mjc,
all shuttles after a certain year get boosted to 8 hit points (I think this is in one of the J modules and I don't remember what year but its certainly pre-X1 (one).

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, September 10, 2007 - 12:30 am: Edit

Advanced Shuttles, J2-(J17.0)
Admin,GAS, HTS,MSS,MRS and SWAC become advanced with their own rules.

A-Admins are spd-8, damage-8, Y180.

Advanced shuttles have two chaff packs and this is why I'm about to post a question about that.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, September 10, 2007 - 07:46 am: Edit

To a degree the "newly neutral" worlds with obsolete vessels are also likely to be lumbered with obsolete Admin shuttles.

But I guess I'll be looking to lay my hands on a J2 sometime. Pitty X1 shuttles are the old style...guess MRS-X will have to do for trickery for the time being.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, September 10, 2007 - 10:45 am: Edit

NO, X1 shuttle are of the Advanced type.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, September 10, 2007 - 10:45 pm: Edit

Guru L.K.:

No, I mean under the SSDs in X1. The need for advanced shuttles was forseen then and considered unnessessary then (Page 14 of the X1 rules under rejected ideas). I wonder what procipitated the change.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, September 10, 2007 - 10:47 pm: Edit

OOps. Double post.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, September 11, 2007 - 01:29 pm: Edit

Loren, just checking to see if I understand your proposal. A few questions.

Is "submunition size" the damage done by the photon submunition?

When is a photon turned into a multi-warhead photon?

Can a held photon be turned to a multi-warhead photon?

Can a multi-warhead photon be recombined into a single photon?

If yes, can it be recombined after shooting some but not all of the submunitions?

When are the type(s) of submunition determined?

Can a single photon tube have multiple varieties of submunition in it at the same time?

Can more than one submunition be fired per impulse?

If yes, can more than one variety of submunition be fired per impulse?

Can a ship arm a single-submunition?

If yes, can it fastload one?

How would this be accounted for on an EA form?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, September 11, 2007 - 02:21 pm: Edit

Submunition size is damage rating of submunition.

It is decided at the initial loading. I figure it is a different unit entirely from say, a standard photon. It isn't like just adding a prox fuse.

Held photons cannot be converted to Multi-warhead.

No cannot be recombined BUT you could choose narrow salvo for all of the submunitions so they would all follow the primary warhead. This would be basicly the same as a standard photon. Note however there is little gain in OL unless you OL to 12 points and you cannot OL beyond that.

The submunitions break apart when the weapon reaches the primary targets hex. You cannot target a hex... well you could but then the submunitions would all just explode in space. You must generally have a primary target.

When types determined? It's an OL once you add OL energy, such as more than two points on either turn of loading. It is a prox at the same time the normal proximity photon rules determin.

No a single tube cannot have multiple types. The weapon is a single unit and loaded and programmed as a single unit. It subdivides when it reaches the target hex so all submunitions are always of the same type.

More than one sub per impulse? Yes because all four are a single unit on firing and subdivide upon reaching the target hex.

Arm single submunitions? No.

EA is handled just like the regualr loading rules except you note it with an M on the first turn of loading.

BTW: You determin the targeting parameters upon firing: Single (each sub rolls to hit separately), single narrow salvo (roll once), random (multiple targets, roll each). You designate the prime target. If random (multiple) you then randomly determin the other three targets (if les than four targets are available you can randomly assign multiple submunition to those targets).

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, September 12, 2007 - 10:21 am: Edit

Ahhh...letting fire out at different times...well that would opperate differently...you wouldn't be limited to drone and fighter stacks only.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, September 12, 2007 - 10:36 am: Edit

Yeah but I'm not proposing that.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 12:32 am: Edit

Oh great...so it's all fired on the one impulse and all must be fired into the same hex...that's pretty restrictive...might as well launch T-Bombs through the probe launcher; you'll collect everything in a hex plus every adjacent hex so deconstructing "the stack" will become less improtant.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 10:46 am: Edit

Whatever.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 01:10 pm: Edit

Loren,

Looking at your proposal, I'm not sure what you're really doing besides getting rid of the dread "slot machine" effect for photons.

Your system produces about the same levels of damage at about the same (sometimes more restricted) ranges and that's about it. (you do give the photon a superior prox setting which would be useful in base-busting)

EXCEPT that you break the photon torp into smaller packets that allow a more averaged distrubition of damage. Less devestating hits, less embarassing misses. The photon becomes something like a gatling disruptor.

For all the work and restrictions, I'm not really sure what actual advantage it is, outside the prox setting.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 02:50 pm: Edit

As mentioned in the original proposal "carronade for photons" with some other uses.

This is balanced by the mid-turn breaking rule that the Romulans could use to mitigate the threat.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 02:59 pm: Edit

huh?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 04:13 pm: Edit

I'll need to go over the proposal again because I'm not sure where the confusion is. I might have made some mistake so I'll check it tonight. Right now I have to leave for a job site.

It's a caronade for photons in that you get four rolls to hit a target with each producing a reduced amount of damage. The idea is that you hit the target with some amount of damage.

Naturally there are other uses too, such as against attrition units and drones.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 05:28 pm: Edit

I just didn't understand where the "mid-turn breaking rule" reference came from.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 06:20 pm: Edit

I don't like the idea that a photon could engage multiple targets, but I do like the idea that a photon could engage the same target with multiple die rolls. Sort of a shotgun blast where some of the pellets hit and some miss.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 08:27 pm: Edit

John,
it's in another thread I started in the X-files.

Tos: I could get past not allowing them to engage separate targets if they were ALL in the same hex as the primary target which is what the proposed rule is.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 11:55 pm: Edit

Well if it were limited to one target (rather than one hex) then you get this super drone killer thing because you'll be making four different die rolls on the one drone and you're bound to hit the drone with one of `em.

I'ld still rather see X2 ships have the ability to use their own drone control channels to attempt to knock down incomming drones (with reduced chances for X1 and X2 drones) that see the Photon heavy weapon get used to killed drones. You need to be able to give some kind of responce when the enemy get to R8 and punch you. It might be a responce with no phaser left, just heavy weapons but a responce of just taking it is kinda silly.
An enemy consisting of a Fed CARa+, NCA and a D7D all owned/higher/borrowed/gained by one neutral world has something like 7 drone racks and a dozen shuttles. A 330 BPV XCA with a 33% effect for force dyamics would be a fairly balanced fight. But the GW ship have a full dozen shuttle craft meaning that if the X2 ship does have to people the onion before setting up the first attack-run; the game is gunna go on for about 10 turns of 13 IF drones every turn.
Let's try to find a better way of dealing with drones than using the Photons for it.
1.5 kills with drone knock downs from the S-Bridge, two drone kills with dogfight drones from the GX-racks and obliquing 6Ph-5s (fired as 18Ph-3 shots) at R1 should kill 15.5 IF drones anyway and you've still got tractors availible. And firing those 6Ph-5s as 12Ph-6 shots probably should bring the total to 15.5 as well.
If the GWs really ramp up the drone chuck rath than you should kill their drones by swining away and pulling out to R36 of their ships...that should bring peel the onion faster and should punchish the GWs for putting all their drones in one basket.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, September 14, 2007 - 12:19 am: Edit

ummmmm...this is the photon topic

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, September 14, 2007 - 12:32 am: Edit

Yeah, lets not discuss non-photon weapon here please.


MJC, did you read the proposal. The proposal I made CAN do what you want. You CAN target all four submunitions on one drone but this isn't likely to kill drones, particularly in the X2 era where you will always be facing at least Type-7 drone with a small target modifier. This proposal is NOT about using photons to kill drone so please drop your attempts to redirect.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, September 14, 2007 - 08:09 am: Edit

Well now you've completely lost me.
What does this proposal do if not kill drones and fighters?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, September 14, 2007 - 09:12 am: Edit

MJC:

You might consider reading the proposal.

The answers to the questions you ask were covered, and I believe have already been discussed at some length.

If you are so interested in making a proposal, why dont you ask the steves directly? If they feel that the idea has merit, they might allow you to post it... but redirecting the discussion away from Loren's proposal is not a very nice thing to do.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, September 15, 2007 - 05:45 am: Edit

Jeff:

I did read it...perhaps you mean reread it.
As to proposals:- I suspect you know that I can't and probably read why.
You know...for a guy I'ld like to try to work with, you can do some really unkind things yourself.