Out of the blue I was inspired with a new idea for X2 warp, so here it is. I've post a couple ideas but I think this one is my best so far. It addresses the over powering of X2 ships problem. X1 ships have tons of power and with the idea that X2 ships may have fewer but slightly better weapons the power curve of an X1 ship is pleanty. BUT THEN, an X2 ship should be an improvement over X1.
Of course, one of the problems with X1 is that they are expensive ships and costly to maintain. I still believe that X2 was the final stage of X-Technology and that X1 was the war implementation of that "still in development" technology.

Further, X1 had big warp engine producing big power on a ship that didn't need all that power for non-combat operations. But X1 was developed for combat. There was a war going on and these ships were expected to do battle ASAP after leaving the ship yard.

X2, it seems and was widely agreed on early what these X files started, is something of a peace time fleet. Oh, no one is really expecting peace to last but everyone is hoping for it for a while at least. The X2 fleet, I expect, is going to be the new long term mainline fleet. This means a measure of economy.

So...
------------------
X2 Warp.

A standard cruiser engine would have 20 warp just like X1 except the top row of 4 boxes is shaded. These are the auxilliary warp boxes. Normally they are inactive and can be activated anytime (takes one turn). Normally when faced with combat, unless surprised, these can be activated on turn #1 under any weapons status.

Auxilliary Warp boxes normally produce one point of warp power. However, they can be doubled. If doubled on one turn, they produce no power th following turn. Aux Warp takes one turn to shut down during which it produces no power. This can be during the same turn inwhich it is not producing power because of a previous doubling. Doubling can be one or more Aux Warp boxes at the player wish. Once doubled, place a dot in that box. Doubling of Aux Warp boxes can only occure during energy allocation.

Active Aux Warp must be the fifth warp box destroyed. That is, for every four warp boxes damaged, an active Aux Warp box must be destroyed next.

Inactive Aux Warp cannot be destroyed except for hits on "Any Warp Engine" and "Excess Damage" on the DAC. Aux Warp in the state of being activated or inactivated can be hit on regular warp engine hits.

REPAIR: I'd say Aux Warp boxes cost 50% more to repair and can't be repaired as normal warp because they are just different systems.

--------------------
The economy part of these warp engines are that the cruiser engine is normally a 16 point engine and the auxilliary warp part remains inactive for most of the ships duties. But where there is danger the ship can activate this extra warp and have the full power of a X1 war ship (and more at times of need through Aux Warp doubling).

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Saturday, December 18, 2010 - 10:46 pm: Edit

Obviously, this same technology would be scaled down to smaller engines on smaller ships. Basically, take something near what the X1 ship has in extra warp and make it Aux Warp.

By Terry O'Carroll (Terryoc) on Saturday, December 18, 2010 - 11:29 pm: Edit

Not a fan of it.

If you don't need the extra power from an engine, you simply don't generate it. The rules already cover that. This rule seems excessively complex to me. I also don't understand why a more advanced technology (X2) ship would be less capable than an X1 ship. If the X2 ships are a "peacetime" fleet then they'd likely be less optimised for combat than X1 ships, but still have the engines of X1 ships. Extra speed is always good.

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Hardcore) on Sunday, December 19, 2010 - 12:40 am: Edit

It is not the new ideas that are the problem, but that they build on the flawed X1. In this case it would have been far better if the X1 ships had a mere modest warp power increase, like 36 boxes, which would have allowed for 40 pts in X2.

Loren, this is adding a new rule that add complexity for little gain other than try overcome basics flaws in X1. Sry.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, December 19, 2010 - 02:33 am: Edit

Yes, but X1 is what it is and it isn't going to change so that's an entirely moot point.

It is true that you don't generate power you don't need but you still have a big engine that needs maintaining. This system has a main engine that runs all the time and is simpler to maintain while the aux warp is only maintained as it is used.

There were LONG discussions about X2 power curves. Some said X1 power was too much. Other argued that X2, being more advanced, should naturally generate more power. Others still argued that more power make X2 munchkin.

This is meant to address ALL those issues. It really isn't very complex. ESGs, Web, overloads, HETs, speed plots, shuttle launch and landing, etc., etc., are all more complex.

But hey, just tossing out another idea. The thing is that X2 needs to be dynamically different from X0 and X1 but still play nice. I think this might do that. Maybe not.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, December 19, 2010 - 02:49 am: Edit

Orion engine doubling isn't too complex for SFB either, but maybe that is a reason against this since it is a little like that. Is it tech sloshing? I thought it was different enough since you have to pay for your extra power the following turn (you are sort of borrowing future power rather than generating extra power you can keep). How it actually would work is that is does double output but has to cool or fail.

There are a few tactical uses for deactivating the aux warp too, that I thought were interesting. It could be used as a way to preserve your warp energy for after an unavoidable beating. It may be that I'd have to remove the one turn deactivation restriction for this to be practical (the one turn activation being enough delay to prevent abuse?).

By Mike Strain (Evilmike) on Sunday, December 19, 2010 - 08:24 am: Edit

One could say that the X2 'peacetime' ships have a lower power curve (ie, warp engines that produce less power than the X1 ships) simply as a cost-saving feature.

After all, if you have the X2 weapons and defenses, you don't necessarily NEED the over-hyped X1 warp engines from the General/Andro War. 95% of the time you aren't in combat, so the maintenance savings over the old overpowered X1 engines are significant.

What could be done is make the X2 weapons/tech less power hungry than the X1 weapons/tech. In short, they are a 'mature' form of the tech that was tested (mainly in combat) on the X1 platforms.

So, using Mike Rapers' X2 example (one of the best IMO), a phaser-5 (X2 p-1 equivelant) still costs only one point of power to fire, but is significantly better than a p-1. Instead of 'free' EW points, simply have X2 EW cost HALF the power to generate (ie, to get 6 EW points, an X2 ship spends only 3 power units).

X2 ships could have 4-point batteries (instead of 3-point X1 batteries), giving them more reserve power (but not as good as the Andro's, obviously). I could go on, but people have discussed this ad nauseam/in length before.

Personally, I don't think we'll ever see X2 published. More chance of them publishing The Sublight Game (Mod Q) than X2, I think. Easier to do, less stress.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Sunday, December 19, 2010 - 02:16 pm: Edit

There's no reason that X2 warp engines have to be superior to X1 warp engines. Personally, I would juat as soon have X2 engines be about the same as there X1 counterparts. The technological improvements were made elsewhere. Or as an alternative, maybe the X2 engines performed about the same as X1 engines at the tactical/SFB level but had strategic advantages. Most warships have a speed of 6 in F&E. "Fast" ships (light dreadnoughts, fast cruisers, X-ships) have an F&E speed of 7 and also have advantages in thinks like pinning and withdrawing from combat. If X2 ships had an F&E speed of 8 and further improvements in pincount and so on (assuming hypothetically that F&E ever gets expanded to the X2 era) it would demonstrate technological improvrment while avoiding potentially dangerous SFB balance issues resulting from super-high-powered engines in the tactical arena.

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Hardcore) on Sunday, December 19, 2010 - 07:26 pm: Edit

They could perhaps take damage better; like every third warp hit onn the DAC is ignored.
But still, I don't expect X2 to happen as long as X1 exist.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, December 19, 2010 - 10:00 pm: Edit

Personally, if X2 maneuvers the same and warp is the same as X1 I'd find that a bit boring.

X2 really needs, IMHO, a different dynamic but as the many hundreds of past posts on X2 show, getting that dynamic and keeping balance is one tough thing.

A lot of discussion was about power levels. 25 point warp engines were what Supp 2 had and that was generally considered too much (although some said that if the BPV matches then nothing is too much... except the BPV system struggles with BPVs that high).

This, I though, gave near that power but only in a very limited way. This engine system could, if any player wanted, just run exactly the same as X1. Check the rules I posted up top. You could just ignor doubling, ignor activation and deactivation, and just let each Aux Warp box happilly produce 1 warp point per turn. This rule set only presents additional options. It's really not complex at all.

By Jonathan Biggar (Jonb) on Monday, December 20, 2010 - 02:06 pm: Edit

Possibility for X2 warp: Introduce powered repair for warp boxes. Pay 4 (adjust amount for play balance) warp in EA to repair one damaged warp box, which is repaired at the end of the turn. A ship may only repair a number of warp boxes equal to its initial damage control rating per scenario.

This gives X2 warp a robustness advantage to recover from light damage compared to X1 warp, but isn't an overwhelming improvement.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, December 20, 2010 - 02:37 pm: Edit

Some semi-random thoughts.

I have a problem with the basic idea that "it's peacetime so new warships don't need as much..." Warships are built to be as mean and nasty as possible in order to deter war if the empire is weak or intimidate a weak opponent if strong. If an Empire can't afford as many super-cruisers as they want, they build fewer of them.

I like the idea of engines that have "free" or ignored damage hits because it gives X2 some much-needed durability in the face of incoming damage. This cuts back to the ASIF concepts we've kicked around.

I like the idea of a warp auto-repair system. It lends durability, though it encourages a ship to play for time and avoid engagement rather then dive in. We really want options that encourage engagement.

X2 don't need warp above 40. I'd actually like to see warp reduced along with the weapons count, but that would require a hades of a compensating advantage (taking a step backward in order to go two forward is not uncommon in tech advancement). Auto-repairing warp or armored warp might be worth it.

I think aux warp is a minor KISS violation, but only a minor one.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, December 20, 2010 - 07:14 pm: Edit

Hmm, I actually thought it was a KISS thing. It seems a way to give X2 the extra bonus power without going over board; keeping in mind all the different arguements in the past over power levels... less, more, same.
This is actually all three.

And it really makes for some interesting tactical choices, I think. For instance, are you the type to double AW on the way in or on the way out? I do think it may encourage engagement.

Heh, I just noticed too, Auxilliary Warp Engine is AWE. Shock and AWE!

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, December 20, 2010 - 08:50 pm: Edit

Loren,

You're fiddling around to get only 2-4 points of extra power.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, December 20, 2010 - 11:17 pm: Edit

The total for a cruiser would be an extra eight points after doubling. The top four of a 20 point engine represent the AW. The basic engine is 16 points.

But the number of shaded AW boxes are dependant on the ships requirements. Basically it is about whatever is beyond the normal movement needs.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, December 21, 2010 - 02:12 pm: Edit

Ah. My error.

I don't want to make too much of this because it is not a bad idea. My issue is it's a bit of a gimmick. It's one more little thing to announce or forget to announce or for you or your opponent to forget to do. It's not where I'd like to see X2 go. YMMV.

X1 did a nice job of reducing the limits most ships fight under (with the downside of reducing individuality). I'd like to add new things and new limits.

Personally I'd like to find reasons to *reduce* the total power generated by a XCA, but make them more efficient and/or give them new options for using it.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, December 21, 2010 - 07:49 pm: Edit

SFB is just chock full of such things. Since it would be uniquely X2 then it would be like Orion engine doubling. I don't think anyone forgets to double engines when they want to or announce it. They might forget to damge the engine but that's a mater more of covenience. (wink)

Reducing power didn't seem to fly very well before BUT I'm not against that. It's certainly an option. I am against flat out more power. So I thought this would give those who want more power their wish but it makes them work for it and it makes them think about when to use it because it isn't readilly available.

SFB make you think hard. I hope that X2 make us think just as hard but also different.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, December 21, 2010 - 08:21 pm: Edit

It's been my experience with X1 is that it *doesn't* make you think harder. X1's vast reserve power make it easy to put off tough decisions and choose to top off the batteries. There's less planning and more seat-of-the-pants flying.

Odds are a XCA will double when it needs a shield brick or needs to run. It'd be a much tougher decision if a XCA had 36 warp. You double to 44, then drop to 28.

It might be better if doubling one turn cost some power the next (not just failed to generate), but that further adds to the complexity of the rule.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, December 21, 2010 - 09:10 pm: Edit

"It's been my experience with X1 is that it *doesn't* make you think harder."

Yeah, I'd agree with that to a degree. When faced with another X1 ship the choices are a bit harder.

"Odds are a XCA will double when it needs a shield brick or needs to run."

These are the two main choices but also very different ones. With AW you could make your attack run using the AW in standard one point generation so you have 40 warp (not counting saucer or boom warp) like an X1 cruiser then double one your way out giving you 48 warp but then the following turn you'd only have 32 warp!

Or double on the way in only if you are sure you can get out with reduce warp power (32). Chances are that players will opt to double on the way out but doubling on the way in could be a winning move.

Or you could choose to double one going in and one going out so you get a boost going in by four points and break even the next turn on the way out. (or vice versa).

Or you could double during reload turns. Plasma users would love this.

I don't think this type of double should cause big issues with cloak since it isn't so much energy. Maybe one extra cloak cost point per AW engine that doubles? Doubling already has it own consequences so maybe no cloak cost penalty.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, December 22, 2010 - 01:54 pm: Edit

Does this really make the game more interesting? Does it give a X2 ship new and interesting tactics? I'd say no.

It's not a bad idea. It's just busywork that allows me to get around limited shipboard power when I run up against that limit.

Ships whose arming cycles work with this doubling scheme get an advantage as compared to those whose don't. Such a system works well on a hydran boat where I can double to arm fusions then pay the reduced holding if I don't use them. It also helps me play the increased cost of OL Hellbores. Plasma's final turn is always a bear on power. It benefits overloading photons on the hellbore plan as well. Disruptors need a more stable power curve.

Nice, but it doesn't give us new options, y'dig?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, December 22, 2010 - 03:28 pm: Edit

Yes, but to get those can you handle the turn of reduced power?

You are talking about how the extra power isn't interesting but the challenge is dealing with the reduced power after?

You get normal X1 levels of power or you can practically borrow power from the next turn for a quick boost.

By Jon Murdock (Xenocide) on Wednesday, December 22, 2010 - 03:38 pm: Edit

Don't we already have a part of the ship on the SSD that allows you to use power now at the expense of having less power later?

Batteries.

Admittedly the power doesn't come back after a turn but couldn't you do something like set batteries to automatically refill from attached generators one turn after the power is used?

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, December 22, 2010 - 06:15 pm: Edit

That's true. This does mirror the effect of having an extra 4 points of reserve power available at EAF time. That was lurking around in the back of my mind as well.

Loren,
Yes, but to get those can you handle the turn of reduced power?

Yes. More easily than I can handle a power-heavy final turn of arming for my heavy weapons.

Using Standard-tech arming cycles for simplicity:

Photons often OL on a 2+[3-6] curve
Hellbores OL on 3+6
Larger Plasmas standard load on a 2-2-X. X often starts at 4 and goes up from there depending on torp being loaded and load options.

I punch the "Double" button to make that power-heavy final arming turn easier, effectively moving 4 points of power generation from the following turn where I'm on the low-end of my arming cycle again. You can see how this evens my power generation out with my power consumption, further taking the edge off the hard choices I have to make. X1 warp power already takes a lot of edge off.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, December 22, 2010 - 07:11 pm: Edit

So the interesting new tactic is when an X2 ship make an attack run at you do you try to alpha back or do you try to mitigate the damage and smack him when his engines are only producing 32 points of power.

And it gets even more interesting when you have multiple ships in play. Consider the XCA against two CLX for instance.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, December 22, 2010 - 07:51 pm: Edit

I don't see that as "interesting." I see play styles optimizing themselves around the system.

I pulse my engines on my big arming turn. You are either pulsing your own engines (in which case you have the same power shortfall I do and am in no position to exploit mine) or absorbing what I throw at you and then looking to exploit my power shortfall.

Since you will know the arming sequence of my weapons, you'll know when I'm going to pulse my engines. Your choosing to exploit my power shortfall is also highly predictable. What else are you going to do?

I don't see options opening up. I see an offense/defense script emerging that set up repeatable circumstances that emphasize a narrow set of options.

YMMV.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, December 22, 2010 - 10:19 pm: Edit

I'm still not understanding that PoV. What we have now is a fairly static power system for all ships. X1 with it's large reserve system (X-batts) makes that a little less static than the previous generation. But ultimately people already do a bunch of EA tracking.

I can promise you that you wouldn't know automatically when I was going to pulse my engines (I like that phrase for this, BTW... see, you are already helping refine the lingo. ) In fact, it would be a tool to make you knowing what I'm doing even harder. Since you can use the engine pulse in a veriety of effective ways but not in all ways then the very point is to NOT use then in the most predictable way... and you can.

How is it more narrow that static energy generation?

You know, I might attack you with standard loads but use the extra energy to tractor you. OR as you alpha me, I reutrn with standard loads (having bricked with batts) and tractor you and start the boarding actions... or launch things at you.

Or maybe I double during reload not for heavy weapons but for phasers (because theres a wave of drones on my butt?).

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, December 22, 2010 - 10:21 pm: Edit

I may be chopping off my own foot here but I can think of a few plasma avoidence tricks to use AW pulsing for.

Also, I think that doubling should count toward required number of warp to disengage.