Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board

Archive through January 20, 2003

Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: OLD X2 FOLDER: X2 disruptors: Archive through January 20, 2003

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 11:17 pm: Edit

You know...a Kzinti CS can do 96 points of damage with 2/3 of her heavy weapons...and she can do it two turns in a row...I don't see anybody complaining and in an EW rich envirmonment Photons will be even less able to hit.

If an X2 drops to a such a low speed that the Feds can AUTO HIT they really should be just as dead as an MY ship that drops below speed 12 against a Kzinti CS.
The Defenses against the Kzinti CS is firing on the drones and dancing around them.
The Defenses against the Fed Photons is as always, EW and Dancing.

With 50-60 Sheild boxes on the cruiser and 50-60 warp power and 20-30 BTTY, 96 points of damage isn't all that much. Remeber that the through put at R8 is still 1.0 and at R1 is only 2.0 so the Fed is really missing something inorder to do that damage:- WARP POWER and lots of it!

By Dave Morse (Dcm) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 11:21 pm: Edit

There's a lot of talk about "balancing" photon versus disruptor. Remember that they don't have to be balanced. Life is not fair. (SFB is not life?). Its for BPV to balance out the inequities.

Apple would like it if there were this sort of automatic tech balance between their PPC chips and intel chips. At one time they were balanced. Time passed. Somebody spent more on R&D. Now PPC is way way behind Intel in most ways. There is no inherent balance to tech wars.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 11:22 pm: Edit

I case you guys haven't noticed...I like A-racks.

Quote:
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.

Even at 4, 6, 8 & 10, it's a good idea.
Maybe that can balance the overloads out to R12 and the something else can balance out the hyperload double damage out to R8.
Or maybe give it 4, 6 & 8 on one turn and 10 & 12 if armed over two turns.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 11:37 pm: Edit

Guys with the Photon, KISS>

Increase the OL range to 10, and the max range to 50. That will be in line with the GW->X1 upgrade.

increase the standard torp damage to 10 (5 power)

increase the prox damage to 5.

Make the To-Hit better, and there ya have an X2 Photon. Easy, no wierd math or half points of power.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 11:40 pm: Edit

D.M.:

Yes and No.

The weapon system with the Monster BPV would unfortunatley become the seldom played ship.

Keeping them reasonably balanced allows for players to play their favourite race without everybody else complaining that the ship needs an entire CVA group and all the work that goes with it to fight it.

It's better to have:-
Different arcs.
Different number of heavies.
Different phaser arcs.
Different numbers of phasser.
Different number of sheild boxes.
Different numbers of Lab and Hull Boxes.
Different numbers of power producing boxes.
Different number of Batteries.

Than to have markedly warped ( excuss the pun ) BPVs.
Duels become less "pick up" when one player has to buy every kind of commanders option and an entire bridge crew of Leg; Officers...it takes time.

Please let no one assume that I am for any kind of cookie-cutterism.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 12:24 am: Edit

There are solutiuons.

In X1, photons are limited to 12-point overloads for a 1-turn shot, right? I seem to remember that...

So, bump them up to 16-point OLs for a 1-turn shot, then sweeten the pot by allowing 2-turn overloads to go to 20 or 24.

That fulfills Tos' desire to avoid super heavy photon hits every round and gives the Fed a carrot for holding his torps for a second turn of arming.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 12:48 am: Edit

J.T.:

As I said before.
I'ld like 12 pointers each turn.
20 pointers in two turns.
And 24 pointers in three turns.

But 16 pointers every turn and 24 pointers every two turns would be cool by me.
20 Pointers every two turn weighed against the 16 pointer every turn in my opinion is too small a bonus to warrent players going to the two turn method, despite being able to load up as what!?!...10+2 and thus having huge amounts of power to play with duruing the battle pass...if it's 8+4 as the best I can do then even I'ld just go for 16 pointers every turn.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 01:43 am: Edit

See, 24 pointers in two turns are cool with me, but no one is gonna spend that kind of warp power on them. Speaking of which........

An X1 Fed-CX has 42 warp, 4 Impulse and and 2 AWR+15 Battery.

so, with 46 effective warp power, the Fed can move speed 30, while arming 4 1 turn standards and the rest.

I would think that an X2 Fed-CX would have about 50 warp, 4 Impulse and 6 AWR. maybe 21 in Battery?

So, with 56 effective warp...speed 30 leaves 26 effective warp. that would be 5 10 point standard warheads.

Are we thinking the new Fed will have 5 Photons? 6? No more than that certainly.

As the Fed is really the baseline, fromwhich other ships woulkd come from, I think we should decide on what the Fed might have first, and then work from there.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 02:19 am: Edit

I would think either the Fed would have 40 Warp that can generate 1.5 power each or 60 warp...may the Saucer and AWR warp can be increase too, offseting the effects of having MANY Warp boxes to kill.

So 60 Warp + 6 Imp + 4 AWR.
Hk of 4.
Four 8 point one turn standards
Movement cost of x5 for every point of warp based movement over 30.
We're looking at a base speed of 34 with 3 warp and 1 Imp left over.

I should expect that an X2 running around with that speed and fast loaded standards should do quite nicely.

If we go up to 10 point standards, then we need to remove 1 warp, which means one slower but that'll also give use 4 extra warp so it'll go at spee 33 with 4 warp and 1 Imp left over.

If we only have 50 Warp Engine boxes then we'll drop both those two speeds by 2.

Once you start talking about 8 EW points than the speeds drop again, using up 8 point of power.

Charging 4 Overloads as 8+4 would be a matter of 4 HK, and 32 for Photons and then it could move at 31 andf have 1 Imp and 2 Warp free...but after EW it'ld really drop down.
The on the turn of attack it would be 4 HK and 16 for Photons and that would allow 33 plus 4 warp and 1 Impulse for other activities.

I'ld say the much feared ability of X-ships to move at speed above 31 isn't very dnagerous if the ship is also moving and arming weapons to some extent.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 05:26 am: Edit

60 Warp is too much, that is BB power. We should be looking for DNH power output at most, not coutning batteries.

34?!?

Come on, we'll need a new chart. The Strategic speeds should be faster, sure. But the tactical speeds wouldn't be THAT much better than X1. Max speed 32 will keep them outrunning most weapons, and then there is none of that hex jumping or extra moves to worry about.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 09:47 am: Edit

"24 pointers in two turns are cool with me, but no one is gonna spend that kind of warp power on them."

Wrong. At the start of every game every Fed would scream in holding all 24 pointers or dodge until he has them ready, then scream in. After that your statement is generally correct. The effect is the Fed screams around the map with a much bigger sledge hammer than anyone else and will win or lose the first time he picks up the dice. No thanks.

The only way I would consider photons over 16 points is if they could not be held and could not be double overloaded with reserve power. Plot it in EA and fire it that turn or lose it. Alternatively I'd consider anything over 16 a suicide overload.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 11:10 am: Edit

As benchmark weapons, the photon and disruptor have to be developed equally. Not necessarily getting the same upgrades, but they should be balanced. To do that, we have to develop them at the same time. I personally don't really care how it's done...just that they balance out like they do now.

Given that, look at the development "history" of the two.

EY: Photon- Standards only.
Disruptor- Standards only.

0X: Photon- Overloads, Proxies.
Disruptor- Overloads, UIM, DERFACS

1X: Photon- Fast-load
Disruptor- In cruisers, 50% increase in number of mounts. No other changes.

So, what I get from looking at this is a feeling that the Klingons might have "maxed out" the basic disruptor by 1X. They didn't make it better, they just packed more on the ship...though one could argue that, theoretically, that means the weapon is smaller; but, it's still one space, so let's not go there.

My feeling is that the 2X disruptor has to be something really new. Maybe a heavy disruptor, or a disruptor that fires twice in one turn...I don't know for sure. But I can't think of many improvements to it that would equal a fast-loading, range 40 photon with a max 24 point warhead. I could live with a very linear upgrade to the photon that adds 25% damage total (i.e., moving from a base of 8 to one of 10), with a fast-load warhead limit of 15. Keep range at 40, and bump the power cost accordingly.

The disruptor has a bunch more flebility, IMHO. So, here are some brainstorming ideas to kick-start some talk:

Heavy disruptors...double up power and damage.
Rapid-fire disruptors...fire twice per turn, if power is available. Use a capacitor.
Super UIM disruptors...UIM doesnt' burn out.
Doubler Overload disruptor...allow double overloads for double the power.

Any other ideas? If everyone would like, I'll put up a page on my site that will hold tables and rules for any weapon ideas we come up with. That way, there's no searching through the archives to find stuff, and it'll all be in one place. I'll post anything anyone wants, provided they tell me what it is. I'll even put your name on it. I really do want to see us get something out of this, and that seems like a good way to start.

Thoughts?

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 11:27 am: Edit

Mike:

Note that X-Disruptors are slightly longer ranged (smaller ships crry range 30, while the DX carries range 40) and the X-Disr can be held.

Small improvements, but improvements nonetheless.

42

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 01:39 pm: Edit

Tos,

I'm cool woth photons that can't be held above 16-point overloads.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 05:46 pm: Edit

So, X2 photons would act as Overloaded Hellbores.

They can load a 16 point OL in one turn, fine, no prob.

If they load up anything from 18 to 24, it must be fired that turn or ejected. Fine, no prob.

Are we going to increase the range to 50? That would be consistent with GW-X1 upgrades. I also think X2 standards should be able to fire and hit at range 0-1.

Then if we change the To hit to:

Range: 0-1 / 2-3 / 4-8 / 5-12 / 13-25 / 26-50
Stnd 6 1-5 1-4 1-3 1-2 1
Prox NA NA NA NA 1-4 1-3
OL 6 1-5 1-4 1-3 NA NA

We increase the minimum range of proxies, since the To-hit of a standard is better and the OL can go out to 12.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 07:19 pm: Edit

I would prefer to either redically alter the photon table or not alter it at all.

An interesting compromise would be allow photons to get ECCM shifts liken phasers.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 08:47 pm: Edit

Hmm, the photon table changed for X1, why not for X2?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 08:58 pm: Edit

Have to be careful with that, though, particularly with the hit numbers. On a d-6, the photon can get waaaay to accurate if you mess with the numbers too much. Longer range I can see, and different brackets, but it'll be hard to balance.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 09:21 pm: Edit

Quote:
60 Warp is too much, that is BB power. We should be looking for DNH power output at most, not coutning batteries.

Let's design around the assumption that our CCXX will have 60 warp power ( more likely from 1.5 points of power from 40 warp Engine boxes than Orion Doubling of 30 or the straight out 60 boxes ) and work from there.
Paying 5 times the usual warp for every movement point above 30 generated by warp, we can move at a top speed of 37, which still means we can be hit by plasma sabot and speed 40 drones.
If we find latter we need to take it down a notch then that's what we'll do...but lets start with 60 and see where things take us.

Quote:
"24 pointers in two turns are cool with me, but no one is gonna spend that kind of warp power on them."

Wrong. At the start of every game every Fed would scream in holding all 24 pointers or dodge until he has them ready, then scream in.

The 2 Warp power per Phot-torp at WS-II and the 4 Warp Power at WS-III might help, but you will move pretty slowly on the first turn becuase the other 10 to 8 points of warp per tube is a lot of power, even if you do have 60 warp.

Yes Fed will build them...here's a clue, stay away from overload range...and never get into R4.

Quote:
The effect is the Fed screams around the map with a much bigger sledge hammer than anyone else and will win or lose the first time he picks up the dice. No thanks.

As I said earlier, the Kzinti CS can do 96 points of damage ( that damage value you seem to fear so greatly ) and do it twice in two turns and only use 2/3 of her heavy weapons.

Consider the following; 50 to 60 box sheilds, 5 point BTTYs, Caps-to-SSReo.
12 Phaser caps...but we'll keep the last 9 points to fire all 6Ph-5s that can be brought to bear. 5 BTTY.

We're looking at 27 points being stopped by the Caps-to-SSReo.
25 points being stopped by the BTTYs.
and 44 points of shield damage.
Leaving us with 6 or 16 points of sheilding.

Admittedly without Cap-to-SSReo we'll take 21 internals or maybe just 11.

Probably we'll have either Cap-to-SSReo on a 50 box shield or a 60 box shield, meaning we'll either get 6 sheild boxes left form 4 narrow volleyed 24 pointers or we'll get 11 internals.

All hail the game breaking 24 pointer, R8 narrow volley combo.

Quote:
The only way I would consider photons over 16 points is if they could not be held and could not be double overloaded with reserve power. Plot it in EA and fire it that turn or lose it. Alternatively I'd consider anything over 16 a suicide overload.

I think there are more subtle ways of dealing with it...hell I think it's fine except for the mizia effect Fed ships will suffer from.
What about just saying limit the holding energy to Warp Power only ( instead of the regular any power ) for the Overloads greater than 16.

Personnaly I don't mind if the enemy DOES power his Photons with Reserve Warp Power, it means he has less reserve power for all those other handy things. If you blow every point of Reserve power on Overloading your Phot-torps, you probably won't be able to stop that R4 tractor and SP combo.

Quote:
Disruptor- In cruisers, 50% increase in number of mounts. No other changes.

Ummmm...UIM burnout doesn't lock up your disruptors for 32 impulses, it just ruins the UI Module.

Quote:
My feeling is that the 2X disruptor has to be something really new. Maybe a heavy disruptor, or a disruptor that fires twice in one turn...I don't know for sure. But I can't think of many improvements to it that would equal a fast-loading, range 40 photon with a max 24 point warhead.

( No offense but ) Where do people get off?
Fast loaded 24 point warhead out to R40!?!
Some people have hinted at R8, Fast loaded 16 pointers, or R10 two turn 24 pointers....but not fast loaded 24 pointers.
Lets all pretend that everybody has said what they've said and stop using poetic licence to forward out own nihlistic veiws.

Quote:
I could live with a very linear upgrade to the photon that adds 25% damage total (i.e., moving from a base of 8 to one of 10), with a fast-load warhead limit of 15. Keep range at 40, and bump the power cost accordingly.

I think we need R50 just so when the DNX start running around with R50, it won't look odd.
I also think 12 point warheads out to R50 is fine...have you seen the power and reserves on these ships!?!

Quote:
Heavy disruptors...double up power and damage.
Rapid-fire disruptors...fire twice per turn, if power is available. Use a capacitor.
Super UIM disruptors...UIM doesnt' burn out.
Doubler Overload disruptor...allow double overloads for double the power.

Any other ideas?

R12 Overloads 50% more range for 50% more power.
HyperOverloads 10 power and R8, but double overload disruptor damage...that a 5/6 chance of 20 points of damage at R1...if you're willing to go there.
Another reason why 24 point warhead probably won't be problem....what's 6 lots of 20 again?

Quote:
I'm cool woth photons that can't be held above 16-point overloads.

I'm not...it feels too much like the mis-fire-ejection rules of X1.
I'ld rather:-

Beyond 16 pointers must be held with warp power.

Or at the very most, 16 pointers can only be held with a rolling delay.

Dumping unfired 18 pointers in deep space is "un-photonic". Phot-torps should be safe to opperate and reliable. Not nessessarily accurate, but sturdy and reliable and a forced ejection if a firing opportunity doesn't eventuate just goes against the Fed design philosophy.

Quote:
I would prefer to either redically alter the photon table or not alter it at all.

An interesting compromise would be allow photons to get ECCM shifts liken phasers.

One thing I'ld like to see is some alternate proximity loading.
3/4 the damage with a +1 die roll bonus.
I'ld also like to see the Photon have the ability to fire Proximity Overloads ( and locality or Vacinity overloads if that's the name given to them ), so that UIM stuff can be offset...if the Disruptor gets get a double damage Overload with UIM ( although with auto burnout ), how does the photon compete!?!

Maybe the Disruptor will get more damaging and the Photon will just get more tricks.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 09:30 pm: Edit

I still don
t see how you go from 32 warp power, to 42 warp power to ...60!!! warp.

And the 1.5 power to one box. Ugh, no. I would rather keep the only thing that has more than 1:1 with the batteries.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 10:33 pm: Edit

40 warp boxes generating 1.5 warp power each.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 12:26 am: Edit

60 Warp is too much!

MC1 with two 16 point engines generating 1.5 each (48)+ command section warp (1:1 power) totaling 52 warp + four impulse and four or more auxillary power for 60+ power(plus batteries). Some races would get different lay outs to balance. Engines cannot be repaired wile running hot.

This is pleanty of power for a MC1 ship.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 12:47 am: Edit

That really depends on how many and what kind of power pigs the weapons systems are.

Let's remember that if we don't have a massive leap forward then we can't deal properly with X1R.

If I get two 16 box engines that yeild 1.5 power each ( 48 warp power total ) and I go into battle against a BCHX which has say for the sake of aregument two 25 box engines, then I look pretty silly prenting to be a technologically advanced vessel.

Maybe we should work on X1R before we even begin to talk about X2 ???

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 02:41 am: Edit

X1R is just more types of ships with X tech right?

Question, is any of this sactioned by SVC/SPP or is all this someone's pet project?

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 02:58 am: Edit

Yes, it's just more X1 tech...maybe a few gadets to play with ( like the mataray drone warhead ( read Stingray that launchers a Type I )).

The thing is, that if the BCHX outguns the CCXX then you have to ask the question, why build X2 ships at all...oarticularly if you don't need the strategic speed, like the Tholians.

If you send a CCXX off to intercept the enemy which turns out to be a BCH and it is sunk; it'ld be worse than you sent out your own BCHX and it never intercepted the enemy at all.

Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation