Consider a 130 point FFXX against a D7k.

The FFXX hurls R12 Disruptor shots and hits 2/3 of the time for 6 points of damage per hit and has two of them and pays 12 points of energy for the privilage in total.

The D7 hurls back 4 standard R12 disruptor shots.

Both attacks inflict an expected average damage damage of 8 points. But the FFXX paid 12 points of power to do it and the D7 only paid 8.

The FFXX will only have at best 20 points of warp (all-be-it with and MC of 0.333) to generate this and she'llprbablly have about 4 Ph-1s and no Ph-5s able to be brought to bear.
The D7 can kick in 3Ph-1s and can more easily pay 8 power from her 30ish than the FFXX can pay 12 out of her 20ish.

Not even considering that this might be balancible is (no offense*) utter close-mindedness.

(*Reread your post and you'll see it this way too)

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 11:32 pm: Edit

MJC: There are some people that don't understand that photons can do less than 16 damage. Fortunately no one currently participating in any of these discussions believes that. Using that flawed logic a ship that could fight with overloads at range 12 and HET on a dime would never allow return fire and always win. It is balanceable but it comes uncomfortably close to the line.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 11:55 pm: Edit

I understand it. In fact most of my OL Photons are 12s. 16s happen when I don't have to do much to get the shot.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 12:25 am: Edit

MJC: There are some people that don't understand that photons can do less than 16 damage. Fortunately no one currently participating in any of these discussions believes that. Using that flawed logic a ship that could fight with overloads at range 12 and HET on a dime would never allow return fire and always win. It is balanceable but it comes uncomfortably close to the line.

I don't quite understand the idea you putforward, by the example about, there is nothing a ship that chose to Fire R12 Overloads and Het on a dime could do to stop the D7 from launching 4 standard shots.

Are you saying that players who resfuse to fire standards in an non-X2 Vs X2 fight shouldn't be penalised for their actions!?!

The question is not really "is it impossible to balance" but rather; What BPV does it balance against".

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 02:39 am: Edit

MJC,

Show me that range-10 OLs don't break the game and then I'll consider 12's.

Call it closed-minded if you wish. That big a gap in OL ranges, however rationalized, is asking for trouble.

Let's fill out your example. The FFXX has either 3 or 5-point batteries. At standard-load range, the Klingon D7 gets a total of 8 disr + 1 each for its 3 boom phasers for a total 11 points on the FFXX. This all assumes EW parity, but the D7 will almost assuredly be firing through at least a +1 ECM shift against it. The even-up 8-point average drops to 6 and even worse things happen to the phaser damage, which drops to 1 1/2 average damage. Total exchange: 7 1/2 from the D7 vs. 13 from the FFXX. What are the odds that the FFXX's battery power can handle most of this? There might be a few points of shield damage. Most of the damage to the D7 IS going to the shields.


We really should assume that the FFXX has P5's but let that go. And your power calculation for the FFXX is off, at least potentially. If the FFXX is holding disruptors, the power cost is only 9 and that's with X1 disruptors, which have a hold cost of 1.

Now, let's add an ECM drone to the FFXX. It can put itself at a -2 ECM shift against the D7 and there isn't beans the D7 can do about it. At that point average disr damage drops to 4 and P1 damage drops to 1/2 point for all three combined for a total of 4 1/2 (D7) vs. 13(FFXX). The FFXX's batteries could handle this.

This is why R12 overloads are a non-starter.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 05:30 am: Edit

Okay, lets look at the power cost involved.


The FFXX has 20 points of warp power, 4 Impulse Engine boxes and 2 AWRs.
It has 4Ph-1s that can be brought to arc, 2X2 Disruptors that can cam be brought to arc, and it's more likely to have no drone rack than an X2G-rack, but is most liekly to instead have an X2E-rack.
It's house keeping is 2.5 points of power and it's holding her BTTYs for contingencies as is the D7.
The Vessel can generate 8 points of EW.
The ship will spend 1.666 points od warp power per point of movement generated by warp over the 30 limit.

Because there is no EW auction during EA we shall assume that the FFXX chooses 1 ECCM to avoid having a +3 shift if the D7 uses and ECM drone (Even without the XP upgrade there will come a year when GW era ships get Kzinti drone percentages and that year is likely before X2 arrives ) and 6 ECM and a further 7 ECM incase the D7 simply chooses 6 ECCM.

We shall assume arming the weapons.

FFXX	POWER
WARP	20
IMP	4
AWR	2
Total Generated	26
House Keeping	2.5
EW	8
Disruptors	12
Remainder	3.5

The FFXX will have a top speed of 10 with 1/6 of a point of power left over for conitngent allocation.

We shall assume that the FFXX chooses to generate some of it's EW from EM and thus gains it's 7 points of ECM partly from EM.

FFXX+EM	POWER
WARP	20
IMP	4
AWR	2
Total Generated	26
House Keeping	2.5
EW	4
Disruptors	12
EM	2
Remainder	7.5

The ship can still only move at a speed of 22!

If we assume that the FFXX has an X2G-rack and launches an ECM drone to help it gain that 9 ECM effect, then it'll have the following power allocation.

FFXX+ECM-DRONE	POWER
WARP	20
IMP	4
AWR	2
Total Generated	26
House Keeping	2.5
EW	5
Disruptors	12
Remainder	6.5

It thus has a top speed of 19.

None of these speeds are inherantly dangerous to the nature of the play of the game, and indeed a Klingon loading standards can make such speeds look like a snail's pace.

SO the question becomes "what of holding?".
An R8 overloaded disruptor can beheld for 2 power and these things cost 6 power to arm.
I suspect that the holding power for a 24 point photon will be three points of power.
So despite prefering to place the holding cost at 4, we shall assume a holding cost of 3 per disruptor.

Thus when holding R12 overloaded disruptors our power allocation shall look more like this.

FFXX+Holding	POWER
WARP	20
IMP	4
AWR	2
Total Generated	26
House Keeping	2.5
EW	8
Disruptors	6
Remainder	6.5

Thus the FFXX will have a speed of 19!

If the FFXX uses an ECM drone and has a holding cost of 3 points per R12 overloaded disruptor then the power allocation looks as follows.

FFXX+ECMDrone+Holding	POWER
WARP	20
IMP	4
AWR	2
Total Generated	26
House Keeping	2.5
EW	5
Disruptors	6
Remainder	12.5

It is here that the FFXX would move at a speed of 31, using 10 warp, and 1 impulse, the remaining 1.5 points of warp power is not enough to generate even one point of movement at the higher rate.


All in all the FFXX has to play like a Fed, spending a turn in attacking and a turn out recharging ( building things to hold ). But against a D7 that's going to be a very difficult game to play.


Doing 4 points of R12 Ph-1 damage and 8 points of Disruptor Damage isn't going to make the D7 hurt ( and that assumes the D7 doesn't get an ECM shift, dispite the heavy ECM powering of the FFXX ).
All in all , the D7 will get pretty good shots against the FFXX on the off turns of the FFXX or else the FFXX will be forced to play a lighter game, say several turns of just standards, which puts it at a disadvantage of the sheer weight of number of the D7's disruptors.

Net result is; that R12 Disruptor Overloads will not be a game breaker.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 09:22 am: Edit

The issue isn't so much disrutpor overloads, for a big reason...the damage drop off. But, if you gave r12 overloads to the photon, could you still honestly say it wouldn't be a game breaker?

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 10:10 am: Edit

As Mike says, disruptors aren't the problem. Photons are the problem.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 01:49 pm: Edit

MJC is talking about giving Disruptors the R12 as s special case.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 02:06 pm: Edit

Hmm, not a good idea, as the Feds will be screwed again.

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 03:25 pm: Edit

Good.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 08:56 pm: Edit

No, what I proposse the Feds will have a an R10 Photon with a max 24 point warhead and a three turn arming limit.
And/or a two turn armed 20 point warhead with an R10 range.

Basically we reinstate racial flavour by mix and matching the R12 and R10 ranges. Basically the two two turn armers (Hellbore, Photon, PPD ) will have R10 and the one turn armers (Disruptor, Fusion Beam ) shall have R12, but with a higher power requirment to force them to go slower on the turn of firing, than their "snub-nosed cousins".

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 01:34 am: Edit

I wouldn't support any attempt to goose the photon above 16 points. Remember with X-tech this is an every turn weapon.

I would consider allowing a standard load torp to be fired with a 10 point warhead at any range.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 12:59 pm: Edit

Not that I support Photons above 16 points, but if they were to go higher to 24 you could make it mandatory two turn arming. Crunch would go up but overall damage would drop considerably over the two turns. This would still be pretty scarry since it is pretty common that there is an off turn of little combat.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 08:52 pm: Edit

I see it as:-

The maximum warheads would be; 12 points, 20 points and 24 points respectively and thus have a one, two and three turn firing rate.Note the reducing rate of return.

It'ld then be standard practice to arm the photons as 6+4+2 so as to have the maximum damage at the end of each turn and yet retain the ability to inflict the maximum damage of the is turn if a firing opportunity presents it'self.


I'ld also like to note that a DX and DXD are both running around with 6 Disruptors ( with better arcs ) whilst the CX is currently running around with just 4 FA phot-torps and as such, if the Photoon:Dirsuptor ratio remains the same in X2 then we really should be making our comparison on 3:2 basis and not 1:1.

One the other hand I can see 2 LF+L 4FA & 2RF+R photons being a good match for 3FH+L & 3 FH+R disruptors...but I'm probably the only one.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 09:04 pm: Edit

Photon arcs will probably never change, and I do not think they should. Also, Fed ships should keep the max 4, maybe 6 Photons on a cruiser.

I don't think the damage per torpedo should go up too much, maybe to 18. I'd like to see them be able to fire every-turn with the Overloads. The X1 tech allows for a 10 (or is it 12) point single turn overload.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 09:50 pm: Edit

The revised X1 rules allow only for a single turn 12 point warhead with no chance of mis-fire.

Photons firing every turn with an 18 point warhead and no misfire!?!
That's a 50% increase in output!
Do they have a an R8 limit or R10?

The trouble is that 4 x 3/6 x 18 yeilds 36 points of damage (paying 36 points of power for the privilage ) and 6 x 5/6 x 6 yeilds 30 points of damage (paying 24 points of power for the privilage )...but if we want to impoove the Disruptors ( say with the Hyperload of double overload damage at R8 or less ) then we are looking at 6 x 5/6 x 12 for 60 points of damage ( paying 60 points of power for the privilage ).

Whilst the first situation does kinda sorta break even although paying 50% more power for 20% more damage is a little unfun, the second situation is thoroughly unfair against the Photons and in favour depending on your veiw of damage or power.

I'ld rather regain some racial flavour by having a 2 ( or better still a choice between a 1, 2 or 3 turn ) arming cycle.

A rapid fire full overload would cause the game to boil down to WHO CAN DO THE BEST EW TRICKS and we all know the Klingons will win that one.
If we have a multi-turn arming cycle then then we re-introduce something back into the game, the ability of a ship to capitalise on POWER MANAGMENT to offset the opponents good gadgets.

My Bastardsword Term Paper stated that 12 point warheads of the Feds would beat Overloaded UIM Disruptors.
Power mangement can offset the Klingon Disruptor...A high warhead-low to hit chance by it'self can not.
Even with EW being equal, paying 4 points of power for a 5/6 chance at 6 points of damage from 6 disrupotors is much more effective ( 30 points of damage for 24 power ) then the 3/6 chance of 18 ponts of damage through 4 phot-torps ( for 36 points of damage for 36 points of power )...and that assums the Klingons didn't get any kind of Disruptor improovement over X1.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 10:09 pm: Edit

If you improve the photon AND give it R10 OL it will be too much, I believe. To hit with a 24 point warhead every turn at R10 would be mass murder!

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 10:11 pm: Edit

If we follow the current progression of tech, we have

2 turn standards in EY going to
2 turn overloads in MY/GW going to
1 turn 12 point overloads in X1 going to...

1 turn 16 point overloads in X2.

I do not think it unreasonable to get a 16 point warhead in one turn. The To-Hit of the photon is all that needs to be improved. It already has plenty of flexability and damage to power effectiveness. I would think a OL out to range 10 would also be reasonable I think.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 10:12 pm: Edit

24 is way to much. We don;t need that. And turning a photon into a plasma is not a good idea either.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 10:20 pm: Edit

No one has yet propossed 24 point warheads every turn.

18 point warheads every turn.

20 Point warheads every second turn.

24 point warheads every third turn.

Yes.

But not 24 point warheads everyturn.


Actually to hit with a 24 point warhead every turnb would be pretty good shooting as the chance is a pittable 2/6.

Perhaps what X2 really needs is to just allow X2 Photons to be a fired an an overloaded proximity mode...although I'ld like to see that plus higher yeild damages.


What do people feel about standards being R50, one turn 8 point, two turn 10 point and three turn 12 point warheads?
I'ld also like to develop a vacinity ( or maybe it should be called locality ) warhead that inflicts 3/4 damage and grants a +1 for the to hit number ( i.e. half way, between a Proximity and a standard ) and basicially is proximity warhead set to explode much closer to the target vessel than a regular proxi.
HMmmmmmmmmmm...maybe the warheads should be 8 for the one turn and 12 for the two and 16 for the three ( both to make the math easier and to equate to the simple idea of "what if we just removed the overload range limit altogether").

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 10:21 pm: Edit

Doesn't anyone else feel that the ability of a Fed to run around with a range independent 8 to 1 damage to power ratio weapon is already way over the top? An X0 Fed holding full overloads can do 64 damage at a cost of 8 power! Why are we discussing the next turn? Once the Fed catches you, you die. There is no next turn. And you want to upgrade 4-photons to 96 damage? Crack kills. Just say no.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 11:06 pm: Edit

Cfant, you know, that ain't bad. That's a good moderate improvement. 16 point fast load with R10 OL should be just right for X2.

I had another idea for Photons but I guess it was too complicated.

I'm going to rethink the Torpedo situation. How do you match that with a Disruptor?

Maybe, double fire? OL one or both? Or like I proposed before, a base 6 damage/fires twice and OLed fires it a third. Out performs the Photon in damage but must be fired over multiple impulses. Probably would require a small tracking chart on the SSD.

I dunno. Need...to...think...

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 11:11 pm: Edit

Another variation on allowing overloaded photons out to longer range is to improve what is considered a standard load torp.

For example an X1 photon can fire an 8-point standard torp. What if an X2 photon could fire a 4,5,6,7,8,9,10 point photon as a standard load out to any range? This revised weapon would be compatible with a proximity fuse detonator.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 11:15 pm: Edit

I have thought about that before and still consider it a reasonable idea. As a Prox. it is only doing one more point of damage.