| Subtopic | Posts | Updated | ||
| Archive through January 24, 2003 | 25 | 01/24 05:13pm | |
| Archive through April 18, 2003 | 25 | 04/18 03:43pm | |
| Archive through May 19, 2003 | 25 | 05/19 12:18am | |
| Archive through September 22, 2004 | 25 | 09/22 07:04pm | |
| Archive through May 20, 2005 | 25 | 05/20 09:59pm | |
| Archive through May 23, 2005 | 25 | 05/23 03:56pm |
| By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 07:17 pm: Edit |
Tos,
The CFs were "hot warp" heavy cruisers. See (R12.34) WYN blue Shark fast CF. Before it was finished as a CF it was converted to X tech. The mission did change the technology to achieve it did.
The "hot warp" CLs were the various CWs, instead of speed they had full heavy weapons loads. Later the NCAs were made.
The point I am trying to make is the an XCF would be like the CFs and the XCAs like a regular CA. The CX is in a way (not build quality) the CW/NCA taken to the technology limit of the day (combat oriented). The next level for this type of ship is the XBCHs and XCWs. (my opinion) I think the spade hull shape should be a special mission ship not the shape for the XCA.
The SSDs for a FED BC, CA, and CX are all similar. The minis are similar in appearance also. To some extent this holds for the other races cruisers as well. The spade hull is an unique Federation shape.
The DNL was and is a true battlecruiser. I like the design and concept. I think the XCF could in some sense assume the CF/DNL missions. A faster raider/survey/commando/ship with X2 tech.
| By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 07:37 pm: Edit |
I cannot remember specifically where he wrote this but SVC definded that CF's had a different sort of warp than CW's. CW's have "hot warp" and CF's have Fast Warp. I think the wording in the rules does say Hot Warp in both cases but he since redefined one to differentiate the two.
This might have been discussed in the F&E forums.
| By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 07:52 pm: Edit |
Loren,
I think that fits with "They [CF] were an outgrowth of the same "hot warp" tech that yielded the CWs and DWs." A Fast X Warp would be an interesting experiment.
| By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 09:18 pm: Edit |
Has anyone suggested for X2 a phaser that has its own built-in ECM. In Omega the Quantum Phaser (PQ) has 4 ECM (OE1.252). The PQ-2 range 8-15 does 322111 for damage compared to a PH-1 range 9-15 of 321000 damage. The Quantum phasers trade close-in punch for long-range sniping.
| By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 09:35 pm: Edit |
I think the situation was that we opted for a better firing chart that would give it a greater damage potential and an inharrent increase in hit probability. That is, the Ph-5 chart has better targeting computers built in so there is no added numbers to track.
It is fine for a single weapon for one race to have a built in ECCM but for a weapon that all races will have it would greatly increase the amount of general accounting involved with playing X2. It would also require special rules for those who do not play EW.
| By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 11:07 pm: Edit |
Loren,
No special rule is needed, see (D6.3)... not used under the standard system: Built in EW of units (D6.394). I also mis-stated the PQs have 4 built in ECCM. An Alpha sector phaser with built in ECCM would just be added to that section.
The PQ phasers were used by 3 out of 11 races (plus a few others not mentioned by name). There are six types of phasers (quick count Omega 1). Some are near P-5 levels at ranges 0 and 1, but don't have the mid range punch.
I am suggesting as an option more than one type of X2 phaser. The P5 played with standard rules will be more like a brute force weapon. I think the special bridge would be Commander's Level rules (optional?) as would the ASIF. How many of the X2 advances will be part of the standard rules? This is my opinion and I could be wrong. I am also just trying to further the discussion not be argumentative.
| By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 12:17 am: Edit |
(R2.2) Federation DN: "but during peacetime the dreadnought is usually docked at a starbase because it is too expensive to operate."
I have no reference to suggest that an X1 ship is too expensive to operate, but it seems like a logical conclusion and fits into my theory of the X2 universe. I can’t reference anything that says a B10 or Condor is too expensive either, but it seems logical.
| By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 01:31 am: Edit |
The thing about DN's is that they are fleet command ships designed to head up fleets. Not counting that originally they had not much more fire power than a cruiser their heavy strength isn't needed for peace time roles. Yes, the DN cost more to operate than the cruiser namely because it is larger. Three engines to maintain, a larger crew, six impulse, more weapons, a larger crew etc. And it wouldn't be doing a job that a cruiser couldn't fill. So they were docked until there was a specific need; War.
The X2, IMO, doesn't fall under this pardigm and neither would the X1 cruiser except early on when the support systems are not fully in place. Now, I would be open to the idea that an X1 cruiser is a warship at it's core and would not be as well fitted to peace time duties as it is for war so this is another reason to go to X2.
And I believe that X1 is in fact the mid-progress introduction of X2 technology. The Empires didn't need the technology when it was fully ready, they needed it now. Some things were almost fully worked out and others produced very different systems but are clearly a stepping stone to the X2 version.
Take the Ph-5 and Ph-6. I wanted the Ph-5 to pulse as two Ph-6 because the X1 Ph-1 can pulse as two Ph-3. The Ph-5 system being the real project that produced the X1 Ph-1 back in Y180.
Regarding the B10. It's a heck of a ship but in peace time it would fall under the same lack of worth as the DN. Other ships can handle any mission that it could do short of it's role in war. An funny that it more power role in war is not actual combat but the forces it draws to counter it. The mere presense of a B-10 squadron ties up massive enemy forces and opens up other areas for easier attack by other Klingon forces. Sort of like a Queen in chess. When the queen is out it affects all the opponants moves.
| By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 03:10 am: Edit |
Ramblings:
I've taken to the X1 warp engines as being a sort of advanced "hot warp" in that they were wartime advanced warp engines. In other words they weren't perfected but they were available. X2 rolls out later on and we have the "stabilized" advanced warp engines. These may not generate more power than the X1 engines, but they do have advantages over X1 engines (e.g. more maneuverable, longer strategic legs, combat bursts, etc.).
If you poke around in some of the other threads here you'll see some proposals I've done for "anti-egg-shell" technology as well. My thinking is that although X2 ships may not have the bulk of heavy warships (e.g. DN, BCH) and will crumble under heavy firepower, they can shrug off heavy firepower for a little while. The tradeoff is that their "shrug-off" capabilities whither away in prolonged combat. The more obvious concepts are ASIF and flexible shielding, but I'm also offering up some new gizmos to expand the idea (e.g. CIWS, damage shunting, new EW ideas, etc.).
I'm definitely of the opinion that X2 needs to revert to the classic race "flavors." This translates to running away from cookie-cutterism as fast as possible. This does not necessitate the return to exact copies of pre-GW-but-with-new-gizmos. All the same I think there needs to be recognizability for the players while offering up "new stuff." Where does one define the balance?
Also, although WE know the Xorks are coming some day, the Galactic Powers don't. All the same, they've still got the Andros fresh in their collective skulls. How does one build a force-in-place to deal with "superthreats" without antagonizing one's traditional opponents? Where does one define the balance there?
Are we going to stick with the old notion of DNs (and I'd add BCHs) hanging out in orbit over Organia or are we going to consider another role for them? I suggest cannibalizing wrecked DNs and BCHs to revitalize a handful of post-war heavy warships and use them as the cores of defensive fleets in ravaged area that lost starbases. Keep them away from the frontiers/borders, let them work with National Guard and Police/Security forces in dealing with insurgencies and piracy. Use them until they're worn out. The X-Ships (X1 and X2) can focus on frontier and beyond-frontier missions. Who handles the Andro mop-up? What forces are working the Magellanics and how are they supported from home?
Etc.
| By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Thereplicant) on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 06:26 am: Edit |
Quote:I know there is an attempt to make the X2 ship outlines more interesting and such but I think it fails if there isn't a logical progression.
| By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Thereplicant) on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 03:33 pm: Edit |
By cheap I mean an attempt by some (maybe not every race choose this path) to design a ship that won't be bigger than the X1 ships.
An RL analogue would be the F-16, or the Swedish Gripen fighter.
This doesn't rule out the CAs, but the first X2 ships on the docks could very well be Cls or CMs.
And those ships, like the CAs would save money by eliminating phasers with suboptimal arcs, and increase other with expanded arcs (that is from P6).
A successor to the SPA would not have any phasers in the ph-3 positions, and one extra Fx and RX. Compared to the SPX that would be a reduction by two phasers, but almost the same fire power. More. if the phasers are type Vs.
Saved money would allow for more cool capabilities.
| By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 05:31 pm: Edit |
PPL look at my post in the XP Thread.
If your even remotely interested in more X stuff you better give it a gander.
| By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 11:14 pm: Edit |
Quote:Yes, the DN cost more to operate than the cruiser namely because it is larger. Three engines to maintain, a larger crew, six impulse, more weapons, a larger crew etc. And it wouldn't be doing a job that a cruiser couldn't fill. So they were docked until there was a specific need; War.
| By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Thereplicant) on Wednesday, May 25, 2005 - 06:42 am: Edit |
MJC, I agree that there will be ongoing programs for X-tech (which is a misnomer really).
Still, the focus of those programs will change when the threat change, this would be causing delays. Thats the reason X2 ships won't get into service in time to defeat the Andros.
| By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Monday, May 21, 2007 - 10:39 pm: Edit |
I would like to note that in terms of economic and military power, the ISC are at least as big a player as the Klingons, and would give the Feds a run for their money!
Gary
| Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation |