---

Quote:

Why not allow them a full point of impulse each X2-turn? This would give X2 ships a max speed of 32, and the benefit of being the only ship units able to move on the first impulse of the standard turn. It would also simplify movement calculations. The only real downside that I can see is that they'd be able to pace fast seeking weapons.

---

---

Quote:

I had never considered X2 to be 'X1 mass-produced' but I find myself growing interested in the idea. You really can get vastly different flavors of ships in this manner when the shift is not only towards higher technology but newer *doctrines* to use that technology.

---

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, December 18, 2002 - 09:01 pm: Edit

I agree. X2 doesn't mean more of X1...it's a new paradigm, just as 0X tech would be considered advanced tech compared to EY ships, and 1X ships are to GW era ships. 2X should be more advanced...it's just a question of how much more. Since Supplement 2 is considered persona non grata by ADB, I think it's safe to say that what 2X should be falls bewteen current 1X tech and that proposed in that supplement.

I agree with some parts of the old 2X stuff; namely, no ADD's, 5 point batteries, and the "option" boxes. The weird rules on shield reinforcement were a bit much, and the uber-weapons were certainly too much. Anyone remember the 2X, double-overloaded, capicitor charged disruptors? Yikes!

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, December 18, 2002 - 09:09 pm: Edit

The problem with X2 as a whole new quantum leap is that it is out of character.

EY lasted for HOW long?

MY?

X1 tech gets only 25 lousy years before the next quantum leap? I think 205 for X2 would be a little too quick. X1 has been barely explored. We need to figure out what happens to star fleets when X1 becomes the default tech for new ship construction and play with that for a while.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Wednesday, December 18, 2002 - 09:12 pm: Edit

Not to mention what ever tech that exists in Y210 needs to balanced against the Xorkaliens.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Wednesday, December 18, 2002 - 09:14 pm: Edit

Right now, there are four time periods that are reasonably fleshed out that span 100 years of galactic technology. The fifth column is an extension to the next era of starships.

Era	Early Years	Middle Years	General War	ISC/Andy	X2(?)
Capital ship	YCA D4	CA D7	CCH CVA DN D7W C8	BCH CX SCS C7A	CXX BCHH DNX(?)
Cruiser shields	24/20	30/22	32/28	36/30 40/32	45/36
Alpha scores a kill?	rarely	sometimes	often	very often	...
Hvy Weaps	2 w/o OL	4 w/OL	4-6	4(X)-6	6-8
Phasers	ph-2	some ph-1 and ph-2	ph-1	more ph-1	even more ph-1 or ph-M
Max EW	4	6	6	6-8(w/-1 shift)	10 w/-2 shift
Trans range	3	5	5	5	7?
Tractor range	1	3	3	3	5?

If X2 is an extension of this timeline but we are dispensing with attrition units, I would expect to see a CX2 with the firepower of a BB and the shields of a DN.

To get a feel for just how big a quantum leap can be, fly a duel with the Fed CA (no refits) against a Klink D4. That should be how much a CXX dominates against a BCH or CX.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, December 18, 2002 - 09:18 pm: Edit

John, I know it seems incongruous. But look at how quickly technology advances in the real world. Computer technology changes so quickly that a computer that's new on the shelf today is literally outdated within months, if not weeks. Our military technology has changed more in the past forty years than in the previous 100, resulting in stuff kids in the fifties only saw in comic books. So I can see a sort of technology explosion, resulting in greatly superior ships in a relatively short time. Again, the tough part is balancing them out.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, December 18, 2002 - 10:00 pm: Edit

Well, I don't mind commenting on X2 in general.

First X1 lost the OL Phaser. I really think this should come back as X2. People liked OL phasers.

Another way to redo Torpedoes would be to increase their firing rate(but once only on one impulse). Photons for instance would be able to load two half size torpedoes (4 point norm) and fire two per tube. They become more powerful because you could OL each to 12. Disruptors would have double fire capability too. They would have a new fire chart (to reflect a slightly harder punch..say 20%) and when over loaded would fire a third shot instead of increased damage. PPDs can actually OL each pulse. Plasmas...wheeeelll...that's a tougher one and I'll have to think about that. Maybe give them a splash effect? ESGs...perhaps a redistributable range? Once the field takes/gives damage the range is locked in that position. Drones: ATG standard. No ship has more control circuts than it's sensor rating (but could use it's bridge to control more:see below).

Power: X2 batteries could be four points and average about 10% more boxes on the ships. Impulse power should stay the same. It was the first interstellar drive and would be already developed as far as it would go. Perhaps it could be easier to repair.

Warp: Well, there is a lot of different things you could do. One that I was thinking of while reading this thread was go back to standard size engines and allow doubling. Unlike the Orions, however, it doesn't burn up the engine but would take damage at a doubled rate while being doubled. So a Cruiser doubles one engine (left) for 45 power. It takes four hits to the engines (two on each) during the turn. Six hit would be marked off. Four on the double powered left and two on the standard powered right.

Maneuvering: X2 ships will probably be larger in mass and would require some way to maneuver with the louzy turn modes they would have as a result. I suggest the Impulse Power-assisted Turn (IPT) Allocate double your move cost in impulse to make one 60` turn any time, but not within four impulses after a normal turn. IPT turns must be eight impulses minimum apart. Must be allocated or by reserve impulse. Most ships could do two of these per turn. No break down roll.

Systems: X2 Transporters have a six hex range. Tractor Beams could have a defencive mode, able to generate multiple beams capable of holding units of SC5 or smaller (when in multi-mode, must be announced as such on the first unit held.) I'd start with three beams.

All X2 ships should have multi-mission functionality. As such they could utilize the NWO boxes from HDWs. No special sensors though.

Sensors and Scanners. More durable, add one or more free hit box with no rating (H&R ignore the blank boxes). On X2 ships the Bridge (however many boxes it is) can act as one Special Sensor with all the rules Scout Sensors entail.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Wednesday, December 18, 2002 - 10:21 pm: Edit

This is why we'd like to see a separate X2 thread with subtopics.

To respond to this would make the discussion go all over the place.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, December 18, 2002 - 11:08 pm: Edit

Ya know, I think you are right. Jeff, I agree. I just presented, what, a dozen ideas?

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 12:08 am: Edit

Mike,

I'm well aware of the pace of RW change. If we implemented that pace here, We would have X2 ships by Y100.

The General War drove pace of change to a fever-pitch, giving us GW-grade tech and X-cruisers. The ISC Pacification Campaign saw X-ships expand into X-squadrons which saw action against the ISC and Andros.

The post-Andro universe ought to see a slower pace of change because, for the first time in about 30 years, relative peace has returned.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 03:07 am: Edit

J.T.:


Not really.

The Jet Engine was invented in 1930!
It was never deployed in a combat aircraft until 1944 simply because when the proposition was first put forward ( 12 years after the war to end all wars had ended ) the was no justification to put Jet Engines on a craft, spend 12 times as much fuel, get out 8 times the power and hence travel twice as fast.

Oh the other hand, the speed of sound was broken in 1947.
You'ld think in peace time no one would be willing to justify the mony to research FASTER AIRCRAFT...but since the Governments are in a THEY HAD A WAR WITH US ONCE, WHAT'S TO STOP THEM HAVING ANOTHER ONE WITH US mentality...the funding gets supplied...and with the bucks so too come the Buck Rogers.


In the 5 years or there about, depending on the culture, after a war, will be a prepairation for war mentality within the government and the society as a whole.
It's very easy for stuff that positively isn't needed for the war effort ( on account of there being no current war ) being developed in the few years following the war. Consider the USSR and her A-bomb ( in 1950? or was it '48 ) and Truman needed to fund the H-bomb to keep the lead. Why did the Russians build the A-bomb...because they wanted to wage war with the US!?!...because they wanted to defend themselves against any future German invasion!?!...because they were already 70% along the way and not going to completion would be bad finance!?!

If you then couple with it with the fact that; your best minds arn't being slaughtered on the battle fields or executed as spys ( they're usually pretty bright ) or being shot as a national security risk ( it's much better to just tripple some guys pay and squeeze the inventions out of him than to shoot him because of the possibility that he might be looking the other way )...And the fact that you've got millions of $$$ to throw at stuff ( your not going to build any more battleships in the forseeable future )...And coupled with the raw resoarces that you now have availible ( think of all they miners who can mine Uranium now, who would have been deployed mining Iron ore ).
...And you do get a post war spirt of massive technological advancement.

All in all, it would be very easy for X1 to be over taken by X2 in a matter of 20 years...or even 15.


As to the Fed CA Vs the Klingon D4.

That is exactly where the balance between a CX and CX2 should be...that unbalanced.

By David Kass (Dkass) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 03:27 am: Edit

The problem is that IMHO, the fundamental SFB game paradigm is starting to break down with X1 strength ships. Thus the need to reduce their firepower to keep them fun (for the majority of players). I suspect that anything that is a simple extrapolation from X1 will result in X2 being unfun (at least for the majority of players).

Just taking the current systems and scaling them up is unlikely to result in a fun game. X1 ships are already at the point where maneuver is almost unnecessary. The game needs to open up a completely new set of tactics for X2 to be interesting (just like Y era did). But it cannot change the scale of the game in any way so that it remains "backward" compatible with all the rest of SFB.

Really, for this discussion to be useful, we need some guidance on timeframe, approach and overall history.

By Mike Dowd (Mike_Dowd) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 04:51 am: Edit

My observation on the GW era to X1 era technology changes shows that while overall firepower and available reserve energy increased by a large margin, actual power generation and damage absorption capabilities increased only marginaly.

I feel that X2 should attempt to bring things back into balance, emphasizing defense, damage reduction and EW.

I don't have any specifics in mind, but alot of good points have been made by previous posters like Tos and Loren.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 06:47 am: Edit

I'm just wondering what people are basing some of their posts on!?!

The revised X rules or the old OVERLOADED PHASER X rules?

People who say "Move to R5 and hose is the only tactic" are living under an old paradymn.


Now...the Y rules didn't create new tactics, but rather they created a different identity for the vessels.
Basically everyone became Klingon...except the Klingons who became even more so except the few that became Hydran.
By this I mean, making battle passes against the target that are not expected to break the sheilds and thus their needed to MOVEMENT enough to make the attack and leave before the otherguy retaliated.

Remember that a YCA's Photons will do at R8, just 8 points of damage on average and a CA's will do 32 ( assuming the CA did overload on account of the fact that IT CAN ).

But is "I run because I have nothing to power and I shoot standards everytime I have them availible" really a tactic or is it just ACTIVITY?
Is a 9 turn battle really that much more interesting than a 4 turn battle?

There are only two basic tactics in Y.
1) Kill the enemy by over run ( Kzinti and anybody with more Phasers than the enemy ( Klingons ).
2) DANCE.
SO you either get two dancers ( so called apllication of tactics ) or you get one dancer and one over-runner ( again creating so called tactics ) or you get two Over-runners, which apparently isn't tactics.


So really what X2 REALLY NEEDS is Racial Flavour.


Hey here's an idea...
Staggered Overloaded Phasers.
Some overloaded phaser do 1.25 times normal damage out to R15.
Some do 1.5 times noraml damage out to R8.
Some do 1.75 times normal damage out to R5.
Some do 2 times normal damage out to R3.
Each race can get their overloaded phaser to fire in atleast TWO of the above varriations.

I might also allow power to be drawn from the caps to power up sheild reinforcement.

Anyway...the net result is that the ships don't just move to overload range of eachother and pound.
But rather players choose...will I go to a closer range because I know the enemy won't fire until range X!?!
Will I fire at range and leave knowing that I can compound what damage I did at a latter stage!?!
Will I forgo Heavies and commit to the over-run ( works better with the special caps rule )!?!

And from this basic selection of battle plans, we generate TACTICS.

And with Two overload methodologies the Captains can quickly change from a closer range atttack to a longer range attack if it seems like the enemy is going to dance.


I wonder if the different attack methods should have alternate energy cost for firing under overload?

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Eagle) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 08:34 am: Edit

I suggest we temporaly shelve ideas on "Increased combat power" (another discusion on overloaded phasers? BORING!) and concentrate on racial differences and new ideas. In some cases it's easy. I have suggested some changes for the cloak (partial cloaking for less cost) for example. Perfect for the Roms. (But the Orions should not have this tech I think) Racial flavour, new tactics in one package.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 09:09 am: Edit

I agree. X2 for some races may be similar sized ships, with more advanced abilities to enhance what they already have. A better cloak for the roms, better drones for the Kzin, better maneuverability and firepower for the Klingons, larger, more powerful ships for the Feds. Different avenues, different outcomes and tactics.

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Eagle) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 09:15 am: Edit

I have created sub-topics (or what you call it)
for these discusions.
They are not precise, but just three groups losely based on the usual partitioning of the SFB universe (more groups can be added). The idea is that tech advances and history is greatly influenced by the neighbouring races. And by using geography as a limiting factor we can perhaps get away from the generic ships of X1.
The Roms for example care little for what the Kzinti does, and this would be reflected in their ship designs.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 09:36 am: Edit

While I wholeheartedly support racial diversity it may be a bit premature to start break out discussions until we settle on the order of magnitude of the change. It is a natural process to simply bolt on new technologies and capabilities but my fear is left unchecked this may reduce the playability of the game. Without bounds we will be inundated with radical but unworkable ideas (of course my Klingon will be able to use his SFG while moving under cloak in X2, the stasis field will just create zero energy stasis bubbles that effect everything in the hex).

What we need to do first is settle on how much of a change we want X2 to be. The various proposals I have heard so far break down into three categories:

1) X2 should be evolutionary changes to X1.
2) X2 should be revolutionary changes to X1.
3) X1 tech is too difficult to maintain and too cost inefficient to mass-produce so X2 should be slightly less than X1.

By BPV these break down to X1 + 15%, X1 + 50% and X1 - 10%.

Once we settle on the order of magnitude, without breaking the game, we can work within a bounded racial framework.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 09:42 am: Edit

Well said. My vote (not that it counts) would be for option 1. Option 2 is likely to break the game, and option 3 frankly isn't 2X. By definition, we're talking about more advanced technology, not less. I can see including something like that as a way to produce cheaper, more effective and slightly advanced designs, but real 2X has to be better than 1X. Just my opinion.

By Ryan Peck (Trex) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 09:56 am: Edit

None of this matters. I agree with both MJC and Carl on the same day. The world is ending soon.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 12:11 pm: Edit

"option 3 frankly isn't 2X."

That is the key statement I'm trying to clear up. Are we working on a new game design (2X) using advanced technology largely incompatible with GW/X1 or are we working on an expansion (X1+) that is compatible with GW/X1. Answer carefully because if we do 2X we will never be able to slot X1+ into the timeline.

By Jay Paulson (Etjake) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 12:51 pm: Edit

Number 3 should only be a campaign consideration. BPV is supposed to be a close as possible to an even battle. It should NEVER be set up to be intentionally unbalanced, which is what your #3 post seems to imply. Even a reduced EPV shouldn't apply to a new class of ships, but would more likely be to all ships.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 01:16 pm: Edit

#3 implies a pullback from "bleeding edge" technology in order to make something mass-producable. It has nothing to do with misrepresenting BPVs.

If the ADB hadn't ratcheted X1-tech back a notch, I could see there being enough room to do a kind of X1- tech for mass-production. X1 tech ships in fact *were* misrepresented as too low for the combat power they had. I don't think that's true anymore. But back to X1- ships.

With GW-tech BCHs in the 180s with a handful of cruisers at or above 200, there isn't much point in doing a 200-point less-than-X1 cruiser from a game standpoint.

I'm with Mike R. in wanting to focus on a X1+ universe, not go into X2 as another revolution in power and capability. Not till about Y230-250 anyway.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 01:17 pm: Edit

SFB in what ever form it takes must challange the skill of the players. When X1 ships were designed the addressed many of the problems that plegued the GW ships. With an X1 ship (revised version accounted for) you have the defensive and offensive ability to go in a accomplish your mission. But the mission parameters are narrow. Wage battle in the short run and win. Survive to be repaired and fight another day.

That pardigm breaks down when you pit X1 against X1. Battles become longer or end quickly with major loss to both sides. This is the field which the Empires are studying. They need ships that are forgiving and durable. With a broder roll. A flexable device for the Admirals to wield.

The core of the concept I posted above was the Torpedo. It has and should continue to be the meat portion of the plate. The new concept was an opening of tactical diversity. By reducing the torpedo size and increasing the number of shots, and allowing OL to about 75% you gain greater output damage but must plan you attack over time. This reduces your one impulse crunch power but increases your per turn output. It also diverges the style of the two major weapons, the Photon and the Disruptor.

The Fed fires his spread of photons. The Klingon answers. They both have deterant level firepower at their disposal. The Fed has a greater crunch level but after he fires again, and if the Klingon has OL, the Klingon has yet another round.

I worked out what to do about the Plasma. It is very simple but would change tachtics wildly. Arm any type (G through R) as a Shotgun. X2 will allow each resulting Pl-F to be fired...Bolted. One per impulse, same or different target(s). (That is what I should have presented to SVC as the Plasma Gatling. In fact, I think I'll sent him a note.)

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, December 19, 2002 - 01:36 pm: Edit

I posted that incomplete because I got interruted and didn't want to loose it.

I would like to address the power issue. IMO if you design big giant major power producing engines you get something that is expencive and difficult to maintain. And unwieldly as well. The X1 enginge produce more power and can take more damage. That all well and good but when it came time to increase their power out put, engineers were faced with engines the size of a Gorn DN for a cruiser class ship. It just wasn't going to work. Design peradigm had to change. One clue was what the Orions had been doing for the last centry but burning up the engines wasn't acceptable. And improved design would be needed.

In game term the design I present is focused on providing power needed for maneuver and weapons and DEFENSE. With multi-firing weapons defencive scenes are vital. This is what batterys have been getting used for forever. A regenerative shield is still technacally beyond science as is a Power Absorber. But in a way there has always been a regenerative shield: Shield reenforcement. The ship designs elaborat on this old ability.

I would like to note that there ways to exploit minor weakness's in my X2 designs by X1 and GW era ships. I would be very dificult the further back you go, but these X2 designs would be most efficiant fighting other X2 ships.

One other thing I didn't address. Hull size (in actual Hull boxes) should be 25% to 50%. Play testing refining the final %.

OK lastly, there are other thoughts but I'm not feeling well, so I will commence another time.