looking at the more common Warp 6 then it's speed 216, or nearly 7 hexes per impulse. Moving on up to Warp 8 and we're talking about 16 hexes per impulse. (Etc.) The passive sensors may be capable of detecting ambient space-time-energy for cloak effectiveness, but I doubt they'd be capable of detecting a space-time-energy "signature" that equates to a high-warp starship and passing that data on to a targeting computer to await a fire command before the potential target can get out of the 3-4 hex range of the Ph-R.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 10:11 pm: Edit

I think I could live with a cloaked Rom launching D-torps. I don't think I can live with phasers.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 11:00 pm: Edit

I think it's worth playtesting.

Basic rule: Ph-R fires normally like Ph-5 when Rom uncloaked. Under cloak, Ph-R fires like Ph-6 with double power cost but is itself still under the equivalent of passive fire control restrictions; Rom loses double-range penalty for one full impulse following phaser fire. Opponent can roll for lock-on during that impulse period but retains +5 hex range penalty; lock-on lost after impulse period.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 12:40 am: Edit

Herb, there is no Y250 in the SFU. The final year is Y225. There is no source files for beyond that year.

MJC: I have discussed at length with SVC about weapons fired at high warp vessels. IT's not like that but it is very bad and no ship ever gets close enough to anything that could be a threat at high warp. Not even a small asteroid in deep space. I just isn't done. But a ship that can fire a phaser while cloaked would not be seen and if well planned a high warp speed ship could stumble on it. However, Jessica has given a pretty good fix for that; the Fire wile cloaked system is incapable of tracking ships at high warp.

RBN: Of course the bain of the Fire While Cloaked ship will be the dreaded Dogfight drone (a wave of 12 type 9!). But fire while cloaked might be a nice answer to the Carronade.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 01:08 am: Edit

I'd really hate to run into an unknown minefield at high warp.

By Herb Diehr (Direwolf) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 02:43 am: Edit

O.

Really, the Xorks die so quickly? Not too big of a threat, it seems.

There will probably be more information put out about slightly later years, if not to 250.

However, you don't answer any of the points; are they all that pointless?

Herb

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 03:47 am: Edit

Herb, the thing is that we cannot really determin what ships will be like or what races will do when Y205 has no definition. The very core of X2 and even what the Trade Wars are haven't been designed. The only useful thing we can do is focus of what can work for Y205. Any developement beyond that is building speculation based on speculation increasing in depth of speculation every year we advance.

Regarding the Xorks we only know that there will be an invasion. The Alpha races know nothing of it until they come but we know only that they are named Xorkaeliens and the few hints given to use by SVC. One hint is they invade something around Y215 (maybe sooner, the history isn't written) so that make the war able to last ten years. The Andro invasion lasts only 12 years so that should be enough. The Alpha races are really tired of war but are sick and friggin tired of being invaded. It should take them about one F&E turn (six months) to unit and start kicking back altogether.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 10:25 am: Edit

With regards to Jessica's suggestion for allowing phaser fire when cloaked... This is not the time or the place to rule it illegal based on one or another persons "opinions".

(Unless that person happens to be either one of the steves... and MJC does not qualify.)

I suggest that Jessica's idea deserves a little more consideration, then play test it. The question of whether it will "play nice" with GW tech is only going to be resolved on the game table.

Which brings me to a question, it seems that the assumption that phasers fired "out of cloak" do not have the same challenge that ships phasers have firing into cloaked ships. (ie the range vs effective range adjustment thing).

If all ranges using "Cloaked ships phasers" had to fire using the same range adjustment that ships targeting a cloaked vessel have to use...then you might not have to redesign a new phaser type. maybe just declare it to be equal to a phaser 1 or a Phaser 2 with the appropriate range adjustment (say add 5 hexes to the range or double the actual range or something like that.)

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 10:58 am: Edit

It's short on hard analysis and very likely to be ruled out but...
Playtest be the judge.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 11:07 am: Edit

Jeff, right.

I just want to be clear that I never intended to know down the idea. Just playing devils advocate to hash out potential issues (like the one I posed and Jessica solved mostly).

Still, the Romulans would pose a serious tratigic threat. Consider a claoker squadron lying in wait for a convoy. Now, you can't hope to catch them in open space but how about near a base station of colony. They would actually scan the convoy and move slowly to intercept and lay in wait using hidden deployment. You would set up at about 120 hexes from the base. That way it take longer for reinforcements from the base to respond. You are too close for them to go into high warp yet far enough way that the you have a good three turns before they can arrive on the scenario map. The Cloaked Romulans lay in wait and fire on the escort when they are in phaser range likely catching the escort with no shields of minimum shields.

The question is: Is the effort of the set up worth the destruction of a cargo convoy? Could you do it with a light squadron, say a XCL and a XDD or a couple XDD?

I think it could particularly during the Trade Wars.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 11:30 am: Edit

Consider Orions getting ahold of the phasers in question...

And for the record, "difficult to playtest" tranlates to more hours spent and greater likelihood of RPS cases making it into the published rules.

Especially as RE Standard technology.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 12:21 pm: Edit

I could live with a phaser that fires through cloaks, provided there are restrictions to balance it; like number of mounts, lower damage, shorter range, etc. However, I don't like the idea of the improved X2 cloak and a phaser that shoots through it. That seems like a lot, to me.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 01:48 pm: Edit

The solution to the problem of Orions having Fire Through Cloak (FTC...ok?) is to say that the systems is a ship wide instalation not a phaser local system. It is tied into the phaser, the main computer core and the Special Bridge (assuming Special Bridge is part of the equasion).

Orions, in general would have S-Bridge so that removes them one step further.

Actually, I don't see Orions having full X2 ships either. Perhaps they do get a new multiplexing pan generational option mount but the ship itself would be X1 at best. Perhaps a better X1, OK, but not full X2. Not for a while anyway.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 02:55 pm: Edit

Jeff, playtest. A good plan with one problem. In three years of talking about X2 less then a handful of playtest games. Without some basic agreements on what X2 is and isn't, Playtesting any particular implementation will be hard to arrange.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 03:34 pm: Edit

Not just that, but just because something works in playtest doesn't mean it will "fit" with other player's designs. The ships and stuff I playtested worked fine, but not everyone likes them or wants ships like that. MJC said his playtested XCA worked, but not everyone likes it, either. Playtesting goes hand in hand with total design, and selling others based on it doesn't always work out very easily.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 04:43 pm: Edit

Well, I think everyone should like my designs but that's just me.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 05:44 pm: Edit

Tos, Mike and Loren:

I'm only suggesting that Jessica and others be allowed to explore thier ideas.

I personnally would be very cautious about adding cloaked phaser fire, but I'm willing to let Jessica and others present their ideas.

Tos make a good point, but IIUC this "is a back burner" item at best. When the time comes, I suspect SVC will either review the thread looking for nuggets of value and use them appropriately or get some other poor *** to do it. (there is also an outside shot, that SVC will assign a staff member to the task (lucky person!) who will prepare a Precis for SVC review.

Either way, the effect is a long term brain trust/think tank intended to submit ideas for ADB review.

Just suggesting that shooting the idea down quickly in Jessica's case (and maybe a few others) is hasty. She has a history and a credibilty whereas others do not.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 08:27 pm: Edit

Jeff, I'm surprised. I would think that you would know Tos, Mike, and myself better than that.

Any new rule or weapon, especially one as potentially complex and controversial as a Ph-R, needs to be look upon from all angles. It bennefits as well as its potential failings. It is also a large waste of time to playtest something before the rules is as well written as it can be. I think you misinterprest my endevors here and I thought I had stated already my thoughts here. I'm not poo pooing Jessica's or anyone elses ideas here, nor have I ever. I will express misgivings and potential problems with a concept as I see them.

I have NOT been shooting Jessica's idea down. Mearly pointing out what might be flack on the master mold that needs filing.

Or should ideas just be allowed to be presented on these forums without debate. If so then we should all back the heck off of MJC here on out. No fresh new idea is bullet proof and for one to become a rule is must be. Debate, playtest and debate, refine, refine, refine. All my post have actually been suportive even if I am of the opinion that the Ph-5 is enough I also see that veriety is just as valid.

You will find no post where I say "I don't like it. I will break the game. That's stupid. If this becomes a rule I will quite playing SFB."

I know I've carried you reply to the extreme here but I want to make it perfectly clear that I have not nore will I ever attempt to not allow someone to explore their ideas. Exploring the idea is EXACTLY what I've been doing.