I think that's a game-balance thing.

Those of us that played with X2-tech noted how the SFB system broke the higher you drive BPV for a single unit.

Arguably the ongoing issues with stack formations suggest total concentrated BPV in any form tends to break the system.

By Michael C. Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 03:03 pm: Edit

The IS a reasonable need for Kzinti, Lyran, Klink (leased zone), Gorn and Hydran X survey vessels as their frontiers get further and further out.

The GSX showed how potent these would be. And F&E shows how important survey is...

The Roms, Tholians, Vudar, WYN and such are already bumping their neighbors in all directions...

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 04:38 pm: Edit

From a practical standpoint, it would probably be prohibitively expensive in a post-war economy to build All-X dreadnoughts (i.e. why build one ship that will be in everyone's crosshairs when you can build three or more that won't for the same price?). That and you're basically kicking off a major strategic arms race if you build one because your enemies will want one (or eighty) too.

At any rate, SVC considers it a DOA issue so I'll stop here.

By James Hallmark (Jhallmark) on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 07:10 pm: Edit

If you scan the peak ship of each size you will note that ships get weaker relative to size as you increase size. This explains the inability of DN's to get full X. I think the comparison of relative stress goes approximately/generally like this, comparing cruisers to DNs

EDN = CC
DN = CB
DNH = BCH

Basically the bigger a ship is the more stress is used up just holding the ship together. For example why is a triple DD better than a dreadnought for most races?

I will note that BB's seam to violate this diminish returns for size idea. I think what is going on there is that they are in fact more than 1/3 larger than a dreadnought.

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 07:21 pm: Edit

It's all about X-tech battleships!

I have a B12 complex.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 07:50 pm: Edit

Good one, Ted.

By John Erwin Hacker (Godzillaking) on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 08:38 pm: Edit

Hi everyone

I could "cook up" an SSD .......... hehe

Have a great weekend everyone

"THE GODZILLAKING"

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 11:31 pm: Edit

Alan,

As you have already posted Type-VIII has two payload spaces but the drone takes up 1.5. So a 1/2 space booster is equal to a one space booster. This becomes the X-tech version of the Type-III with an endurance of 25 turns. The bombardment version has only one payload space ( 18 point warhead), 100 turn endurance, and up to three way points.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Saturday, August 08, 2009 - 11:29 am: Edit

Joseph,

I doubt that you can turn a drone built for "direct combat" into a long-range DB drone with any kind of booster. I think the drone has to be designed for that mission from the beginning. In the non-X case, you can buy extended duration for Type-Is or Type-IVs, which brings their endurance to 6 turns. But there is no way to turn a Type-I into a Type-III.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Saturday, August 08, 2009 - 02:35 pm: Edit

Alan,

I didn't communicated clearly in my last post. I wasn't intending to us a Type-VIII drone frame just some of concepts on space savings for propulsion etc. I agree an X-bombardment drone would to be purpose built for that use. Sorry for the confusing post.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Monday, December 28, 2009 - 07:01 am: Edit

Hydran CUX and HNX are referenced in X1R but not yet published anywhere.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, January 04, 2010 - 04:48 pm: Edit

What additional X-ships are needed?

New Construction, not conversions and adaptations of existing designs.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, May 04, 2010 - 10:01 pm: Edit

John Trauger:

I suspect that there might be a need for X-Police ships of a number of different designs to replace older GW and pre-GW ships.

For the Federation, that might include (but not limited to) the FLG, POL and the APT version (the CUT IIRC).

Each of the major races that operated X-ships would likely eventually turn to police ship production.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 12:21 am: Edit

Seeing the title of this thread did inspire one thought.
What additional X-ship are needed?

A totally new class that only works because X-tech makes it workable.

Then I scrolled up a bit and John Trauger beat me to that thought quite a while ago.

But really, here is another thought. First we had Fast Raiders. The straight CCX is considered a great successor to fullfil this mission, but is a galaxy of X-ships, what woud you do with X-tech to make a fast raider within the X-ship paradigm. I'm thinking an X-ship designed from the keel to conduct fat raids better than anything else ever built.
I'm thinking this unit would have some of the same concepts of the combat optimization of DNs in another thread. Oh, not as drastic and there would be no removing systems since this ship would be designed with less of them.
It could be a pure combat ship conceptualized along a differnet technology path than where the general flow of advancement was going (X2). At the height of the Andro War this design became plausible.
The Fed version might even have the spade primary hull and only three torpedoes. The mini would only need Adam Turners engines.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 08:53 am: Edit

Loren, just trying to get "my head arround" the idea you are suggesting...

If I recall correctly, in F&E terms, fast raiders strategic speed was 7 hexes of operational movement...shared by first generation X ships.

So what would a 2nd Generation X fast Raider do in terms of F&E speed? perhaps a 8 hex F&E range/speed?

sounds like an expensive experiment that might only repeat the experience of the original fast ship program.

Now... what if the 2nd Generation X ship raiders were capable of materially greater speed than other 2nd Generation X ships?!?

call it a 9 F&E hex/operational speed ability... and a 50% increase over Genral Warships (typically those able to move 6 F&E hexes per turn), and 29% increase over speed 7 X ships... that might be enough of a speed increase to allow the fast raider concept to work.

Or maybe not.

might have to game it out to prove or disprove the concept.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 09:56 am: Edit

I don't think that increasing the operational speed will work. IIRC, F&E op speed of more than seven created problems. I even doubt that X2 will have an operational speed greater than seven (maybe it will have some other special rule).

No, it think it will have to be someting slimmed down for raiding. Maybe something with split F&E factors. What are the F&E factors for a Fed CCX?

Maybe they discovered that applying the hull designs that the Fast Cruisers had to an X-ship still gave it some advantages. Not more operation movement on the strategic scale but maybe a bonus on the raid and in escaping. The ship would have a better ability to sustain slightly higher warp. This would mean that even other X-ship couldn't prevent it from escaping (call in 0.1 warp factor faster). At the tactical level this ship would have movement pressidence over other X-ships.
The SSD would give it a few less support systems like Lab and maybe a minor reduction of hull. Enough to raise it's attack factor by 1 (the loss of the torp is covered by a few more phasers) and lower it's defense factor by 1.

That's the general gist of the idea. Ultimately, it would be a new construction hull but probably look like an X-tech fast cruiser. The Fed would natural look unique, but other empires should have some hull form design change.

Maybe Klingons would have more swept back wings and a shorter boom. But hull form will probably be more a factor of what the mini market can handle and minis are certainly besides the point.

The question is, what would push an X-ship design to be more of a raider than a standard X-ship?

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 01:25 pm: Edit

Loren,

Put a CX saucer on a GSX rear hull. Call it a CBX. You end up with a cruiser that has 14 phaser-1s, 4 X-photons, 4 GX racks, and 8 shuttle racks (convert 4 to F-18 fighter racks?). Configure the three transporter boxes as a transporter and a probe launcher like on the CX. Change the two probes to 2 AWR.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 04:00 pm: Edit

I'm thinking something leaner. I'll try to sit down this week and plan something out for a basis of better illustration of my concept, but I encurage people to discuss what they think such a ship might be.

Am I right that players would want to see a new ship built from the keel up? I would, but it's hard to find a niche where such a ship could occupy. I think a fast raider of the X-era could be such a niche.

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 04:10 pm: Edit

Just to through out a thought, perhaps a late X1 design that triggers X2?

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 04:11 pm: Edit

Not really. You can X-ify a CF just as easily as not. :/

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 04:28 pm: Edit

Loren,

When I started this topic I was looking for "gaps" that still needed to be filled. These would be things like a Federation X-tech drone bombardment ship. The Klingons and the Kzinti both got these in X1R, which seems to indicate the concept is still valid in the X-tech era. There is no apparent technological reason why the Feds couldn't build one. So a Fed "DBX" (just to pick an abbreviation) ought to exist. The Feds don't have an NCLX like the Klingon D5X or the Kzinti CMX. So maybe they base their "DBX" on their DDX/DGX design. Or maybe they also field an NCLX, with the drone bombardment ship as a variant.

Other needs include a Seltorian "conjectural" X-scout and a Tholian X-tech "heavy scout". The Seltorians are at a huge disadvantage in non-historical X-tech squadron battles because their opponent could have an X-scout and they can't. The Tholians are at a lesser disadvantage, but they are still currently outclassed in the X-tech EW arena. Most empires have X-cruiser-based (usually though not always a CWX) heavy scout with at least 4 scout channels. The Tholians don't. They are outclassed in the EW arena and there is no technological reason why they couldn't build a CWX-based 4-channel scout, based on the non-X case. Again, these two X-scout examples represent gaps in capability that should be filled.

I never made any suggestions for the Kzinti in this thread because I don't play them often and don't believe I know them well enough to identify what, if any, needs still need to be taken care of in their X-fleet. I was hoping that someone more expert with the Kzinti than I am would post something. Similarly with the Hydrans, Gorns, etc.

I certainly don't have anything against your suggestion for a new class of ships like X-tech raiders. But I do think it's putting the cart before the horse. It's more important to identify ships that both the established tech and the established history suggest should have been built.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 05:19 pm: Edit

Alan,

In another topic the super heavy cruiser (SHC) has been discussed for years without any consensus as to what it is. The main reference to the SHC is in C2 page 29, which was last updated in 1994. A lot has been added to the game since then. For discussion purposes perhaps the late general war SHC is a slightly larger x-cruiser. The ship I suggested really is a type of X-SHC.

The Romulan SHC, Killerhawk is considered a heavy hawk, which includes the Novahawk (R4.N3). In X1R the Romulans have an X-version of the Novahawk the NHX. Conceivably any heavy hawk could be converted to an X-ship.

Most X-command cruisers are in the 250 BPV range. The Romulan NHX's BPV is 297 and the ISC's CCX BPV is 315. As a point of comparison the impossible X-versions of the DNLs were in the 350 to 400 BPV range. So an X-version of an SHC should be in the 300 to 325 range. This would be an interesting new class of X-ship.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 05:27 pm: Edit

Joseph,

I have no problem with something like that. But I still think it should be lower priority than things like a Fed DBX or Tholian CWSX (or Seltorian conjectural SCX).

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 05:33 pm: Edit

Not all heavy hawks are the same.

The Killerhawk is a Romulan BCH...and then some. It was built for the BCH mission (DN replacmeent).

Until X-tech gets to the point where BCHXes are viable, a KHX will not be viable either.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 05:35 pm: Edit

John,

The Killerhawk is inferior to a BCH in one respect, however. It still has CR-9. So it's better than a BCH in a duel but not as good, considered as fleet flagship.