Sorry, you are not dense, I just included it in the chart. Not as a designated weapon. I put it there for comparison. In fact, I wanted to put Mike's improved Disr. but room was a problem.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 06:49 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

Second: So 48 points of disruptor damage is "too much like a photon" but 60 is not? Care to explain that? See, you're trying to hard to look at the individual weapon, and not the ship as a whole. Bottom line: DX can dish out 60 points. XD7 (or whatever you choose to call it) can do 48. End of story.

---

---

Quote:

Third: Similar to point the first, you should compare the heavy disruptor not against the X1 photon, but against the X2 one. It, too, has a base damage increase of 20%. Turn-for-turn, the X2 photon and X1 disruptor do equal damage, or at least have the capacity to. But, the disruptor is far more accurate and not so expensive to arm. This is supposed to encourage two turn arming, and put fast-loading in it's place as an emergency measure. In playtesting, no one cared to fast load unless we had to. We wanted the two turn 80 point salvo when we could get it.

---

By Roger Dupuy (Rogerdupuy) on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 06:58 pm: Edit

John, how? Three to four LMs out of most arcs. I just used the wing phaser arcs for B and C and backwards wing phaser arcs for E and F.

Is it power?

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 07:38 pm: Edit

Roger, yeah I have a problem with that. I've never seen the Omega stuff so it seems like sometimes I reinvent the wheel. Maybe I need to break down and buy it.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 03:05 am: Edit

Roger,

3-4 may not be good enough, a good sabre-dancer needs to be able to fire them all at once, hence the FH+L/R arcs on the D5. This ship has to centerline to get a good alpha.

Otherwise, the ship has to turn to bring all its firepower to bear and the time taken making that turn will be time the target has to turn as well.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 01:51 pm: Edit

Yeah, the ship definately departs from standard Klingon design. Not saying this is bad, necessarily, but it's something that's pretty obvious. It has fantastic 360 coverage, and with a sharp turn mode can get most any arc it wants. But it will have trouble generating penetrating damage.

By Jeff Johnson (Jeffro) on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 02:12 pm: Edit

R Brodie,

The Omega stuff is good. I've got the first two modules.

Not only is there a lot of variety in it, but things are also meant to be a little simpler than traditional SFB. (For instance, most weapons system rules are only a page or two in length.)

By Roger Dupuy (Rogerdupuy) on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 06:47 pm: Edit

Mike R. , and John T.,

The FX (Klingon X1) has two disruptors and that's what I was shooting for...3-4 LMs are like 1.5 to 2 of the FX's disruptors.

This is the disruptor comparison I have been thinking about:

D5=FX=KIC (Klingon X2 cruiser for the Trade Wars Era.)

I can also mount a Mike R disruptor in the FX boom (Make it FH) for added firepower...or RBN's "boomer" disruptor..

The AT disruptor (firing ship trades range and power of a std disr for the choice of hitting one of three shields) could help.

To make a pure 'all-disruptor boat' the two PH-1s could be replaced by LMs (same arcs). that would make it 4-5 LMs in most arcs.

OR....and this is a big OR...the LMs have some shield leaking capability that I have mentioned in an earlier post or two.

I'm just offerring some responses...

By Roger Dupuy (Rogerdupuy) on Thursday, March 17, 2005 - 01:54 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

The CIWS is my latest version of an X2-ADD (which fires more than just ADDs/DFDs).

---

By Roger Dupuy (Rogerdupuy) on Thursday, March 17, 2005 - 03:14 pm: Edit

oops, no ADD thread, how 'bout p-3 and other defensive weapons?

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 07:30 am: Edit

Roger, that's where I'll put it but it's defensive only and can't harm ships. I'm in the middle of finding a new house while working and blah blah blah so give me some time to catch up.

By Roger Dupuy (Rogerdupuy) on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 04:51 pm: Edit

take your time RBN.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 07:37 pm: Edit

Okay, my version of the X2 Disruptor:

(XE3rbn) X2 Disruptor Bolts

1. HISTORY: The Klingons divided their advanced disruptor research in two branches, more stable disruptor fire (X2 disruptors) and rapid-fire capability (X2 boom-mounted disruptor). They also developed an Advanced Ubitron Interface Module (AUIM). DERFACS was integrated into the fire control system and was no longer vulnerable to Hit-and-Run raids. The result was significant improvements in disruptor fire at a moderate cost in R&D.

2. DESCRIPTION: The X2 disruptor is represented on the SSD as "DISR" and is nearly identical to the X1 disruptor but uses a new chart. Only X2 units can use the X2 DISR. The Klingons sold the technology to the Lyrans and Orions. The DISR is hit on TORP hits.

3. OPERATION: Two units of power are allocated (or reserve power can be used) to arm and fire an X2 disruptor bolt, and can be overloaded with two additional units of power (allocated or reserve). X2 disruptors can be held for one point of power (two points to hold overloaded disruptors). X2 disruptors have only a six-impulse delay before they can be fired again. Resolve X2 disruptor fire using the Advanced Disruptor Chart.

NOTE: Not all X2 units are equipped with Range-40 disruptors. Maximum disruptor ranges are given in the unit descriptions.

4. Advanced UIM: The X2 disruptor is equipped with an Advanced UIM (XD6rbn.5.AUIM).

. . . more to come . . .

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 07:42 pm: Edit

(XD6rbn.5.AUIM) X2 Ubitron Interface Module

DESCRIPTION: The Advanced UIM ("AUIM" on the SSD) is identical to the X1 UIM except as noted here. The AUIM will not break down over the course of the first four bolts fired (whether they are fired during the same impulse or not does not matter). For each of the first four bolts fired, fill in the specially marked boxes. Afterwards the AUIM has a 16% chance (die roll of 1) of breaking down if two or less bolts are fired during a given impulse and a 33% (die roll 1-2) chance of breaking down if three or more bolts are fired during a given impulse.

. . . more to come . . .

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 07:42 pm: Edit

And finally the Boomer:

(XErbn.BDISR) Klingon X2 Boom-Mounted Disruptor

1. HISTORY: The Klingons devised a rapid-fire X2 weapon to rival the Federation's fast-load photon torpedo and other races' advanced weapons. The boom-mounted disruptor replaces at least two of the standard boom-mounted phasers but compensates with superior firepower. Advances in auxiliary power made the replacement worthwhile.

2. DESCRIPTION: The boom-mounted disruptor is a two-space weapon with a single box on the SSD ("BDISR"). As of Y205 only Klingon Size Class 3 or larger X2 units can use the BDISR. Klingon starbases are also equipped with the BDISR. The BDISR is hit on TORP hits the same as standard disruptors.

3. OPERATION: In a given turn, the BDISR can fire up four disruptor bolts during a single impulse. The bolts may not be spread over more than one impulse. The bolts are armed as standard bolts (i.e. 2pts of power from any source, allocated or reserve) and can neither be held nor overloaded. The BDISR has a range of up to 22 hexes, but starbases can fire up to 40 hexes. Use the Klingon X2 Disruptor Table to resolve fire. Use the following chart to determine the BDISR's "cool-down" delay before it can be fired again:

Klingon BDISR Cool-Down Table

Bolts	1	2	3	4
Delay	6	8	16	32

NOTE: "Delay" represents the total number of impulses required to cool-down the BDISR before it can fire again.

4. Advanced UIM: The BDISR is equipped with its own Advanced UIM (XD6rbn.5.AUIM) and one back-up. They are marked "B" on the SSD.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 08:09 pm: Edit

Brodie;

I'm confused here. How does your "Advanced Disruptor Chart" differ from the current chart? I'm just going from memory here but it looks to me like it has the same range brackets, damage, and hit probability as the standard chart (with DERFACS where appropriate). The Advanced UIM and BDSR are new, but how is the Advanced Disruptor Chart new, other than not having a line specifically for DERFACS?

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 08:19 pm: Edit

That's it. It's pretty simple. DERFACS has been integrated into the fire control system. Nothing more special than that.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Saturday, April 16, 2005 - 08:09 pm: Edit

And I screwed up. Posted above was the wrong BDISR cool-down table. Here's the correct one:

Bolts	1	2	3	4
Delay	6	8	20	32

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, April 17, 2005 - 01:47 pm: Edit

So how many of each Disr does a Y210 Klingon XCA get?

Are they both hit on torp hits?

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Sunday, April 17, 2005 - 07:32 pm: Edit

Y210? I'd wager that's the same as Y205, so an XCA would get 4 advanced in the warp engines plus the 1 boomer. They are all damaged on TORP hits.

I've also considered an alternate BDISR cool-down table:

Bolts	1	2	3	4
Delay	6	12	22	32

Please comment. I would especially love if someone could playtest this thing. I'm just not in a position to make that happen right now.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 01:52 pm: Edit

My only issue with the system is that it encourages the long-range game by giving the Klingons double their previous firepower at long range.

You may wish to consider a range-limit.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 06:26 pm: Edit

For example? I was thinking about shorter ranges but I was also nervous about close-n-hose.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - 01:30 pm: Edit

Try range-15.

If we're expecting a general increase in firepower anyway. close 'n hose is problematic because my opponent also had increased damage potential.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - 02:40 pm: Edit

Range-15 works.

I could also make it really myopic and give it a minimum range of 3 hexes. I'm not sure how to justify that other than to say "that's the only way the Klingons could build it" (and I'm definitely not fishing for technobabble). Maybe it's not even necessary, but it's something to consider.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - 04:19 pm: Edit

If you're afraid of range 0-1 damage where the disruptor does 5 points, then myopic those ranges out.

Would the 4-point damage-range (3-4) concern you also?