Archive through December 30, 2006
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board:
The "X" Files:
First Generation X-ships:
X1R The X-ship R Module:
Archive through December 30, 2006
Playtest designs are what Captain's Log is for.
Tos:
Agreed, a CL would be the place to put playtest SSDs for experimental stuff for X2 and doing so would make the playtest burden of X2; lighter.
Would anyone like to see an X1 analog of the type II-XX drone???
I think a two space type VIII-XX would be Xed up enough to provide a real challenge and would have a fairly long range able to do the long range bombardment job.
Has anyone at ADB actually bought off on the S-bridge? It has been talked about a lot here, but to my knowledge, SVC has not thrown any support the direction of the idea, particularly on X1 ships. I seems a little presumptive to be talking about it for X1R.
I'd be against a bunch of new rules in X1R. I'd like to see the X1 rules update included, some scenarios, and a bunch of ships. I don't really need anything else. New rules means development and playtesting time - and that means a delayed product.
Duplicate Post
Jeremy,
As far as I know, SVC hasn't bought off on the S-bridge or any other of the "X2" ideas. My impression is that X2 is a comparatively low priority right now and he hasn't looked at those discussions much, if at all.
These were the rules that were sent to ADB for consideration:
Rules: Crew Quality for X1 and XP ships.
Rules: Mega-X-Pack for fighters.
Allows drone-carrying fighters the ability to launch and guide 2 type-VII X-drones replacing the 2 type-IF drones normally gained with a mega-pack. [Never more than 2 X-drones]
Rules: Drone Bombardment cruise drone for X-ships. Exchange half warhead space for fuel and III-XX targeting computers. Can be used to track moving targets from long range, not just fixed targets.
Rules: Plasma Carronade for the PL-L. Possibly spread the technology to other races.
[L-Carronade has been approved but only for the original races. It may need a new chart]
Rules: XP
I posted the following 10-7-2006 in the XP topic. I am reposting here so it won't get lost.
"Would you consider allowing PFs and fighters to use Type-IX drones carried in racks, on rails or in MW drones and stingray drones? Type-VI and Type-IX drones as warp seeker are self-guiding. The Type-IX drone is using its own guidance system so no X refit is needed for a fighter or PF."
As I understand the guidance system needed for X-drones is to large to fit on a fighter; can only fit in/on an X-MRS. Allowing use of type-IX drones doesn't require an X-refit.
As a balancing option for plasma races allow 2 PL-K to replace a PL-D in racks or on rails.
I would also like to see, post-GW, F-111s (and FB-111s) refitted to fire photon torpedoes out of the 3-space bay. The F-111 was produced in larger numbers than the A-20; a greater number of ships carry the F-111; in F&E those carries with only F-111s can operate as an un-escorted carrier.
I cannot remember having ever heard of an S-bridge.
Nothing for X2 has been read, studied, or considered.
IX drones do require guidance outside of a certain range. Probably 8.
Plasma fighters already have more torps then they can use so upgrading them from a Mega 2PL-K to 2PL-D is pretty minor. I'd rather see a PL-L Mega Pack.
That is my understanding. If the type-IX is used on a MW drone or Stingray drone,(if allowed) then the drone carrying the type-IX can either be guided or self guide until reaching range 8 (or less) at which point the IX can try for lock-on.
PL-F is X-tech, but PL-F mega pack would be cool. This would be a change to (J16.243); fighters with PL-Fs get 2 PL-Ds with their mega packs.
I would also like to see mega packs for A-Admin and three kit bombers (B-24; B-26; and B-36) that were published In CL#31. These bombers can retain 2/3rds of their cargo capacity. A type of EWF package was developed to fit in this cargo space. Limit is one per squadron of six bombers. Shuttles so equipped would be usable only by ground bases. The mega pack would add 1xPH-3-360 in addition to 2 extra damage and double speed. This is also post-GW and a way for colonies to better defend them selves.
Should an X version of the type-IIIxx be developed perhaps this could be a Kzinti weapon only. The Kzinti economy post GW is weak.
The Gorns could receive an X-GAS; why should the Gorns get any better treatment in X1R. Actually all races would be able use these. An X-GAS would cost 7; go speed 10 (same as an X-MRS); use ground attack pods.
I’ve compiled a list of questions from our recent discussion and will repost periodically. Let me know if I’ve left your favorite idea off the list. If I have there may be a reason. For example BCX and DNX are already on the SSD list so check the original list before deciding it’s missing.
Open Design (rhetorical) Questions:
1) Can XP, in full or in part, be added to a PF? Specifically for the purpose of launching X-Drones?
2) Can XP, in full or in part, be added to a fighter mega-pack? Allows for 2 X-drones and/or PL-L torp plasma Mega-Pack.
3) Could launch rate for plasma fighters be increased after a certain date?
4) Can IX drones be made available to non-X ships as a direct replacement for the VI drone? PFs? Fighters? As sub-munitions on a non-X MW drone?
5) Can the F-111 get a photon option for its internal bay?
6) Could a PF XP attribute be the elimination of the damage penalty on WBP?
7) Could an improved WBP be created that eliminates the double damage a fighter takes?
8) What is the maximum number of SSDs that can reasonably be released in X1R?
9) Can a VII-XX and/or VIII-XX drone be created for the DBX mission?
10) Will a S-Bridge be considered or could some of its features (like RTN tracking without special sensors) be retrofit into existing X-tech?
11) What S8 changes will be necessary? Would you considered a new S8 rule that defines X deployment differently in different time periods?
12) Will there be any X-Drogues or modifications to existing Drogue rules to better support X-Ships?
13) Will there be rules for X-Maulers?
SSD Updates: (Modifies list posted 12/15/06 6:18PM)
1) Add Vudar CCX: CL#32
2) Add Vudar SCX: CL#32
3) Add X-Sector Base: CL#30
4) Remove Romulan BCX, covered by NHX.
5) Remove Neo-Tholian NDX. Probably impossible to build except in the home galaxy.
6) Remove Neo-Tholian NFX. Probably impossible to build except in the home galaxy.
7) Add Neo-Tholian NCHX as the Tholian BCX.
8) Add Neo-Tholian NCMX.
9) Add Tholian CX.
10) Add Tholian CWPX. Either or with the CPFTX.
X2 is not too late for S-Bridge. The statement that it is seems nonsequitor to me. X1 doesn't need S-Bridge to work. It is an X2 proposal and I'd prefer it remain such. Thank you.
Answer to Tos's questions. (Read carefully, the fact that I don't understand most of the questions may be quite revealing.) Also note that as this is an SFB topic, Steve Petrick's decision overrule mine, unless I decide they don't.
=============
1) Can XP, in full or in part, be added to a PF? Specifically for the purpose of launching X-Drones?
- - - - - -
SVC: Some kind of thing to allow them to launch X-drones is theoretically possible, assuming it is theoretically possible to allow non-X ships to launch X-drones. However, I am very dubious that this would have been done during the General War, as X-technology is too rare to be put into attrition units.
=============
2) Can XP, in full or in part, be added to a fighter mega-pack? Allows for 2 X-drones and/or PL-L torp plasma Mega-Pack.
- - - - - -
SVC: Same answer as #1.
=============
3) Could launch rate for plasma fighters be increased after a certain date?
- - - - - -
SVC: That's up to Petrick.
=============
4) Can IX drones be made available to non-X ships as a direct replacement for the VI drone? PFs? Fighters? As sub-munitions on a non-X MW drone?
- - - - - -
SVC: Theoretically, although probably AFTER the general war. Up to Petrick.
=============
5) Can the F-111 get a photon option for its internal bay?
- - - - - -
SVC: I haven't thought about this one and would have to discuss it with Petrick. I can't remember, but maybe this existed in an earlier incarnation of the rules?
=============
6) Could a PF XP attribute be the elimination of the damage penalty on WBP?
- - - - - -
SVC: My own vision of X-tech is that it makes attrition units obsolescent, and that X2 eliminates them entirely. Petrick's mileage may vary.
=============
7) Could an improved WBP be created that eliminates the double damage a fighter takes?
- - - - - -
SVC: I haven't thought about it and would have to discuss it with Petrick, but my first gut reaction is "hell no".
=============
8) What is the maximum number of SSDs that can reasonably be released in X1R?
- - - - - -
SVC: It depends on a lot of factors. I would think 96 would be about the max but in point of fact there is no theoretical limit, could just as easily be as big as the AdvMis SSD book which is 144. I might comment that I think spending a lot of pages on partial X-refits would be a bad idea and I'm not convinced there are 96 first generation X-ships needed.
=============
9) Can a VII-XX and/or VIII-XX drone be created for the DBX mission?
- - - - - -
SVC: This one seems more plausible than some of the others.
=============
10) Will a S-Bridge be considered or could some of its features (like RTN tracking without special sensors) be retrofit into existing X-tech?
- - - - - -
SVC: I don't know that RTN tracking is possible without special sensors, or that I want it to be. I answered somebody else earlier this morning that I could not remember having ever heard of an X-bridge.
=============
11) What S8 changes will be necessary? Would you considered a new S8 rule that defines X deployment differently in different time periods?
- - - - - -
SVC: Can't say I have ever thought about it and most of these decisions would be made by Petrick. I do think it would be possible to have one version for general war and one for andro war. However, I should point out that X-tech availability is defined by F&E rules and my general theory is that production of X-ships after Y185 is not going to be any higher than it was in Y185. There would be fewer non-X ships built (no massive war going on) and fleets would gradually become more X-ish due to continued production at the Y185 rate rather than increased X-production.
=============
12) Will there be any X-Drogues or modifications to existing Drogue rules to better support X-Ships?
- - - - - -
SVC: I haven't thought about it and would have to ask Petrick. I tend to consider drogues to be a desperate general war attempt to get more out of existing ships, and have my doubts that X-ships would even bother. But, I'll chat with Petrick.
=============
13) Will there be rules for X-Maulers?
- - - - - -
SVC: We are thinking about it, and did one in CL34 just to get people talking. The "unknown" status of this ship simply means we haven't decided.
=============
Somebody email me what an X-bridge is.
I cannot find a clear definition using keyword search.
Frankly, I'm stunned there is so much discussion and testing of a rule nobody has ever mentioned to me. Very bold (see: risky) move to spend that much effort on something that may not pass summary judgement.
S-Bridge is an attempt to give very limited special sensor functionality to ships without special sensors. It was designed as an X2 device, which is why it hasn't come up before. One of its features was a way to track the Andro RTN network (after the network was largely dismantled resulting in limited impact on the history).
SVC: I will e-mail you.
Guys, please allow me to explain.
There is broad agreement that attrition units will still be needed to hunt the RTN network. At least until Op:Unity.
Remember that the scope of the project we are discussing is ISC War and Andro War, not General War. Our ideas should be taken in that context. If you want to extend the YIS of some X ships into the GW, that is your perogative. We are specifically not asking for any rule changes to the GW timeline.
Quote:1) Can XP, in full or in part, be added to a PF? Specifically for the purpose of launching X-Drones?
2) Can XP, in full or in part, be added to a fighter mega-pack? Allows for 2 X-drones and/or PL-L torp plasma Mega-Pack.
On the drone side, 1 and 2 boil down to ease of accounting. The player, if he spends the points, has only to account for a single stockpile of X-drones as opposed to his pile of shipboard X-drones and ATU-based standard drones.
X-tech was limited and difficult to produce. I don't see it getting extended to ATUs, so no to both.
Quote:3) Could launch rate for plasma fighters be increased after a certain date?
That might be the part of a mega-X-pack. Not independently.
Quote:4) Can IX drones be made available to non-X ships as a direct replacement for the VI drone? PFs? Fighters? As sub-munitions on a non-X MW drone?
X-drones on a non-X unit would require an XP upgrade. See 1 and 2. No X-submunitions on a non-X frame.
Quote:5) Can the F-111 get a photon option for its internal bay?
Does it need one? If so, why didn't it appear in J2?
Quote:6) Could a PF XP attribute be the elimination of the damage penalty on WBP?
7)Could an improved WBP be created that eliminates the double damage a fighter takes?
XP does not affect engines, unless we're making up ATU-specific XP refits.
Quote:9) Can a VII-XX and/or VIII-XX drone be created for the DBX mission?
I see no reason why not, except rarity of X-tech. Give them a Y198 YIS, I'd be willing to consider it.
Quote:10) Will a S-Bridge be considered or could some of its features (like RTN tracking without special sensors) be retrofit into existing X-tech?
I admit to the temptation to include the S-bridge for RTN hunting, but I bow to Loren on that question.
Quote:11) What S8 changes will be necessary? Would you considered a new S8 rule that defines X deployment differently in different time periods?
Can S8 afford to have year-dependent caluses and changes? Its complicated enough now.
What potential X-ship abuses would need to be blunted or addressed?
Quote:12) Will there be any X-Drogues or modifications to existing Drogue rules to better support X-Ships?
Drogues come pretty well-equipped. Their only drawback for X-ships is the slow speed required for use. I'm not sure I want to give any ground on that point.
Quote:13) Will there be rules for X-Maulers?
I'd like to see it
Let me clarify on the PL-K: I was suggesting that for each PL-D canister that 2 PL-Ks are the replacement. A PL-D rack then has an option of Ds or Ks.
The ASM has been suggested a number of times. I haven't heard that this weapon does not work so add to X1R.
New ground bases:
Sector Control Base. It is the military counter part to the POB in CL# 33. It would be an X-tech medium sized base. My thoughts on what to include: 1xspecial sensor; 3xPH-1s; 1xPH-4; 20xBP; assortment of shuttles; 6xFighters; increased shields, batteries, and AWR (BPV = 50)
Combat/Defense bases: Ground based X-PH-4 (PH-3s are PH-1s); missle base with GX racks; ground based PL-L and PL-M bases
Message sent.
I can see Ground Based Pl-L and Pl-M's but I can see very little advantage to X-Ph-4 (1 and 3's). The only benefit is rapid pulse and the larger capacitor which is not much of an issue with ground bases. This seems SO low on the totem pole that every ship in the fleet would have X-Ph-1's via XP refit before ground bases would get a single one.
Loren,
Just for clarification a ground based phaser-4 base has 4xPH-1s and 1 PH-4. A PH-4 can fire 4 times as a PH-3 or 2 times as a PH-1; a PH-1 can fire twice as a PH-3; total or 12 PH-3 shots or a lesser number of PH-1 and 3 shots. An Andro MWP is an SC5 unit which can be engaged using X-Aegis. Add full X-aegis to the base. Would that be worth while increase defense capability (I am not trying to argument for such a unit, just understand your perspective)?
All true but you have to consider how such an engagement would actually play out.
I've never found much use for X-Aegis against shuttle and I don't think I would against an MWP either. You see, the nature of drones makes Aegis useful but shuttles and to an even lesser extent, MWP's and PF's don't have to be killed. Against a drone it is absolutly critical that you kill it otherwise it is 100% effective. The difference of a point is critical.
Shuttle ar less critical where the difference of a point may mean crippled or not there is a margin between crippled and destroyed. Over kill is less of an issue also. A wasted Ph-3 shot (due to overkill) isn't as critical as when facing a wave of drones where that might have taken out an entire extra drone.
Drones WILL close to R1 to a ground base and spend time in the atmosphere (if there is one) while an MWP or PF should not be closing within Ph-3 range. Against such targets you should be using the Phaser-1's.
NOW, if an X-Ph4 could fire twice as Ph-1... 
So, X-Aegis would be useful against a heavy BD raid but not so much against the Andros.
Still, X-Ph1's would be FAR more effective used on ships. Same with the X-Ph4 on space bases. Until all the fronteer ships and bases have them they wouldn't go to ground bases, IMHO.
There is something I'd like to see in X1R though and that would be an X-Scout Channel. Something I've always not loved is Scout Channel blinding but I accept it.
However, perhaps in the X-era they figure out a way to shields Scout Channels. Perhaps something like this.
Through the expendature of one energy point per channel a ship equipped with scout channels can protect a channel from being blinded by weapons fire for a period of four impulses. During this time the channel "blinks" and no longer opperates during this period. I does continue to opperate as assigned after the blink period.
Power to shield a scout channel may come from one of two sources, once per turn, either from reserve power any time during a turn or from EA, in which the blink period would only occure durng the first four impulses of a turn. Obviously, one could elect to not power their channels until all fire was conducted then power them via reserve power later in the turn.
Alternatively, the same rule could still be useful but not allow the channel to return to it's previous operation for the remainder of the turn. Still, it avoids being blinded.