Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	Archive through September 06, 2007	25		09/07 06:38am

Loren: you're right about developing weapons that do the same thing (cause damage) in similar ways (DF). So the only likely new developments for existing empires are weapons that do new things (carronade) or fix problems with old weapons that didn't matter under old tech (sabot).

Conversely, one might see new weapons in EY or MY that become obsolete and thus don't exist in latter years (Andorian drones).

Now most of those niches have been filled already, or the fix would be unbalancing (eg real drones with warp-seeking guidance), so as you say it's time for X1.

By Jim Davies (Mudfoot) on Thursday, September 06, 2007 - 06:57 pm: Edit

JRC: So this ship has more warp and more weapon boxes than an NCL or NCA. Oddly enough, I can well imagine how it might do more damage on an overrun.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, September 06, 2007 - 10:56 pm: Edit

Mudfoot;
Is that because Bricking-more can allow you to get closer or because jamming more-warp into movement allows you to get closer or more energy for dial-a-photon allows you to hurl bigger photons?

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Thursday, September 06, 2007 - 11:07 pm: Edit

Richard,

Good point about the excess warp-shock. Shock rating: as a guess between a Fed BCJ (13) and the various maulers (17). Not sure what to do about 36 warp though. Perhaps the ship and weapon should be X technology. In which case it would have 40 warp and be built with a DDX saucer and HWX rear hull; MC would be one.

Jim,

The NBC doesn’t have more weapons but does have more warp. An HDW has 15 boxes in the rear hull. Depending on the rear hull layout of the NBC it could just be 9 warp capacitor boxes, 1 photon beam emitter box, and 4 hull boxes. Attach this to a standard NCL saucer, which provides the box count for comparisons.

SPP,

Did my post 10:56 pm post on 9-5-2007 change any of your observations?

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, September 07, 2007 - 06:38 am: Edit

Joseph Carlsson:

Truthfully? No. I would rather have an NCL. I do not buy into the concept (as a Fed) of having a ship that HAS to close to near point blank range to be effective with its primary armament. It just means that the crew of that ship KNOWS they are going to be the targets of enemy fire, and do not even have the advantage of a mauler of diverting battery power to reinforce the shields. The ship is too specialized (it cannot even use the power to reinforce shields) to be worth building. The concept that you could have this weapon and standard photon armament without suffering shock effects that would make the New Jersey seem stable by comparison does not make sense to me.

But please note that I am not shutting down the discussion.

By Jim Davies (Mudfoot) on Friday, September 07, 2007 - 08:10 pm: Edit

JRC: It doesn't have more weapons? So these 9 capacitor boxes are replacing 9 boxes of phasers and drones, are they? If so, it'll do less damage than its conventional counterpart, whilst being much less versatile and more vulnerable.

MJC: More power + more weapons usually does equate to more damage, regardless of tactics.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Friday, September 07, 2007 - 10:45 pm: Edit

SPP,

The photon beam is a secondary heavy weapon to the photons. The ship does incur shock when firing the photon beam and when firing photons within eight impulse of firing the photon beam. So I do not understand your last post.

The ship and the photon beam isn’t intended to be a mauler. Instead of the warp energy being fired as a photon torpedo it is fired as a photon beam. There is a holding cost and feedback damage like a photon torpedo.

The warp capacitors are not batteries, as batteries don’t have a holding cost. Since the ship has 36 warp, 4 AWR, 2 batteries, and 4 impulse I did not think it would be appropriate to allow energy stored in the warp capacitors to be used like energy stored in batteries or generated by AWRs. One cannot tap into whatever the device is that stores the warp energy for torpedoes and use it for other purposes. The photon beam and warp capacitors function like a photon torpedo; one can fire, hold, or discharge it.

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Saturday, September 08, 2007 - 02:45 am: Edit

JRC: It may be a secondary weapon but secondary effects need to counted.

First, padding. 13 torpedo hits means armed photons will survive a long, long time. The NBC won't arm every capacitor and photon but all capacitors that won't be powered become a sizable damage sponge.

Second, drone defense. Even allowing for the shift, the photon beam will hit a drone 90% of the time. Charge them on the early turns when ships have excess power; hold during the approach; ignore them after firing; and remove 8 drones from the map.

Being able to switch to a faster firing weapon should also alter knife fighting tactics. Without a complete SSD evaluating is difficult, but the photon beam looks to be one of those systems with extremely divergent abilities depending on scenario: either useless or overpowering.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, September 08, 2007 - 03:37 am: Edit

You know, to me, a Fed NBC would be a CCH that looks like an NCA.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Saturday, September 08, 2007 - 11:06 am: Edit

Richard,

The to hit on the DAC, for the warp capacitors, could be changed to A Hull, battery, and APR. The photon beam (emitter) would be hit on a torpedo hit, which gives the ship only five torp hits total. This would mitigate some the padding effect of the 9 warp capacitors.

MJC,

If you want to make a ship like that call it an NBH, which is a CLC saucer with a standard HDW lower hull.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Saturday, September 08, 2007 - 04:37 pm: Edit

????? Something that nearly doubles the direct photon firepower of the ship at short range is a "secondary weapon"?

Why not just suggest that all feds ships get fitted with a battery of four phaser-Gs that only fire straight ahead?

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Sunday, September 09, 2007 - 01:32 am: Edit

SPP,

In your first post you indicated the proposed ship and weapon wasn't as capable as an NCL because the NCL could due more damage in an over run attack. After I suggested the beam could be a secondary heavy weapon now it nearly doubles the direct photon firepower of the ship at close range. I suppose it could be named the USS Gemini, the two faced ship.

I don't think we are communicating or at least I am not following your comments. That its for me, nothing else to to add.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, September 09, 2007 - 07:38 am: Edit

A worked example in comparison to a similar Fed ship without this weapon system would help.
Having the new weapon system on a completely new ship design throws poeple's understanding completely off.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Sunday, September 09, 2007 - 12:58 pm: Edit

MJC,

Why? There doesn't seem to be much interest in the proposed ship and weapon.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Sunday, September 09, 2007 - 03:22 pm: Edit

Joseph R. Carlson:

It may be that I am not understanding what you are proposing.

I will note that I have not made any effort to shut down the topic. I have certainly never said "forget this and go work on something else." I am quite willing to admit that I am human and fallible. Every response I have given has been (to me) in responses to what I have read of your posts. And it is always possible that I am being partly confused by other projects I am working on such that perhaps I have forgotten something that was said.

But I was pretty sure the start of this thing was about Maulers, i.e., a ship added to small squadrons that had massive firepower for busting bases at short range. Then it became an anciliary weapon, but there was no reduction in its firepower, it was simply in addition to the normal weapons that would be found on an NCL (apparently, maybe I misunderstood that). Since as described the firepower was just a little less than a volley of four fully overloaded photons, adding this to a ship with four photons would certainly not qualifiy it as a "secondary weapon".

Did I miss some change in its damage output?

I could have.

There are a lot of topics and I am working on a lot of projects.

But I certainly did not mean to disrespect you in any way shape or form.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Sunday, September 09, 2007 - 04:22 pm: Edit

SPP,

No I don't think you disrespected me. I figured you were are very busy and misunderstood my intial posts. The use of the secondary was a poor choice of words on my part.

The ship has two heavy weapons. Which is first and which is used second depends on scenario and tactical picture; I used secondary to mean used second (no I didn't explain that very well).

The photon beam isn't a mauler; it has a holding cost, only uses engine-warp power, and incurrs feedback damage at range 0-1. The ship suffers shock when the beam is fired. It is a short range weapon, but the ship is duel purpose.

I will let the topic run for a few days then repost the idea with the changes made.

Thank you for your response.

By Michael C. Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Monday, September 10, 2007 - 09:53 am: Edit

I am unclear on this.

1) Does or does not have its Photons?

2) Where are the "warp capacitors?" Can they be destroyed?

Can someone please clear it up?

WITH Photons it would be a monster. Without it would be weaker than the base hull IMHO.

By Jim Davies (Mudfoot) on Monday, September 10, 2007 - 06:45 pm: Edit

And in a similar vein, does it lose anything (phasers, drones, shuttles, APR, etc) in exchange for this gadget?

Can we have a full SSD or system list?

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Monday, September 10, 2007 - 10:55 pm: Edit

Mike and Jim,

I will answer questions in a few days.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 01:48 pm: Edit

While it has been more than a few days below is an updated proposal.

Version 2
PHOTON BEAM (Ex.xx)

The photon beam functions similar to a mauler but only uses warp power. Warp power is stored in warp capacitors and discharged as an intense photon beam. Unlike a mauler the ship is not built around the photon beam; its power source is an array of warp capacitors. The warp engines are not connected to the warp capacitors. The Federation is the only race that has photon beam technology.

The photon beam uses the mauler rules in (E8.0) except as modified below.

(Ex.1) DESIGNATION

(Ex.11) SSD: The photon beam is shown on the SSD only as a black arrow connected to the warp capacitor boxes. The photon beam itself cannot be destroyed unless the ship is destroyed.

(Ex.13) DAMAGE: Warp capacitor boxes are hit on A-Hull, battery, and APR hits. A damage point is allocated to any warp capacitor box at the owning player’s option. Warp capacitor boxes destroyed before the impulse of firing cannot be used to fire the photon beam.

(Ex.2) FIRING PROCEDURE

(Ex.21) ENERGY: The photon beam is fired by discharged warp energy into it. Warp energy is stored in the warp capacitors. Damage is proportional to the number of warp capacitors boxes used for that impulse and range (E8.22). Warp energy is applied at the instant of firing.
(Ex.212) Each warp capacitor box holds two points of warp energy as a standard load or three points as an overload. Standard and overloaded warp capacitor cannot be fired during the same impulse.
(Ex.213) Firing the photon beam, at true range of 0-1, using overloaded warp capacitors causes feedback. One point of feedback damage is caused for each four points of warp energy discharged as a photon beam (round fractions of ½ point or more up and fractions less than ½ point down).

(Ex.22) PHOTON BEAM DAMAGE CHART

Range: 0-1; damage is double the amount of warp energy discharged.
Range: 2-4; damage is equal to the amount of warp energy discharged.
Range: 5-8; damage is one-half the amount of warp energy discharged.

(Ex.27) ALTERNATE FIRIG ARCS: The photon beam does not use the mauler’s alternate firing arcs.

(Ex.28) SHOCK: Firing the photon beam subjects the firing ship to shock damage effects (D23.0).


(Ex.3) POWER FOR PHOTON BEAM OPERATIONS

(Ex.31) WARP CAPACITORS: Energy to fire the photon beam comes from warp power stored in the warp capacitors. During energy allocation two points of warp power are allocated to each specific warp capacitor box. The warp capacitor box can be used during the same turn as a standard load.
(Ex.311) On a subsequent turn one point of warp power can be allocated, during energy allocation, to each specific warp capacitor box. The warp capacitor box can be used during the same turn as an overload.
(Ex.312) If standard and overloaded warp capacitors are not discharged on the turn energy is allocated then the ship must either discharge the warp capacitors (E1.24) or allocate ½ point of energy per warp capacitor, for each turn, until the capacitor is discharged as a photon beam (including the turn of firing). Energy can come from any source.
(Ex.313) The ½ point of power allocated to hold a warp capacitor may not be combined with ½ point of warp power to over load the capacitor.
(Ex.314) A standard loaded warp capacitor could be overloaded using reserve warp power (H7.48) on the impulse of firing.
(Ex.315) Reserve warp power (H7.48) can also be on the impulse of firing to fire a standard photon beam.
(Ex.316) Warp capacitor energy can be allocated to the batteries per (H5.32) for use like reserve warp power (H7.47); one point for each battery.

Ship Systems: Additions are +, subtractions are -.
SAUCER: Uses a modified CLC saucer.
4xPhoton;
8xPH-1s 3-LS, 3-RS, and 2-FH (+1 each LS/RS: these replace the 2xPH-3s);
2xDrn-G (+1);
2xBridge, 2xAux, and 1xEMER;
3xBattery (+1);
3xTRAN (+1);
4xAWR;
4xLab;
4xShuttle;
4xImpulse;
2xTRAC;
12 F-Hull (+2 boxes).

REAR HULL: Uses a modified HDW lower hull.
2xWEAPONS Option boxes (-2)
4xAWR (-4)
4xBattery (-4)
4xR-Hull (-2)
9xWarp capacitor (+9)
Photon Beam emitter, designated PB on the SSD (+1)

SHIELDS: No.1 is 36; No.s 2 and 6 are 30; No.s 3, 4 and 5 are 24 (same as Fed CLC).

Annex 9 Cost of Repair:
Warp Capacitor box: 6
Photon Beam Emitter: 8

Warp Capacitor box(s) and the Photon Beam Emitter can be destroyed using hit and run raids using the rules in (D7.8). the PB can not be used in option mounts.

Proposed ship shock rules (D23.xx):

1. If the ship fires the photon beam at a speed greater than 10 the ship incurs 2 shock point; above speed 20 shock points are doubled.

2. If the ship fires photon torpedoes within eight impulses of firing the photon beam the ship incurs one shock point for each photon tube fired.

3. One shock point of incurred for each four points of warp energy discharged as a photon beam (round energy fractions of ½ point or more up and fractions less than ½ point down to total warp power in the capacitor).

The proposed shock rating is 17. Example: The ship discharges 18 points of warp from the photon Beam (PB) at range one going speed 18. The ship incurs four shock points for firing the weapon and two shock points for speed 18. If next impulse the ship fires 4 overloaded photon torpedoes the ship incurs four additional shock points and 4 points of feedback damage. If the ship instead fired the PB at range one overloaded with 27 points of warp then the shock would 6 points plus 4 points of feed back damage (Total shock for both weapons would be 10, plus 2 for speed 18, and 8 points of feed back damage).

The PB uses the mauler firing arc and a modified range table. The ship as designed has 9 warp capacitor boxes. Using a standard load, 2 point of warp per box equals 18 point of energy. At range 0-1 this will do 36 points of damage. Firing all nine boxes, 27 points of warp energy, as overloads will do 54 points of damage.

The PB can be fired using as little 2 points of power (3 points as an overload), which is one capacitor box. At range 0-1 that is either 4 or 6 points of damage. Reserve warp power (H7.48) can be used to fire a standard PB or an overloaded PB.

Summary
The ship and the PB isn’t a mauler. Instead of the warp energy being fired as a photon torpedo it is fired as a photon beam. There is a holding cost and feedback damage like a photon torpedo. The PB is not an alternate firing mode of a photon torpedo or a refit to photon torpedo. The photon beam, while using some of the mauler rules, isn’t a mauler; it has a holding cost, only uses engine-warp power, and incurs feedback damage at range 0-1. The ship suffers shock when the beam is fired. It is a short-range weapon.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, October 21, 2007 - 01:06 am: Edit

---

Quote:

(Ex.212) Each warp capacitor box holds two points of warp energy as a standard load or three points as an overload. Standard and overloaded warp capacitor cannot be fired during the same impulse.
(Ex.213) Firing the photon beam, at true range of 0-1, using overloaded warp capacitors causes feedback. One point of feedback damage is caused for each four points of warp energy discharged as a photon beam (round fractions of ½ point or more up and fractions less than ½ point down).

---

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Sunday, October 21, 2007 - 10:50 am: Edit

MJC,

Thanks for your questions. I hope the following answers them.

Photon torpedoes can't use directed turn modes so the the PB can't either.

The feedback damage is the same/similar to a photon torpedo (see (E4.414); it is based on amount of warp discharged rather than the number of warp capacitor boxes used.

The maximum range for the PB is set the same as an overloaded photon.

The PB can fire each impulse because of the design of the warp capacitor boxes allows this.

By Jim Davies (Mudfoot) on Sunday, October 21, 2007 - 07:10 pm: Edit

How much warp does this ship have? Move cost?

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Sunday, October 21, 2007 - 07:20 pm: Edit

Jim,

The ship has two NCL engines (on the saucer) and two frigate engines (lower hull like on the HDW). So the tota warp is 36. The proposed MC is one.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, October 22, 2007 - 10:38 am: Edit

Joseph,

Here, I think, is a basic problem with your whole concept; the ship that carries it is way too good. If the Feds can build this hull form at all, why are they bothering with the photon beam? Instead, they fill the rear hull section with AWR, batteries, drone racks, and phaser-1s and they have what amounts to a BCH+. Or they use the ship as a CV for A-20Fs. The problem with the A-20 is rearming the photons after the first sortie. But configure the rear hull to carry a squadron of A-20Fs and the ship, even without rear hull power systems, generates 44 points of power (40 of it warp) on an MC-1 hull. It would be an awesome A-20 carrier, as well as having inherent combat power comparable to (or better than) a CB (fewer phasers, but more power and better shields).

If the Feds can build a cruiser like this, why do they build any other cruiser type until X-ships show up?

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, October 22, 2007 - 02:31 pm: Edit

Joe,

I don't thnk this isea will fly exclusively as a specialized ship.

You would need to show CA and NCL versions.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Monday, October 22, 2007 - 10:11 pm: Edit

Alan and John,

The point about "the ship that carries it is way too good" is correct. The HDW lower lower and two 6 box engines is too much.

An NCA lower hull is smaller and will hold 2xR-hull boxes, the Photon Beam emitter, and 9xWarp capacitor (3 sets of three). These would replace AUX, 2xPH-1s, 2xBTTY, 2xdrn-G, and 2xR-Hull.

The revised ship would have 30 warp, 4xAWR, 3xBTTY, and 4 impulse. This would be a NCL/NCA variant.

I don't think it would be cost effective to do a full conversion of an NCL or CA. A smaller version could be developed for a CAR+ as a refit for the lower hull.

By Jim Davies (Mudfoot) on Tuesday, October 23, 2007 - 06:56 pm: Edit

To be honest, I'd rather have the phasers, drone racks, batteries and whatnot. At R3 (for example) the fully loaded beam does 18 damage, for 18 power and shock. The phasers would do 8 for 2 power and no shock, and the drones potentially far more. Not to mention the difference in versatility.

I don't really see what this device achieves that a conventional DF weapon doesn't. 9 boxes of ship to emulate a cumbersome pair of photon torpedoes doesn't look good value to me. 9 boxes of almost anything bar hull or cargo would be more useful.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, October 24, 2007 - 10:18 am: Edit

Ahhh the infamous...if it's too good it's an auto kill and if it's too lousy it's almost an auto-kill; dynamic.

It's probably best to look at altering something existing. So exchanging external armour for explosive modules as a base busting drone or dialing up photons with a third turn of arming and turn of cooling (ala Fusion Beams); would be better rather trying to create a weapon from whole cloth that adds on to an existing race.