Does the Lyran fighter vanish when the Plasma is depleted?

I.E. Can I run the fighter out?

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 04:45 pm: Edit

But of course to some people, it does. There are still Lyrans out there who, in defiance of some of the Lyrans on this board who desperately want to do away with all Lyran drones in the name of racial purity, want to have Lyran CWDs. And there will be some who, if you gave the Lyrans plasma-Ds (or plasma-Ks, or both) would want to use that as a wedge issue to have Lyran plasma ships.

There are is always going to be a battle between the "purists" and the "tacticians".

The purists want racial purity at any cost (so long as we later fix the problems that racial purity would bring them, perhaps by making their ships even bigger and more powerful, or making their weapons better.

The tacticians are less concerned with racial purity, and more concerned with "what works", and see no reason why any race might not adopt some systems from another race. The tacticians, of course, tend to get carried away (leading to, for example, Hydran photon ships to better down the shields of enemy ships for the hellbore ships to exploit).

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 05:06 pm: Edit

Re: Jim's plasma-thingie -- dang, that isn't bad. Gives the Lyrans some tangible benefit from their Peladine conquest (plasmium), ties in nicely with their racial flavor (ESGish), and makes their fighters more versatile (can shrug off a few drones and/or "ram" something). And even better, Steve likes it!

By David Kass (Dkass) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 05:25 pm: Edit

When I started reading Jim's suggestion, I expected it to end with "but the fighter is destroyed by the plasma on the impulse it is launched." :-)

I'm still trying to see how this is different from a range 0 ESG (with a shorter duration).

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 05:34 pm: Edit

How is it different...

1. It decreases in strength over its lifespan.
2. It provides the fighter with an ECM bonus.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 05:41 pm: Edit

3. And it's a lovely shade of purple.

By Marc Baluda (Discomaster) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 05:44 pm: Edit

4. It does much more damage.

Also, it is copyable by all races as was discussed earlier with regard to the R0 ESG pod that I brought up (and got "booth time, suspended by my thumbs" for!).

I must say that I think this proposal is far more powerful than a R0, Strength 1 ESG pod that lasts 32 impulses (or less, if it needs balancing).

I'm not saying I dislike the idea, but I am saying that it is more powerful that previous proposals, requires tech-creep, is a record keeping headache, and will cause nasty supply problems for Lyrans using this technology (where do they get the Pl-D/K canisters?)

By Scott Tenhoff (Scottt) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 05:46 pm: Edit

3a. Well at least it's not pink. Can you imagine how thrilled a Lyran is going to be flying around in a pink fighter.

That's real impressive. Little pink pansy fighter pilot.

\serious on
How is this going to effect a ship before WBPs? Oh, he turns on the Plasma-ESG, well the fighter can only go speed 12-15. The ship turns off, until it can only do 1-5 damage.

Best thing would be a drone sweeper. Any Hydrans fighters will shoot the fighter w/ ESG at range 1 to destroy it with a P-G.

By Marc Baluda (Discomaster) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 05:47 pm: Edit

By David Kass (Dkass) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 05:50 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

2. It provides the fighter with an ECM bonus.

---

By David Kass (Dkass) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 05:57 pm: Edit

Actually, the idea of letting Lyrans mount Pl-D and Pl-K cannisters on thier fighters in intriguing. They're drone shaped so would fit in the carrier storage. They don't require any major modifications to the ready racks (ie no torp freezers or the like). The rails on the fighters would need to be changed, but that might be deemed trivial.

The two drawbacks are first that the drones are still the better deal in most cases. And second, the fighters (and carriers) are no longer interchangeable with the Klingons.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 07:01 pm: Edit

Interesting idea, but I do have some concerns. One, what's to keep the other races from using this technology? Especially the Romulans and Gorn? I may be wrong, but wouldn't this be the first example of a race that doesn't normally field a weapon getting a special version of it before a race that does use it would?

My other concern has to do with why the Lyrans would get this. If it's to make their fighters different, it works...until other races that use plasma adopt it, too. Then we're back to square one. If it's to make them better, the same thing applies; other races will start screaming for it.

I like this idea, but would think changing it to a range 0, fighter only ESG would stymie any other race's efforts to develop it. Giving the Lyrans a special plasma weapon when they historically have never used plasma at all seems a bit out of place. Just my opinion, and not meant as an attack on the merits of Jim's idea.

By Charles Gray (Cgray45) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 07:29 pm: Edit

No tech slosh!!!

Seriously, the Lyrans don't have much of a fighter problem, were not a primarily fighter race, and don't need new gadgets.
IF you want to give them something, let them have a neat gadget for the PF's, since they put most of their effort into them.

Like, mike said-- making Lyran fighters just as good or better using a new weapon will have every other race screaming for it-- and more importantly, one of the things that let the Hydrans survive or advance was their fighter doctrine, tied to superior fighters. That's one of the reasons the Lyrans never really went into fighters so much. Give them a gadget that equalizes them, whats to keep them from building more fighters, to combine with their already superior ships, and cleaning the hydrans clock?
Quite honestly, before they go to the effort of designing a new weapons system, they'd just put in the arguably less extensive effort of capturing and reverse engineering hydran fighter gatling phasers.

I'm increasingly wondering how much room there is in the Alpha quadrant for non-X new weapons. Anything that's good enough to adopt raises so many problems of tech slosh, and balance of power, that it almost seems a self defeating issue. Maybe it would be better to push on with other regions and time periods, leaving the general war more or less alone in terms of new technology.

By Marc Baluda (Discomaster) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 07:32 pm: Edit

Steve Cole:

Can we have a K2 topic?

By David Kass (Dkass) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 07:42 pm: Edit

There is a K2 topic. The Proposals Board:New Ships:Module K2? Perhaps not the most obvious of places...

By Marc Baluda (Discomaster) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 08:02 pm: Edit

Thanks David.

By Andy Palmer (Andypalmer) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 08:34 pm: Edit

One huge benefit of the plasma-thingy over a range 0 ESG is that the former does not auto-block Hellebore fire, thereby causing a balance issue vs the Hydrans.

A few questions:
1. How does it interact with ESGs?
2. How does it interact with other plasma torpedoes (targetted on the fighter, for example)
3. Can the fighter fire/launch while "encapsulated" by the plasma-thingy?
4. Can the fighter perform EM while encapsulated?
5. What if the fighter HETs and moves in the same impulse; how does the plasma act?

Very innovative idea.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 08:59 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

One huge benefit of the plasma-thingy over a range 0 ESG is that the former does not auto-block Hellebore fire, thereby causing a balance issue vs the Hydrans.

---

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 09:07 pm: Edit

Out of spite I found myself ready to propose a Lyran photon torpedo that arms it's self with the ESG field energy. Absorbs all the energy and does half that to the target it hits.

But I wont! Oh, I just did? Well, it wasn't serious.

By Ethan Dawe (Wild_Guesser) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 09:14 pm: Edit

Mike Said

"Fire a hellbore at a fighter? Ye gods, why?"

That would be ESG/Hellbore interaction. Its in the rule-book. I don't remember the rule number though. The Lyran could use a fighter(s) to shield capital ships from hellbore fire. Hellbores fired at any target that cross an ESG field, strike the ESG generating ship. This would allow Lyrans to run ships behind a wave of fighters that hellobres couldn't touch.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 09:29 pm: Edit

Ethan,

I don't think that would work. The reason a range 0 ESG field interacts with a hellbore currently is becuase the ESG is surrounding the target. You HAVE to go through it to hit. I don't think a fighter could block a ship like that; if it can, it's a broken rule. A fighter is what, a few meters across? So, say a fighter ESG is 25 meters in diamter...heck, lets say 50. A hex is 10000 meters across. That fighter isn't going to block a ship with a tiny field like that.

That's just my opinion, of course.

By Andy Palmer (Andypalmer) on Wednesday, September 04, 2002 - 10:44 pm: Edit

Mike R. A SC4 ship with a R0 ESG can block all HB fire that crosses its hex (up to the strength of the ESG, as reduced by the HB). Even R0 ESGs are significantly larger than the unit producing them, filling up a large percentage of the hex.

By Charles Gray (Cgray45) on Thursday, September 05, 2002 - 12:05 am: Edit

I have a thought (don't laugh). I was wondering if either fighters or PF's have enough compelling material to justify an individual product.
Fighters start with the Kzinti, but by Y180-1 they've become obsolete in a developmental aspect-- after Y184 I'd figure there's very little R&D for fighters. For PF's the same thing happens by 205, with X-ships increasingly taking them away.
That puts a window on development-- anything post 200 should probably wait for X2, and the time period before then is getting crowded.
That being said, how about combining both PF's and Fighters into a product called Attrition units?

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, September 05, 2002 - 02:12 am: Edit

---

Quote:

Mike Said

"Fire a hellbore at a fighter? Ye gods, why?"

---

By Paul Stovell (Pauls) on Thursday, September 05, 2002 - 05:48 am: Edit

A few thoughts on the plasma thingie. First I think its kinda fun.
I wonder if Jim's plasma thingie might be combined with SVC's hound dog plasma to allow the fighter to travel at double speed while encapulated.
I read Jim's rule on ECM as counting as OEW against the fighter.
Arguably the plasma shell could shield the fighter from phaser damage as this would reduce the plasma warhead strength instead.

The basic rule would allow a Lyran fighter to take out say 5 type-I drones in ideal conditions
as against 2 later 4 with drones launched to kill drones. With the drones greater standoff ability this seems a reasonable balance.

Not sure about anti-ship/anti-fighter roles.