| By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Thursday, September 18, 2008 - 08:25 pm: Edit |
Loren, an ECM drone costs the same as an explosive drone. You get explosive drones for free. There is no cost to convert your explosive drone to an ECM drone. Shorthand: ECM drones are free.
The Kzinti can still win, but not while saber dancing at range 15. They have to close with a well executed drone wave on a closed map. If you would like to contiue this discussion then might I suggest we move to the Kzinti tactics board and ask there how two CM would conspire to beat a DX on an open or large map?
John, that's 24 Ph-3 backed by X-Aegis. IMO X1 ships have excessive drone defense.
| By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, September 18, 2008 - 09:12 pm: Edit |
Tos, I never said they would win just saber dancing. I said they would have to saber dance FIRST. And launching drones while doing that saber dance would be just a waste, thus they hold them until later.
| By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Thursday, September 18, 2008 - 11:00 pm: Edit |
Every turn the Kzinti saber dance is a turn they take more damage than they dish out. Give me some Ph-5 with a -1 to hit and they take significantly more damage every turn they saber dance.
If nothing else this example illustrates just how difficult it is going to be to create a balance between X2 and GW.
For one, at 266 BPV the X2 ship needs to have fewer HW and fewer phasers than a DX. Lets ignore if this is a XD7, XD5 or XFDW.
It would be great to reduce the EW advantage or at least the -1, but I can't see that happening. Between 8 EW and the -1 to hit GW ships will find themselves unable to compete in the saber dance, an argument I lost with the publication of X1R.
We haven't discussed this yet, but if X2 gets a -1 to hit, which should be reliably easy, you do 4-4-3-2-2-1 or 2.66 average damage per Ph-5. 4xDisr + 6xPh-5 @ R=15 -1 to hit does an average of 26 damage a turn. That will crush a shield every turn. If I divert two Ph-5 to kill your ECM drone then I still do 20.66 damage every turn. A pair of Kzinti firing through a 2 shift with 6 disruptors do 6 damage a turn. The the X2 ship can maintain the range and plays the EW game well it will be no contest.
To give the Kzinti a chance the Klingon will need to be designed vulnerable to drones; a practical impossibility on an open map. The Ph-5 should loose the ability to rapid pulse.
We will have to slow the X2 ship down. Less power than an equivilent MC X1 ship to start. The Ph-5 should cost 2 power (more?) to fire (still 2.66:1 at range 15 with a -1 to hit, which is awesome).
I don't know that X2 can be dumbed down enough to make it a fair match against a pair of Kzinti CMs on a 2x2 map.
| By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, September 19, 2008 - 12:11 am: Edit |
Tos, I think first you should compare two Kzinti CM vs. and X1 CX, just to see how much X2 will actually have to play nice with X0. I don't see why X2 will have to play nicer than X1 with X0.
The Kzinti may take more than they dish out but they can spread that damage among several shields. Yes, the X2 ship can too but it will be harder if the two Kzinti are conducting a fighting retreat for the first hald of the battle.
I'm not saying it's easy, it's not. I'm saying it's possible. There are still MANY unknowns about the ship the Kzinti are fighting in that battle.
| By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, September 19, 2008 - 12:48 am: Edit |
By CX do you mean DX? I don't think its a good idea to compare against non-historical opponents, at least not first.
My position is that X2 BPV needs to accurately reflect combat with GW era ships. If it turns out that X1 BPV is wrong (shocking) and a DX (250) really does have an 80-20 advantage against a pair of Kzinti CM (266), then it would appear that there is a BPV error unrelated to X2.
I do understand that it may be impossible to create a ship that is both balanced against a pair of Kzinti CMs and a single Fed CX without forcing an overhaul of the whole system.
If we can't find a way to balance X2 against a pair of GW then we might as well stop here. One thing that might help is to only warranty X2 BPV on a fixed map. IMO a floating map gives a very large advantage to an X ship due to its ability to seperate and recharge bats, phasers and heavy weapons before closing (against one less GW ship).
| By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, September 19, 2008 - 11:09 am: Edit |
I meant CAX, and X1 cruiser. Who are the historical opponants of the Trade Wars, which is when these two ship will be fighting. They will then be fighting together against the new enemy.
A fixed map would bennefit plasma opponants more than others. People playing fighters will complain, etc.
I have wondered about a general discount for X0 after a certain year (like Y205). This sounds like it might be a difficult thing to practically manage.
| By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, September 19, 2008 - 01:55 pm: Edit |
The X2 ships are designed during the Andro War. Early X2 designs would have been focused first on defeating Andros (more Ph-5, less drone defense) and reconstruction. When the ink dried the Trade Wars hadn’t started and the neutral zones too wide to contemplate an invasion. I’m not sure where this leads yet, but those are the facts as I understand them. To be on topic, I don't see any R&D going into a Ph-6, which won't help against an Andro.
| By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, September 19, 2008 - 03:43 pm: Edit |
Tos, you're missing on important fact. SVC said that all of the races remained at an uneasy peace. X2 ships would be designed with the idea of fighting another war with local empires in mind.
Also, the Ph-6 in any of the itterations proposed would be useful against Andromedan MWP's.
| Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation |