Because the L is a light-use torp, I think the ISC will get better mileage out of the carroande than the gorns.

I've seen a lot of posts where people assume that Ls replace Fs in most cases when a look at the SSDs tells you it's as or more more common to see S's replace F's. Especially on cruiser and light cruiser hulls.

Can the S-torp carronade, even if it's only the Gorn S-torp?

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Sunday, December 17, 2006 - 04:39 pm: Edit

NO.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Sunday, December 17, 2006 - 08:06 pm: Edit

SVC,

Will you in the near future provide an outline of what X1R might cover?

By Loren S Knight (Lsknight) on Sunday, December 17, 2006 - 09:11 pm: Edit

JRC,

That's what he's been asking us.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 12:09 am: Edit

I've resent the files on X1R to SVC, unchanged from 3/28/04. Its the same stuff I posted here a few days ago plus all the unused XP stuff that we were considering pre-Captain's Log dial-a-refit rule. As the conversation over the last few days around the PL-L has shown, many things have changed or been clarified in the interim.

If you missed it, it was all reposted here in this topic 12/15/06. Eventually (soon) there should be a version 0.4 of the X1R summary, so get your input in.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 12:09 am: Edit

Loren,

I understand that. So here are some suggestions in rough idea (outline form). Maybe these ideas as stated might not work but

Scenarios:
GW- historical: Kosnett’s flying X-squadron tangles with a Klingon X-squadron.

Pre-Op Unity: A mini campaign where the galactic’s find the way through the energy barrier, while RTN hunting, and find the three routes to the Magellanic Cloud.

SG Secnario: Orion X-raiders tangle with an X-freighter and FFX.

SF scenario (Y199): X-survey ship exploring outside the galactic energy barrier goes to the rescue of a Iridani quester being attacked by Xorkelian raiders (Y199).

Ships:

X-freighters; X Ops base and X-OALs.
Feds: A GVX with a two space version of the B3 bomber (CL# 30); CLX; ACX with newer versions of the F-18 and A-20; X-Tug; CX with a dorsal turret like on the BCG (drones or plasma?).

There are a number of ships in various captain logs that need to be published. The DGX and D5XD in CL# 16 for; GVX in CL# 26; X Sector base in CL# 30 are examples.

The XP draft refit rules in CL# 31 could be finalized and included.

New Weapons:
Add the quantum photon torpedo in two forms: XP quantum instead of X-torp (18 point max; YIS Y195); X-quantum as an X-ship refit (20 point max; YIS 192). Add X-quantum PH-1 phasers for all races; leaks through shields like a spearfish drone; limited to FA arc and center line phasers; optional firing mode (YIS 195). An X version of the type-IIIxx; external explosive modules.; a X-type-IIIxx configured to follow the RTN trail and drop up two data buoys for the supporting scout to locate and recover.

X-Monsters:
The cyborg moray eel with X-swarm-bots, that go speed 20 and fire saboted plasma bolts (L-torps) or F-torp seekers; has defensive warp seeking plasma (uses K-torp rules).

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 12:26 am: Edit

I just reread the old XP proposal and found it interesting reading. This proposal pre-dated the Captain's Log dial-a-refit approach.

Basically each race would define how they would choose to implement an XP upgrade and each ship would have one and only one XP upgrade path (and BPV). I repeat this here because the original proposal wasn't particularly clear on this point. The theory is XP could add some racial flavor by having each race pick and choose which X-tech was worth the cost of adding.

Here is the original text that didn't make it into the earlier post:

Secondary Module Focus: Partial X-refits (XP)
Rules: Applying partial-X technology to General War hulls without making SSD changes.
Y195 Target: 50% non-X ships, 30% XP upgraded ships, 20% X1 ships. Varies by race.
Pro: A large numbers of ships can receive upgrades without making changes to existing SSDs. Allows ships that did not have an upgrade path to full X-tech to compete. Warp engines and phasers are not upgraded.
Con: Requires extensive but abbreviated MSC: Ship, BPV, YIS, Notes, Optional: Explosion Strength; all else would be the same as the base class.

XP Weapons:
Upgraded: Allows GW ships to use VII-drones in limited or restricted quantities plus the ability to control X-drones. PL-F are upgraded to PL-L. Remove cool down turn from Fusion armed ships. Gives Lyrans either X-ESGs or no burnout UIM. Gives Tholians X-Snares. Special Sensors act as X-Special Sensors. Possibly UIM available to Kzinti and Tholians.
Pro: Many players don’t like the tactics of fastloads. Not a good return on economic investment due to not enough available power to arm fastloads. SSD tables don’t have the longer range of X-Photons and X-Disruptors.
Con: VII Drones will need to have limited and restricted availability years. Need to understand how converting a PL-F to a PL-L affects the Plasma Carronade, a function we would like to retain against the Andros. No UIM table on Kzinti and Tholian SSDs.

XP Batteries: Improve batteries.
Option 1: 3-point X-Bats with a restriction that no more than 1-power can be extracted or charged.
Option 2: 3-point X-Bats with a restriction that they cannot be recharged with more than one point of power per turn and can release no more then one point of power per impulse.
Option 3: 2-point XP-Bats with no restrictions.
Option 4: 3-point unrestricted batteries, exactly as in X1.
Cons: 3-point unrestricted batteries may be unbalancing for ships with unusually large batteries.

XP EW: Allow XP ships to generate up to 8 EW but they do not get the (XD6.34) –1 modifier to hit.
Pro: Allows balance options against X1 ships, provides advantage against Andros. Not enough power to abuse this advantage.
Con: Might be too good against Andros.

XP Shuttles and PFs: Compatibility with X-MRS. Allows Hydrans the ability to support St-X fighters, may need to limit availability. Might need a St-TX. Possibly upgrade PFs to remove the warp booster pack extra damage rule. Many have requested a Lyran PFX or PFXP.

XP Upgrades: XP ships would be required to have all previous refits installed before upgrading to XP. XP ships could be further upgrade to X1 if available, this could be done due to budgetary restrictions or yard space. Exact nomenclature still needs to be worked out.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 12:28 am: Edit

Hey, anyone know of any X ships published in Captain's Log since 2004? We should add those to the list or they won't get a counter.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 12:48 am: Edit

Tos,

CL# 32: Vudar CCX and SCX; CL# 30 X-Sector Base.

What ships can be converted to X-ships could be defined better. The Fed FFB is non-war construction so it could be an FBX. There are a number of battle frigates in CL# 31; how many of these can be X-ships.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 01:37 am: Edit

I'd hate to see any real new weapons in X1R. Such things should be saved for X2.

I'd like to see XCL's based on more CW designs but are new builds without the quality for quantity cuts. Still the reason for creating Light Curiser X-shps is to increase the number of X-ships per budget. While these ships are quality long service life ships they meet the same sort of need. Of course, the Klingons understood this fromt the beginning with there excelent D5X.

X-Tech doesn't need to be given to every possible ship class but X1 could use a bit more veriety is all.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 09:44 am: Edit

Tos, Loren, and anyone else interested,

X1R Concept: Advance the history and timeline from the late GW period (Y183) past Operation Unity (Y205). The major focus is Y195 to Y205: the Galactic Races destruction of the RTN and drive to the Magellanic Cloud; link up with the Magellanic Cloud races; development of trade to and from Magellanic Cloud (beginning of the trade wars); first meetings of Xork forces in the Magellanic Cloud; Andromedans? another small wave with new ships.

X1R Module finalizes the XP refit rules; expands the types of X-ships used by various races.

Scenarios: One T scenario(mini campaign); 4-5 SF (historical); 2-3 SG (general).

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 10:06 am: Edit

To focus exclusively on the Andro War would leave the ISC War underdeveloped. 92% of all published X-Ships were deployed before the ISC War started. Yes there will eventually be X-Ships designed with the Andros in mind, but what was designed during the ISC War? How did these designs differ than those that came before or after?

I'm thinking X1R would end with Operation Unity and start with the ISC War (Y186-202). X2 would pick up post Unity and document the history of the Trade Wars (Y202 - pre-Xork). The Xork War would be X3.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 10:10 am: Edit

I seem to recall (though I might be mistaken) SVC saying there wouldn't be an X3.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 10:23 am: Edit

JRC: I have no idea what X1R might cover and was kind of hoping somebody would tell ME what it would cover. I would assume the period from Y180 on to Y202? Equal coverage of general war, ISC war, Andro War.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 10:50 am: Edit

Yeah, since there is several mentions in the rules that X3 is not in the scope of the game and X1 and X2 denote technology generations then X3 shouldn't be a continuation of X2.

Xorkaelien Invasion might could be X2R (X2 having well introduced the Xorkaeliens) or XI might be a C module. Anyway, this is all beyond the scope of this thread.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 10:54 am: Edit

Wasn't ISC the next F&E product? If so then it seems a natural to do X1R with that.

The most difficult thing about doing X1R would seem to me to be working out the ISC solution. I think the ISC history is going to rely heavilly of how the F&E product works out.

Each product will have consequences in the other.


JRC: I think X1R should end with Y202 so that developement is open for X2. I whole heartedly support the idea (since the early days of the X-Files) that trade with the LMC is the basis for the Trade Wars it really too is the realm of X2... IMO.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 11:30 am: Edit

X1R, X2, X3 are semantics, and we have to be careful how we use them.

"There is no X3." What this statement means is there is no third generation X ship. That's accepted, but it doesn't mean that there can't be a module named X3, X4, X5 and X6 the same way there is R3, R4, R5 and R6.

X1 is published. If there are two more X1 era modules, should the three modules be named X1, X2 and X3? Should they instead be named X1, X1R, X1R1? If X2 is the name of the second generation X-tech module, should the Xorkelians be in X2R and X2R2? Given the choice I prefer a simple numerical progression based on original release date.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 11:31 am: Edit

Loren, tying in X1R with F&E ISC War makes sense. Certainly we need an F&E player to let us know if any new X ships are planned to be added in F&E.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 11:48 am: Edit

Tos, I don't think is so much F&E telling us about X-ship but rather how the war progresses. There is a very difficult problem that is being worked on with how the ISC are to operate in F&E. Without a fairly clear understanding of how ISC in F&E will work and progress it might be hard to write the X1R history invlolving the ISC. On the other hand the effect of adding many new X-ships to F&E is something that has to be considered and understood. You could add tons of X-ships to SFB and it wont really unbalance anything but the affect on F&E is unknown (to me anyway).

Developing these two product with an eye on the other just means less errata and that's a good thing. Of course, SVC knows best and perhaps its all clear in his mind... er... on the Air Force tapes.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 12:51 pm: Edit

I agree with you on the history, but on occassion F&E does add a ship to SFB. If it does in this instance I'd like to make note of it in our ship list.

ADB will determine much of the history and rules that make it into the module when they get around to building it. The immediate thing for us to do is capture all the counters they will need to print.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 01:20 pm: Edit

Agreed.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 01:30 pm: Edit

Guys,

I am at work, while check in this evening.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 11:56 pm: Edit

Looking at equal coverage for the GW, ISC war, and Andro war attrition units still play a large role. Drones are covered in X1 but carriers and PFTs are not.

GW: I think those races which use PFs would build PFTXs. The Feds have the GVX.

ISC War: The ISC used the CVS and CVLS as replacements for the respective base hulls in formations. Would the ISC build X versions? Would an X-carrier squadron be a good group to attack either an X gunline or non-X gunline?

Andro War: RTN hunting is one of the prime uses of X-ships. PFTXs, X-scout carriers, X-DCS and X-ACS type ships would be useful. X-battle scouts are on the auto reject list, right.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 - 07:40 am: Edit

The Xorks might be held until X2R too. Although I'ld like to see `em in X2 proper.

I think X1R should cover up to Y204...but that's just me.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 - 10:25 am: Edit

One thing that X1R will need , given more X-Ships, is some sort of limiting data on when ships are available and in what numbers.

Some sort of additional S8 rule might be needed.