Proximity Photon Torpedo Flexibility
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board:
New Rules:
(D) Weapons:
Proximity Photon Torpedo Flexibility
Ok. With great trepidation, I would like to post a photon proposal.
I am well aware that many, many photon proposals have been made, and the makers of them have been routinely beaten on this forum.
First of all, let me say that I am thinking about this photon torpedo change as a house rule, not a rules change to SFB. Secondly, I'm not trying to "fix" the torpedo, I'm only trying to reduce bookkeeping and increase flexibility.
Here's my proposal:
What if any NON-overloaded photon could be fired as a proximity-fused torpedo as a launch-time decision, instead of an EA-time decision?
Plausible "techno-babble" explanation:
SFB describes the arming of a proximity torpedo as fitting a special fuse to it during EA. However, the rules also state that the warhead isn't materially affected by this change; the lower damage is a result of the torpedo exploding at some distance from the target. It seems logical to me that the Feds could simply put the proximity fuse on ALL torpedoes. However, the fuse is initially inactive. When the torpedo is about to be launched, the launcher sends an encoded signal to the torpedo to enable the proximity fuse system if desired, otherwise the torpedo is launched as a normal warhead.
Now, to me this doesn't seem too unbalancing. The Federation still has a two-turn arm cycle if they fire, giving the opponent time to do an overrun as normal. It actually reduces the complexity of the rules, which is a plus when it can be achieved with little effect.
However, I suspect that it would have the greatest effect on fleet battles, and I have the least experience with those. Perhaps that is not coincidentally 
.
I would genuinely like to hear a debate about whether or not this proposal would be unbalancing, from players much more experienced than myself.
I've made that proposal, as an X2 option. You might be able to sneak it into X1R, but I can't see you gaining any ground on making such a change in non-X ships.
I don't think the idea is especially powerful, just that it’s too difficult to change 25+ years of established game history. I'd like to make Life Support = Movement Cost for all ships, but it will never happen for the same reason.
Aha!
But that would imply that it's probably fine as a house rule. After all, for a particular gaming group, the 25 years of history isn't a problem.
The real difference it makes is in the decision making process, it gives the Fed a great deal more flexibility in his tactics. All of a sudden he does not have to decide what range he wishes to engage at. He says oh the romulan made a mistake I dont have to stay outside of 8 with the proxs, I now have an opportunity to move closer and do greater damage, rather than saying dam I cant get any closer because my proxs wont work.
Under Commander's Rules, it was possible to use reserve warp to overload a prox-fused photon, removing the prox function. So, the standard tactic was to arm proximities, and keep 2 points of reserve warp handy to make 9-point overloads.
The Captain's edition removed that option. Possibly because it was too handy.
J.L.:
Could you quote the rule number on that?
I was just saying to my brother the other day that the descission to use UIM and DERFACs is made during fire and Proxies are made during EA and that's a little unfair.
I'ld say as a house rule, letting the Klingon have plenty of UIM purchases would balance out the prox fire option.
I did not remember that Jeff, because going back to the designers edition Expansion 3 said you could not overload proxs. You could change them to standards during EA with no power cost, not overload, but it did not prevent you from using reserve power during the turn to overload.
I'm away from home, so I'll have to look for it Monday (if I still have those rules where I can find them).
I should have looked myself but I'm not sure if it'ld be under photons or reserve power.
Looking at E4.34 is where the prohibition exists.
I will have to take people's word that there was ever an option to change a prox to an overload in mid-turn. It was never the case when I played, but I started with the Commander's edition rules about 1985.
The proposed "house rule" is a disastrous change simply because it does eliminate any decision on the use of the photons. Part of photon tactics is deciding during Energy Allocation if you are going to stay at range and unload proximity fuzed photons on the enemy, or try to close the range and use overloads, or split the difference and load standard torpedoes and dedicate your reserve power to the close range photon shot.
Worse, house rules like that tend to become embedded, i.e., people forget they are House rules and try to apply them to games with "new people" or even in tournaments.
I really do not want to get into how messy house rules can make a tournament.
It was not about photons, but at one tournament a player was brilliantly anticipating the moves of his opponents. He made it into the finals before running afoul of an Ace (no, it was not me) who simply could not believe that he was able to predict the maneuvers as well as he was doing. Turned out his local group had a house rule about hellbores that allowed you to fire them, even if they were overloaded, as standard hellbores if the enemy did not come into overload range rather than being forced to eject the warhead into space. They felt that being forced to fire them was punishment enough rather than completely losing all the power that was allocated if the enemy did not come into at least range eight.
Things like that, and it is not the only case, tend to make me opposed to house rules. I have other reasons, including getting rules questions from players where it turns out the problem is a corruption of a house rule carried forward from one group to another. The Person coming from another group simply has forgotten, or never knew, that what he was doing was a "house rule" (with so many people teaching other people who do not own their own copies of the rules, house rules get taught as "the rule" and then carried forward to other groups).
Other examples are the infamous "Sudden Impact" rule (a favorite of drone races where in if they launch the drones at range zero, they impact the same STAGE they are launched, allowing the target no chance to defend itself) or Economic fighters (a favorite where in all fighters are purchased at their economic costs which in turn makes a Ranger cost a mere 138 BPV (139 if you use an EWF, 156 with the plus refit, 157 with the plus refit and an EWF).
I do not like house rules. But that is just me.
When I first came here to the SFU BBS I had to do quite a lot of adjusting when discussing tactics since I had long played with an EW house rule. It was simple, anything specifically not designed to generate EW didn't. That meant ships in general couldn't generate EW (nor carriers not equipped with Special Sensors).
Additionally, the max a special sensor could generate was two EW. It took one power to activate the sensor and one to power a function, of which 2 EW points was a function.
This vastly simplified play while maintaining the flavor of EW. However, you can imagine that it colored all my tactics (most ships had 4 to 6 power no deticated to EW!) and I had to rethink everything on this "by the rules only" board.
Well, I found part of it.
Captain's Log 5, page34:
(E4.34a) It is possible to convert a proximity-fuzed photon to an overloaded type. Simply remove the proximity controls and then add overload energy by allocation or by reserve power.
This was expanded on in the Captain's Edition to say "remove the proximity fuse during Energy Allocation Phase and then (in that same phase or a later one) add overload energy by allocation or (later in the turn) by reserve power."
As originally written, it was not explicitly stated that the overload could not be done during a turn. I haven't checked the old rules, yet, to see if the (E4.31) restriction on removing a prox fuse only during EA was in the previous set.
In other words: you decide at EA if it's a prox or not and can change the decision on any subsequent EA.
As long as it is proxed, you can't overload it.
If you un-prox it (during EA), you can treat it as if it never were proxed during that same Ea cycle and further on.
Does that mean you can unprox it AND apply OL energy on the same EA?
Turn one: Proxed held
Turn two: Unprox and appy 7 points per tube to max overload it?
Yup...E4.34 says exactly that.
Except I think you mean 6 points per tube.
Assuming you meant to have a rolling-delay.
Although you could pay the holding cost of that finished Torp plus fully overload it for a total of 5 points of power of which four must be warp.
Photons hold. they do not 'rolling delay".
But MJC's power figures are right.
The energy to create a prox is the same as that for a std (4 pts warp) so it holds for 1
Fully OLing the torp would require 4 more points of warp.
Total: 5, 1 to hold (from any source), 4 warp or AWR, just as MJC said.
Speaking of house rules, the guy who taught me how to play taught me that Photons had a rolling delay...