So, how about the basic rule as I presented it (and Jessica does it match your idea)?

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. No double-range cloak 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 Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 09:30 pm: Edit

Loren, I suspected that is how you felt, but **WE** (collective we, meaning the population of posters plus the occasional lurker) have some times come down rather heavily on suggestions that people have made from time to time.

Just wanted to remind folks that what we write can some times be interpreted in ways other than what was intended.

In any event this has taken us away from the discussion, and I do appologize for that.

Some one earlier posted that phasers fired from under cloak might be too powerful...and IIRC suggested substituting a plasma D instead. That is not too distant from one of the Simulator races IIRC (memory block, I thought there was a simulator race that could launch drones while cloaked... I'll have to look it up later.)

(It could have been something Tos posted)

Any way, I think some consideration could be made for a seeking weapon launched while cloaked, the Type D plasma is rather on the anemic side... and has the strengths and weaknesses of the plasma torp and just might be a good contender for to "role" of a 'fire while cloaked weapon' that doesnt have the drawbacks mentioned vis a vis cloaked phasers.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 09:31 pm: Edit

I havne't shot Jessica's idea down...in fact I said I could dig it, provided there were enough checks in place. I mearly point out that playtesting a given rule does not mean that rule works within the greater context of the game. For example, as I said earlier; a phaser that fires when cloaked is one thing. A phaser that fires when cloaked paired with a better cloak is too much. That's all I'm saying. I think Jessica's idea has some merit, and would like to see it explored a bit more.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 09:36 pm: Edit

Jeff, which drawback(s) do you have in mind? FWIW, I've also suggested a fire-under-cloak plasma before and that was treated like a leper as well.

In any of these cases, I recommend that only the Romulans have the technology; the Orions don't get it any time soon.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 09:49 pm: Edit

Jeff,

The race you remember is the Frax; they can fire drones from their sub type ships when cloaked.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 09:55 pm: Edit

RBN, Sorry, I don't remember that discussion, (gee, I hope I wasn't one of the "shooters"!?!?

I guess I am a little over sensitive as I have introduced my fair share of controversial ideas (some might feel too many ideas...) but I'm really hoping we could develop this "thing" a bit more before consigning it to the back log of ideas.

As far as draw backs, I think that phaser fire while cloaked needs to be comparitively weak compared to uncloaked phasers.... maybe down to the level aproaching that of a phaser 3... and perhaps even subject to the 15 hex range limit that fighters and shuttles have.

As far as plasmas fired under cloak is concerned, there needs to be some serious consideration of what constitutes "a drawback" or other penalty.

Mike, As I wrote to Loren, I'd like to see more discussion of the idea.

I really do not like the idea of X2 phasers being able to shoot thru cloak at full effectiveness... just as I think the ability to fire full strength plasmas while cloaked is dangerous to game balance.

But having Romulans (and maybe ONLY Romulans, no Orions need apply) able to fight offensively while cloaked is a viable Racial characteristic for SFB's.

Certainly it would be some thing Romulans would want to be able to do...

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 10:01 pm: Edit

Thanks Mike, I've read about the Frax, but to date have never played one.

But if that is a precident we can use to justify plasmas launched while cloaked... we have a starting comparison point.

A weak, very short range plasma that is totally dependent upon its own EW capacity to seek out its target... the Type D plasma might be a good pattern to use when designing it.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 10:05 pm: Edit

Ya know, I could see an other "Use while Cloaked" weapon that might actually work in any era (good greif!).

Why couldn't a cloaked ship launch a special heavy weapons drogue with a special self targeting module installed that once released fires it's plasma F's all at once (or one at a time) randomly like a Shatter Pack. Since the Romulan is cloaked no plasma will lock-on to it so unless there is other uncloaked allies all the plasmas will target on enemy ships. The cost is that the drogue is lost and the ships exact possition is given and a lock-on role is allowed like a mine flash.

Yikes!

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 01:26 am: Edit

Jeff, as I have it the Ph-6 is a good compromise.

It's most effective out to 3 hexes, but since the cloaked Rom will be firing under the equivalent of passive fire control his effective range is doubled (D19.11) so he'd roll under the range 6 column for true range 3, range 4 column for true range 2, etc. Under cloak the fire control is actually inactive (G13.13) but I'm using passive fire control as an approximation of using the cloak's "ambient sensors," plus passive fire control only allows fire out to a true range of 5 hexes (D19.23).

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 09:08 am: Edit

---

Quote:

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?

---

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 10:10 am: Edit

I don’t think we want to open the Pandora's box of allowing an undetected cloaked ship to snipe at and cripple a ship in high warp (which in ways that escape me is somehow different then a captor mine).

What exactly is the purpose of a phaser that fires while under cloak? From the proposals I’ve seen so far it isn’t (and shouldn’t be) an offensive weapon. If it’s not offensive it’s defensive; but what are we defending against? Unless we develop a seeking weapon that can track a cloaked ship it isn’t clear to me what the purpose of allowing a unit to fire under cloak is. A rule needs a reason for being more compelling then just being a new trick.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 10:57 am: Edit

Tos, It seems to me the only thing that can retain a targeting solution on a cloaked ship while cloaked (or, more accurately, may retain a cloaked ship as a target during fade out/cloaked status, is the type 6 drone (aka warp seekers).

From that point of view, gaining ability to kill drones that have not lost lock on without having to void the cloak would be a major improvement to the existing cloak system.

Also a consideration is mines/mine fields. The conventional wisdom for cloaked ships is to avoid mines, (the disadvantages of dealing with mines while cloaked out weigh the benefits of being cloaked.

Having a phaser that can fire while cloaked gives atleast the capacity to hunt mines while cloaked...if someway could be found around the need for active fire control. not sure how that would work out, but it would be another use for a cloaked ship to use in combat. (one possible scenario would have the cloaked ship attempting to leave a difficult combat situation and being forced to move towards a mine while evading an enemy. having the ability to kill the mine before it detonates would be better than intentionally detonating the mine.

the chances to successfully sweep the mine would be minimal considering the fire control situation and the absence of the other normal rules required to sweep mines.

Other threats that phaser fire could be used for might be fighters and shuttles that get too close...

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 11:00 am: Edit

Tos: Any issue about the Ph-R firing on high warp has been solved so not a problem.

The Ph-R would be useful in many way mid-senario (besides the set ups I suggested earlier). It makes cloaking easier in the X periods as Type-9 are a threat. It could be used to fly faster in asteroid fields. It could be used for killing small units like drogues and shuttles without having to uncloak. It could answer Carronade attacks so the Gorns will have to be a little more careful.

Consider what you might fire 8 phaser threes at if you could get close to the enemy but the enemy is R +5.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 11:41 am: Edit

I don't think you can hunt mines without first locking one in a tractor beam, which requires active fire control and should not be allowed while under cloak. Good try, but hunting mines isn't the answer.

Before we go further, let me make sure I understand the proposal. Is it the Romulan may fire any phaser at R*2+5? How is EW used, if at all? Does the Romulan roll on the chart to determine damage reduction?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 01:43 pm: Edit

Tos you're right, did you consider the things I posted?

However, remember that the Ph-R is not firing under PFC. It has a special passive fire control system but is not the same PFC that everyone else uses. That's what I gathered from Jessicas post. So you could have lock-on for firing those phasers. Each phaser having it's own targeting mechanism. However, you are right that sweeping mines require a tractor link and not even a full normal lock-on is enough.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 02:40 pm: Edit

I read what you posted before I posted but didn't have time to respond to what you said. Still don't.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 03:29 pm: Edit

I don't think any proposal that allows a phaser of any sort to be fired while under cloak with a lock-on of any sort has any chance of passing muster. Find some way to rephrase the proposal using passive fire control. Frankly I think the whole idea is DOA, but I'll help search for something remotely palatable.

Maybe you could work out some sort of veil mode, something less then a full cloak, that could allow some level of phaser fire.

So let’s review what it might be used for:
1) Shoot down incoming drones you didn’t shake by going under cloak.
2) Shoot down incoming plasma you didn’t shake by going under cloak.
3) Shoot down SC=6 shuttles, drogues and fighters.
4) Shoot at SC=5 PFs.
5) Shoot at Ships doing a sub-hunt.

Assuming firing reveals your position and allows all units a new lock-on roll I’m not sure it would be such a good idea tactically in the case of option 3-5. In the case of a drone bearing down on you I’d be more open to an ADD or PL-D style weapon then a phaser. In the case of a plasma, I’m OK with you getting hit.

Try to remember that battles against a cloaked unit tend to be long and un-fun. Anything done to encourage cloaking is a violation of the second directive.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 04:21 pm: Edit

Actually, the original gist of the idea was for a relatively weak phaser (somewhere between a Ph-2 and Ph-1, per the chart I posted a few days past) that would be able to fire without a shift the second that decloaking began, rather than waiting until the end of the Fade-In. The idea of it being able to fire while under cloak (with some manner of shift and a "flashcube" effect) was something of an afterthought.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 04:30 pm: Edit

Tos;

As I understand the proposal, it wouldn't be firing "with a lock-on". It would be more like firing with a very advanced passive system that dramatically reduced the penalties for firing without a lock-on.

As far as whether it would be a good idea tactically in cases 3-5, I think that would be highly situation dependant. I can certainly think of some instances when the capability would be worthwhile. For example, even the threat of firing while cloaked would force a sub-hunter to be a lot more careful about dropping shields to use T-bombs.

I also agree with those who think this should be a "Romulan-only" capability, beyond the reach of even X2 Orions.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 04:52 pm: Edit

Tos was replying to me and I did say there would be a ph-R lock-on. I misunderstood what the ph-R was and Jessica just straightened it out. I like this proposal of being able to fire during the fade period.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 06:19 pm: Edit

I give up. Jessica, at least you were able to get your point across.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 07:28 pm: Edit

Why so, Brodie?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 08:02 pm: Edit

RBN made his own proposal based on Jessica's and wants to talk about that. We haven't yet.

RBN: I didn't think this until this last post "I give up" but now I'm wondering if you think you should be able to tell us to stop what we're doing and focus on your proposal. Dude, sometimes a thread sticks sometimes it doesn't. People are still debating the core merrits of the concept. Why note hand tight for a bit and watch what happens and maybe bring up the proposal again.

There has been many post by me that totally get bypassed. No big deal and not need to post "I give up". So come on Bud, hang tight, we'll get to it, OK?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 08:17 pm: Edit

If this did become a serious proposal, Alan's point about using t bombs to hunt cloaked ships would be a problem that would have to be resolved.

Any cloak hunter wanting to transport t bombs into the aproximate area of the cloaked ship would have to do so from with in the limits of the transporters (5 hexes with MY and GW ships, less than that with EY and possibly more with X2 tech)... Just the threat of being able to take a Phaser R shot into a down shield will change the dynamics of the game between cloaked and uncloaked ships.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 08:49 pm: Edit

Well there is two answers to that.

1: is that Jessicas design only allows free fire during the fade in/out period so to take the shot at the down shield would be to turn off the cloak.

or

2: The way I had suggested was that you lose the double range factor when you fire and expose both your possition and range become R+5. This would imediately let the opposing play transport mines exactly in the best possition.

Either way it's is still a dangerous game for either side.