Should a CXX be:

As powerful against a BCH as a CA can beat a D4?

A little more powerful than a CX/BCH?

A little less powerful, but more standardized than a CX?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Saturday, December 21, 2002 - 02:15 am: Edit

Better defenses and some way to maneuver better. Should be able to be multi mission and fight the long haul battles.

I believe that in X2 years large fleet engagements will be rare. These ships will have to stand on their own and big battles will be squadrons. So, tactically, these ships need to be flexable.

Multi firing torpedos give you an alpha strike and a deterent strike.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, December 21, 2002 - 07:01 am: Edit

A CXX should be as powerful as a DNX...period.
Just different to a DNX.

Like a CX is currently about equal to a DN...but opperated differently.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Saturday, December 21, 2002 - 01:42 pm: Edit

MJC,

People have three differing ideas of what X2 should be.

1) Another quantum leap in power
2) Improvements and extensions of X1, including more diverse ship classes.
3) Scaled-back, slightly less than X1 "production ships."

Clearly, you're thinking along the lines of 1).

Me, I go for 2), where a DNX would *be* a possible X2 ship.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Saturday, December 21, 2002 - 01:49 pm: Edit

Very succint, John. MJC, why not join the conversation in the first 2X thread? We've gotten a pretty good discussion going that's addressing this idea of which way to go. Any rational, constructive input will help.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Saturday, December 21, 2002 - 04:01 pm: Edit

A different space combat game has a rule for "common", "uncommon" and "rare" varients.
Each ship in that game is classified as being one of the three.
Basically, for every 3 ships, no more than 1 can be uncommon, while for every 9 ships, no more than 1 can be rare (and would also count as uncommon in its group of 3)

Would the CXX be a "common" ship, i.e. the basic run-of-the-mill cruiser just as the CA/D7 is now?

Or would it be an "uncommon" or "rare" ship, meaning that a majority of shipyards are still building CA/D7 or CX/DX ships?

Or would there be some "transition" period where for a couple of years the CXX is a "rare" ship, a couple more years where it's "uncommon" and then "common" from then on?

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Saturday, December 21, 2002 - 06:06 pm: Edit

No discussion about X2 and BPV can be relevant without a time frame. I've done a fair bit of analysis, which I will spare you from for now, and simply mention that besides X1 and HDWs practically all new class development stopped in Y177.

This presents a great void between Y178 and Y204 ripe for class expansion.

Taking from John’s list we need not pick from it. All tech levels are valid, it is only up to us to determine what time period they are valid for and how they fit into the history.

For purposes of making this easier to understand allow me to invert John’s list:
1) Scaled-back, slightly less than X1 "production ships."
2) Improvements and extensions of X1, including more diverse ship classes.
3) Another quantum leap in power

Here is the timeline problem: the GW ends in Y186, the ISC invade Y186-188, the Andros invade from Y188 to Y202. Scenarios are already written for these events, most notably operation unity, and they use standard X0 and X1 tech. Radically increasing tech levels pre-Y200 will put the poor Andros at a severe disadvantage.

X1 mentions that a new generation of more powerful ships, a new class of construction rather than a refit, debuts in Y205. Y205+ can be period 2.

That leaves period 1 ending around Y204, right after the Andros buy it. But when does it start and what does it look like?

Period 3 with true uberships is stuck in Y225+.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, December 21, 2002 - 08:34 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

1) Another quantum leap in power (X2)
2) Improvements and extensions of X1, including more diverse ship classes. (X1+)
3) Scaled-back, slightly less than X1 "production ships." (X1-)

---

---

Quote:

Or would there be some "transition" period where for a couple of years the CXX is a "rare" ship, a couple more years where it's "uncommon" and then "common" from then on?

---

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Saturday, December 21, 2002 - 08:47 pm: Edit

Hmmm. Interesting point.

Y175 - NCA invented because most races predict that almost none of the standard CAs will survive the war.

Y181 - CX invented.

Y186-188 - ISC war. Since the ISC have taken the border areas without moving deep and invading territory, the galactics get a chance to rebuild some of their fleets.

Y188-202 - Andy War.

X1 has a problem in that it requires upgrading bases to X1 tehnology in order to efficiently make repairs.

Shipyard size	small	medium	large
Y167	DD	CA	DN
Y170	NCL	CA	DN+
Y175	NCA	CCH	DNG/CVA
Y178	NCA	BCH	DNH/CVA
Y181	NCA	CX/BCH	DNG/SCS
Y183	DDX	CX	CX & FFX
Y186	DDX	CX	CX & FFX
Y195
Y202
Y205

Tos, perhaps what you're refering to by Y225+ should be classified X3.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Saturday, December 21, 2002 - 08:55 pm: Edit

Another point I'd like to bring up is that some of the X2 innovations should make the ship cheaper. This wouldn't be noticed on the battlefield, but would be noticed in a campaign that tracks economics in a campaign.

A generic cruiser costs somewhere between 100-200 BPV.
A generic DN costs somewhere between 200-275 BPV.
A generic BB costs about 350-400 points.

In a strategic sence, if your race has the capability to build CXX ships, they should cost a little more, but have a lot more firepower. I propose the BPV of a CXX fall somewhere in the BB range, while the cost fall in the high end of the cruiser range. 350/175.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Saturday, December 21, 2002 - 09:19 pm: Edit

I would like to clear up something where either I'm confused or others are confused.

I don't believe there is a ModuleX0. X0 could refer to the refitted cruisers to X-tech. but then X0 and X1 appear in the same module. Usually reference to X1 is for First Generation X-tech.

X2 would the second X Module but would actually refer to Second Generation X-Tech.

In the rules it refers to the fact that it is assumed that there is a X3 but that belongs to the Next Generation and not in the scope of the SFU. Note: That was the gist of it not a quote.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Saturday, December 21, 2002 - 09:31 pm: Edit

Loren, some folks (me included) use the term "0X" to refer to the basic rules of the game. Just a neat lable for it, that's all. I don't beleive it's official or anything, but it's a handy way to refer to it.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Saturday, December 21, 2002 - 09:33 pm: Edit

Tos: The reason ship development stalled out after 176. Is what new classes are needed? Other than PFT's and BCH's (and variants). There isn't anything left to build.

Most every type of ship. Has already been put on the construction schedule. Or has already ben supeseceded by a later class.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, December 21, 2002 - 09:34 pm: Edit

Yes.


There's a bunch of people who want an R section and SSD book as X2.

So they can have their BCJX, BCGX (BCHX for everyone else ), BCX ( CCHX for everyone else ), NCLX, NCAX, CLX, CMCX, CLHX, NSCX , DNX, DNGX, CVAX, CVBX and everyone's favourite AxCVLX.

We need to find a new name for this XA, XB, XR...but we mustn't call it X2.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Saturday, December 21, 2002 - 10:25 pm: Edit

MJC,

What you're descibing would simply be the second X2 module to be published. Once we have the basic cruisers down, then maybe we can get to the rest.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 12:27 am: Edit

Its not about module name, its about timelines.

What room for expansion exists from Y180-204?

Can be only minor improvements or it breaks the ISC and Andro wars.


What do the new class of ships look like in the Y205-224 era?

Wide open field to play with. The existing rules simply states that these are more powerful ships built on all new hull classes. I'd like to see these new hulls capable of combat at warp 3.5.


Is there another tech increase around Y225+?


MJC: "But I thought everyone else was on the same page."

Nothing could be further from the truth and we need to get on the same page (or decide to work independently on different pages) before we can make any meaningful progress.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 12:49 am: Edit

LK: X0 is analogous to the GW era ships to me. Figure your average Y175 ship.

LK: X2 is the second X module published. It is unclear at this point what time period it covers. Some favor the path module Y takes, all module in the series in the same time period. Other favor X2 as a completely new tech set after Y205.

MJC: “I want to see X1- as much as the next guy and X1+ might be cool [but] X2 tech ( even if not labled as the X2 module ) must be the first idea.”
Odd, I would have felt quite the opposite. Build the earliest first and expand toward the later years. Less likely to box yourself into a corner that way.

KJ: “The reason ship development stalled out after 176. Is what new classes are needed?”
Ships, presumably, are built for a purpose, in this case to fight a particular threat. The ISC invasion (Y186-188) would have encouraged the races to find some way to challenge the range of the PPD and forces the western races to realize their ADDs and ESGs don’t help much against plasmas. The Andro wars are much longer (Y188-202) and provide much more incentive to develop new technology (those ADDs are even less useful against an Andro). Necessity is the mother of invention and there was plenty of necessity to go around.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 01:19 am: Edit

MJC: Having reviewed the rest of the ‘X2’ labeled topics it does indeed appear that the majority of the topics are referring to an era of new tech. What year is proposed and how it fits into the history is not clear but there is a lot of raw creativity and brainstorming going on. I’m still not convinced that calling it all ‘X2’ is wise, but I can go with the flow.

BTW: I'm in the Module X2 is mearly more ships available between Y180-204 camp and second generation X-tech is a new gaming system that deserves its own letter, not unlike Module Y.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 01:21 am: Edit

But the ISC wars lasted for only 3 years. By the time a new ship class is designed specifically to fight the ISC, it's facing Andys.

I definately agree that there's room for expanding the ship classes between Y186-202. Perhaps upgrading half of the ships of each varient to X1 tech.

"Module R1X, the Andromedan War".
Includes refits and varients for X1 ships.

Y181-185, general combat units produced.
Y188-189, X1 ships refited to optimize against the ISC. (No more than 1/3 of the ships produced are X1, the rest are X0)
Y190-202, X1 varients are produced. (2/3 of the ships are X1, the rest are X0)
Y203, first X2 ship is produced. (90% of production is X1, 5% is X2, 5% is X0)

Maybe we have different definitions, but I'm refering to X2 as the next quantum leap beyond X1, regardless of what year it's in.

My preference would be to have the first X2 ship roll out around Y203, after the Andys start declining, but before the Andy war ends. Not every ship that chased down a RTN link was the Super Space Control Ship, after all.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 01:44 am: Edit

I've moved the talk of timelines and definitions to its own thread (X2 Timeline) and adopted what seems to be the most prevelent definitions.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 01:48 am: Edit

Jeff: Somewhere I heard that X1 ships never made up more than 10% of a races fleet due to the need to crew them with outstanding crews to maintain the bleeding edge tech. That's where X1- tech fits in, a way to gain some of the advantages of X-tech with an average crew.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 01:54 am: Edit

I will try to find the exact place where it says in the rules that X2 is a Second Generation of X-Ships. Bigger and more powerful.

If there is a desire to expand on the current Module-X then I think that cool and it should be called Module X1A.

I say that given what has been published in the rules and Captains Logs.

I have never heard of X1A before but that would be cool, and probably should be done before X2.

So...The discussion has been mostly about bigger, faster, more powerful ships than X1. That says to me that we've been talking X2.

Maybe there should be a thread about X1A. More X-Ships. Perhaps some partial X tech. ships (though I think that may have been rejected already). Maybe a modest increase in technology. Set it up as a foundation preceding X2.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 02:30 am: Edit

The relevant official references of 'what is X2' are on pages 2 and 15 of X1. They are quite non-committal in defining X2.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 10:33 am: Edit

I'll rephrase what I said earlier to avoid confussion.


If X1A is to be an X1- then one need not worry about what it is now, and we can freely skip on to X2.

If X1A is to be X1+ then we should work with that before we jump "boots and all" into X2.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 01:02 pm: Edit

X1A is probably an expanded stable of First Generation X ships.

And for marketing purposes it will probably be labeled X2.