Restated Proposal:
Ablative Armor, Rev01.0
By Jeff Wile, USS Minnesota.

Ablative Armor is a type of hull coating for an alienrace (undesignated,as of yet, but tennatively referred to as 'the Squids') that mimics the effects of shields with three significant differences:

1. requires no power to maintain the protection,
2. it can not be repaired during a scenario, and
3. does not protect the ship in the same ways as normal shields. a partial list of such things include: radiation, heat zones, nebula effects etc.

While the above disadvantages are significant and may well doom the proposal for game related concerns, there are several possible advantages that might make such a system interesting to play. These include:

1. requires no power initially to protect the ship.
2. as the "Ablative Armor" is boiled off by weapons fire, the residual boiled off material envelopes the ship and creates a cloud of dense "Natural ECM" (strength determined by the number of ablative armor boxes destroyed).
#AAB destroyed Natural ECM created

0	0
1	+1
2	+2
4	+3
8	+4
16	+5
32	+6
64	+7
128	+8
256	+9
512	+10

Where AAB is "Ablative Armor Boxes".

There are some obvious limitations, the natural ECM benefit is limited to that hex that the ship was damaged in, if the ship moves out of that hex all natural ECM benefits are immediately lost. (Note, no other ship moving into that hex would ever gain benefit of AAB having been burned off in that hex). (recommended change:let the natural ECM benefits accrue to any/all units in same hex as the ECM cloud.)

A second limitation is the natural disspation of the cloud, at a rate of -1 natural ECM benefit every quarter turn(8 impuses). (recommended change:alter the rate of dissapation from -1ECM/every 8 impulses, to -1ECM every impulse.)

Some rules should be established:
1. Normal shields and Ablative Armor are mutually exclusive. the effect of raising normal shields burns off the ablative armor immediately, and no benefit for the natural cloud of natural ECM is realized as the ablative material is contained by the ships shields.
2. a ship can not "shoot itself" to gain the benefit of the boiled off ablative material. the effect can only be achieved by weapons fire from outside the hull of the ship by atleast 500 meters.
3. A friendly ship, can not target another friendly ship with the idea of creating an ECM shield. (blatant game rule to avoid abuse)
4. ECM clouds "stack" ECM benefits. all direct weapons fire through ECM Cloud hexes must add the accumulated ECM benefits to the target units current ECM value. (this is another recommended change.)

Comment#1. It should be noted that as these ships would not have the shields protecting them from being boarded, it is suggested that the boarding parties of the 'Squids" ships be larger than is found in most other races starships... tennatively 2 or 3 times larger to prevent easy capture by enemy fleets or squadrons of smaller squids vessels by being "swamped" with offensive BPs.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 07:38 am: Edit

Ok, here is the first revision, did I miss any recommended changes?

Any other suggestions that might improve the proposal?

By Reid Hupach (Gwbison) on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 09:38 am: Edit

Willget back to you I have an actual Job interview today to get to

By Randy Blair (Randyblair) on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 01:43 pm: Edit

After reading the restated proposal, I'm wondering if this will actually ever come into play. Do the ships involve tend to be stationary? Any movement at all, it appears, nullifies the ability.
Am I reading it wrong?

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 03:02 pm: Edit

I think this might be better as a secondary defence for the non-biological component of a hybrid-monster ship.

If you look at a Branthodon SSD, you see one section for the artificial armor-clad exoskeleton attached to the dragonship, while the rest refers to the organic aspects of the dragon itself.

In this case, you could have a ship module attached to a monster, then allow the module to detach from the creature if the latter is terminally wounded. The ablative armor might enable such an escape.

By Mike Kenyon (Mikek) on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 03:50 pm: Edit

I think the major effect would be to shield this ship from the 32/1 double whammie. If you rock down the shield at the end of the turn, knowing he can't move before you fire, you sadly have to get through all that ECM before he moves.

But yes, with the "when you move, it doesn't stay behind" addition (had I missed that the first time round?) it's not going to come up often.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 04:44 pm: Edit

Actually, guys... that isnt the danger with this proposl.

its that it reinforces the tendency of players to "brick up" and "Star Fortress" at the point where they exchange alpha strikes.

Gives a huge defensive bonus to the squid ship, assuming they stop movement and TAC (the infamous "sit and spin" technique.

I am afraid that as it stands right now, this proposal is unpublishable.

There are a couple of alternatives that we might consider... let the natural ECM cloud expand for X impulses, the max ECM benefit in the hex where the ship took damage, and -1 for each hex of expansion (similar to the blast radius) to a minimum of +0ECM... that way (if the ship moves slow enough or has a very good turn mode) it can remain in the cloud for the natural ECM benefit.

But even that doesn't fix theproblem some one pointed out earlier that in a ECM claoud the squids direct fire weapons will require it to pay for ECCM to be able to use its own weapons effectively.

Heck of a draw back for ships that don't use shields... maybe its too much of a negative?

By Mike Kenyon (Mikek) on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 06:29 pm: Edit

Jeff,

I'm going to presume that the following would be cardinal tactics against this defense system.

If I have a multi-turn arming heavy weapon, I hit you hard and skip Mizia. The ECM effect is therefore non-existant for me as it only applies after I've alpha struck.

If I have a single-turn arming weapon with good range (read disr.), I'd probably plink off small chunks on the way in hoping that you'd decel. to take advantage, but frankly planning that I'd just remove your shield and get to fire on your down shield unopposed next turn.

Mike

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 07:08 pm: Edit

Mike,

Yeah that's about what I was thinking too. if the ECM cloud had some persistance (as it would under the -1xECM per every 8 impulses that I originally posted) the Squid ship could double back behind the cloud (even a +1ECM cloud would have lasted a quarter turn, a +2ECM cloud would stick around a quarter turn as a +2 cloud and the other quarter turn as a +1 ECM cloud) to take advantage of the Free ECM factors.

that way you'd have the terrain feature that would make manuvering for position a viable option.

With your suggested modification of -1ECM per impulse the cloud effect would never (realistically) exceed 8 impulses and most of the time never exceed 9 impulses duration (given the number of AABs that would have to be destroyed in a single hex, see table above)

I wonder if a "half life" duration might not be better?

Say you hit a squid ship for 128 points of damage on impulse #1, creating a natural ECM cloud worth +8. 32 impulses later (turn #2, impulse#1) the cloud becomes +4, and every 32 impulse it loses 1/2 of its value (we could be tricky and say that half of 1 point is 0.5, and SFBs numbers convention (its in the rules) says that decimal numbers of 0.499 round down and a decimals of 0.50 round up) which effectively leaves +1natural ECM clouds floating around for the duration of the scenario, but are gone (dissappated) before the beginning of the next scenario.

That way we have a terrain feature that makes a modest +1 natural ECM difference, but the massive +8 or more clouds decline in value during the scenario.

By George Duffy (Sentinal) on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 08:58 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

4. ECM clouds "stack" ECM benefits. all direct weapons fire through ECM Cloud hexes must add the accumulated ECM benefits to the target units current ECM value. (this is another recommended change.)


(recommended change:let the natural ECM benefits accrue to any/all units in same hex as the ECM cloud.)

A second limitation is the natural dissipation of the cloud, at a rate of -1 natural ECM benefit every quarter turn(8 impulses). (recommended change:alter the rate of dissipation from -1ECM/every 8 impulses, to -1ECM every impulse.)

---

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 11:24 pm: Edit

George,

You have expressed one version of the discussion. Obviously this is a work in progress and some things need to be worked out.

the problem for you and your example is you can't repair AA during a scenario (atleast as it is proposed to date). so you have, ineffect caused 10 points of damage to each of your squid cruisers that can't be repaired in the scenario and still have to actually engage what ever enemy forces that you are challenged with, and will have neither the 10 shield/AA boxes and by the time the enemy closes with your force, will no longer have the benefit of the +20 natural ECM.

Doesnt seem to have gained you very much.

By Troy Latta (Saaur) on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 09:57 am: Edit

I don't think internal damage should contribute to the cloud. If we're talking about a property of the armor these ships use, then realistically (there's that word) only the armor would ablate and cause a cloud. So you're looking at 6 ECM, at the most, from any one ship. And then your cruiser has lost its nose.

By Mike Kenyon (Mikek) on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 01:20 pm: Edit

I agree with Troy. If the ablative armor is what's generating the effect, you should be limited in how much effect you can make based off of how many AAB boxes you have that were hit.

If you've got 128 AAB boxes on one arc ... well, I'm leaving the sector now.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 02:25 pm: Edit

Troy & Mike:

You got it... but George talked about repairing the systems after taking damage. It may be that he was talking about ships already damaged from combat, and self inflicting 10 points of mine damage on his own ships to create a temporary +20 ECM cloud (5 CAs doing 10 points of damage to AABs).

I don't think anyone was seriously proposing 128 AABs on a single hull/shield facing, and I am not advocating AAB effects from internal hull hits now.

Given how the proposal handles the "shield" aspects, perhaps we do need a slightly larger AAB count compared to traditional shields. we havent decided what that number should be... 125% of normal shield boxes in AABs? 130%? I'd guess that that number can be established by playtesting (if it gets that far)... but we must remember that AABs are always going to be less effective than normal shields in most of the catagories we can measure.

By Reid Hupach (Gwbison) on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 03:24 pm: Edit

also Jeff would it be possible for a ship to have AAB and regular armor on the same hull, its just a thought but AAB will raise the the points a ship is worth than regular armor

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 04:18 pm: Edit

Reid,

Isn't it also something of a wash?

Not having regular shields is going to cost some BPVs as well as regular shields are more flexible than AABs. not to mention not having to have extra Boarding Parties to combat the raid/ship capturing attempts that no shields would invite.

Not sure how much volume regular armor would need/take up in a ships SSD sheet that would actually make any difference to how well the squid ships would fight against various opponents.

Just because I proposed that shields and AABs were incompatible with each other, may mean that the AABs might require greater support in the form of more structure.

That would be an issue for the steves to decide... most any guess I might make is almost certainly going to be different from what the steves would determine.

still, it is an interesting concept...

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 12:48 am: Edit

Well, looking back over the topic, I wonder if we could maybe do an experiment?

lets take a size class 4 hull... oh heck lets keep it simple and just use a Fed POL.

change the shields to hull mounted Ablative Armor Boxes, keep the movemnt cost and turn mode the same, and figure some way to add some armor (added Structure) to the hull. change the outline to look more "squid like" and we need to figure out what kind of weapons to give it.

For my money, since we have assumed no transporters, just change to transporters to armor boxes (I think there were 2 of them). While were at it, change the cargo to armor aswell.

triple the number of defensive boarding parties.

No plus refit, so no drone G rack or phaser 3s.

Now we need to figure out what weapons a squid ship would use...to replace the photon and the 3 phaser 1s.

Any ideas?

By George Duffy (Sentinal) on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 02:19 am: Edit

How about this...

1) You can say it has 2x 360* Ph-3s (range =2 max), which are really just two long tentacles that all squids have. (These cannot be used for grappling)

1a) Used together, both larger tentacles can generate a 4-impulse (speed 64) burst of speed, once every 16 impulses (no TURNing possible at this speed).

*[Can not do range attack during speed burst]


2) It also has eight small tentacles used for movement or grappling. Each tentacle can propel up to 4 movement points in a turn but a tentacle cannot grapple if it used all 4 points for movement

*[Movement for turn, decided during each Energy Allocation]

Otherwise: Speed is 0-32, Turn Mode = A, Status = Nimble.


3) RAM: A 30-point ramming effect on any impulse when the burst of speed is in play. Hit on a 1-4, (1-2 if target is using evasive maneuvering)


4) Grapple:: At range zero, roll tractor attempt for each small tentacle, each unused movement point is equal to 1-point of tractor energy. Each tentacle that successfully grapples target, applies 1-4 damage to one shield facing, and to the same shield facing with a successful re-roll at the beginning of the next turn. Each successful tentacle must attach to a separate shield facing before there is any doubling up.

[Edit: BTW - Grappling ignores shields, apply damage directly to ship. Armor and ESGs are still effective]

By George Duffy (Sentinal) on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 03:30 am: Edit

Obviously, I was looking at this more as the "squid" being a live creature/space monster and that any equipment/crew would live on an attached module or inside the "squid" itself. Like that of the Branthdon space dragons in Omega sector.

You could then give the squid a body, which would hold all of the AAB instead of just applying it around in areas like shields on a ship.

If you want to follow it as more mechanical unit, then just give it phasers and disruptors, like on any ship.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 01:52 pm: Edit

George,

Well, that's fine with me.

Lets treat it like a monster, give it one "unitary" Ablative Armor thingy inplace of the AAB we talked about, assume it has 8 tenacles (2 of which used for movement) and the other 6 tenacles act as tractor/repulsor things that cause damage like a andromedan TR Beam.

just for "bite" lets assume that it can "eat" starships for damage like an overloaded photon but pays no energy cost for, and suffers no feed back damage. the photon bite can only attact each target 1 time per 32 impulse turn, but it could (intheory) attack up to 32 different targets (limit 1 per impulse) and only targets that are within range of the overloaded photon "bite".

We don't have to worry about the AAB shields interacting since StarFleet Battles rules prohibit ramming as a tactic, so lets just assume that the squid never gets close enough to be affected by the shields of its food errr vict... er...ummm enemy.

lets start with 200 AABs and 50 excess damage boxes (the monsters 'hull' if you will) and see how it plays in a play test situation.

comments?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, March 19, 2011 - 04:08 pm: Edit

Seems no one wanted to talk about a squid type star monster, so lets go back and try to design a simulator ship for play testing.

We have already posted the changes to a vanila fed POL (change transporters and cargo to regular armor (added structure to the ship). And drop the plus refit, 1 drone G, 2xPh3, and IIRC 1xAPR/WPR.

we need to substitute something for the 3 phaser 1s and the photon, hopefully something appropriate for a squid ship.

How about replace the photon torpedo tube with a second probe launcher? give it a FA firing arc, and leave the original probe 360 degree firing arc. let the squid ship treat it as its primary torpedo (using the existing rules for arming probes as an emergency weapon.

This works on a couple levels, it give a short range weapon (without an overload option) and if the squid ship is in the natural ECM cloud, it could use probes to "gather information" from the area outside of the ecm cloud uneffected by the natural ECM cloud.

Might want to increase the ammunition load for the ship to increase the number of probes available...

change the phaser 1s to phaser 2 (for some reason, I think of squids as being very short sighted!

would that give us a workable ship for playtesting without having to invent new weapons?

By Mike Kenyon (Mikek) on Monday, March 21, 2011 - 07:23 pm: Edit

Jeff,

We're going to try to give it a shot if there's time after a campaign battle Thursday night.

Side question though - really, if what we're looking to test is how the AAB *takes* damage, then so long as the ranging factors are similar to what you'd want, who cares what the actual weapon is? I'd say keep the photon and P1 and see how it goes. I imagine that with a photon, you're not going to want to shoot from the protected hex - which is a fine tradeoff.

Mike

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, March 21, 2011 - 09:36 pm: Edit

Works for me!

Let us know how it works out...

You know that is an excellant point about shooting out of a protected hex.

Perhaps the sQuids need some sort of seeking weapon with its own ECM/ECCM factors like drones and plasma torpedos have.

Wonder what we could come up with...

By Troy Latta (Saaur) on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 - 04:19 pm: Edit

Why not just use a Barbarian from C4 instead of trying to use a real shp?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 - 05:09 pm: Edit

Troy,

6 in one and half a dozen in the other.

could go either way, its just that I have the box counts and the arrangements of the POL in memory...stuff from C4 I'd have to look up, and I don't have my SFBs stuff with me now.

If you want to post a barbarian ships stats (SSD box counts) I'll be happy to work with you on deciding on how to convert to a squid type unit.

But without the SSD I can't even begin to use any of the Barbarian ships in C4.