J.T.:

Yeah...that's why I think we should use PAN-WARP to exceed the speed 31 limit.


M.R.:

Personally I think the 4 180 degree weapons should be left in the domain of Disruptors.

Photons being 2 LF + L, 2 FA and 2 RF + R has much more racial flavour.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 09:08 pm: Edit

I'm against going much faster than speed-32. The moe I think about it, the bigger a can of worms it starts to look.

Bizarre cases of movement start to become increasingly common. With GW-X1 tech a ship can close from range 2 -> 0 in an impulse, under the right conditions.

Going any faster than 32 means we start seeing 3 -> 0 and 4-> and 2 -> 0 situations become very common. Especially since X2 ships have all this wonderful warp power to play with and so tend to end up moving at top-speed a lot.

Then we need an even faster plasma. If starship-max goes to sabot-speed (40), plasmas will need to go to something like 64 to cope, meaning that a ship might not have much chance to use defensive weapons against a plasma lauched ahead of its target.

The firsr way around this that comes to mind is to change the Impulse Movement chart. Specifically add more impulses. If we want a faster starship, we need more impulses in a turn and I haven't begun to calculate what a mess that could make.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 09:30 pm: Edit

John's right. On further reflection I think we need to stay away from speed 33+. Maybe allow a 2X ship to reach 32 could be allowed. But I dont think it should go any faster.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 10:06 pm: Edit

I think 36 would be a nice speed for X2.

As to R4 down to R0 or worse R2 to R-2...you could offset that problem without More impulses...but you probably shouldn't.


HOWEVER You offset the R5 Ph-1 and R3 Ph-2 sweetspots to R15 and R9 or there abouts.

With only a gradual build up in firepower at closer ranges.

That way a ship won't jump from R2 to R-2 because it'll be fired upon by the other vessel which will then VEER long before those ranges get seen.


And maybe having seekers jump from R4 to R0 is exactly what we need to make seeking weapons actually deadly enough in X2 to warrent being deployed by the Gorn and Kzinti....though it won't be if there is the range extentions.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 10:42 pm: Edit

Wrong thread for faster than 32 warp. That topic, though likely doomed, deserves its own thread. And I've got a solution that just might work.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 10:59 pm: Edit

I'd hate to see seeking weapons depend on tricks like that because that means a seeker launched behind (or ends up there) isn't a threat.

One thing I would emphasize is that ANY increase in a starship's max speed must be accompanied by a increase in plasma torp's sabot speed. For speed 36, plasmas would need to move between 45-50 to keep their edge. Probably 48.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 11:12 pm: Edit

I just created the "X2 Speed Limit" topic.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Friday, January 03, 2003 - 06:58 am: Edit

An idea I presented back during the GEnie days: a two-stage arming chamber to allow photons to fire every turn with a two-turn arming schedule.

The way it works is the first turn charge is done in the first stage, and then the torp is moved into the second stage to finish arming and launch on the second turn. At that time, the first stage can start charging up another torp.

If the first torp, in stage two, is held instead of launched, the second torp in stage one MUST be held for one point of power (two points if it was overloaded by any amount). Otherwise, the energy is dissipated and can not be reloaded; the entire photon tube must remain off-line for a full turn after the torp in stage two is launched.

A half-loaded torp may be held in the second stage (assuming it was empty, of course!) for one point of power (two if overloaded). If dissipated from stage two, the one-turn off-line requirement does not apply as the torp can be jettisoned directly into space.

I'm inclined to not allow second-turn arming from reserve power for a held half-load torp, but I do like the interesting tactical implications: if I have a torp and a half held on turn three, I would be able to fire the first, move the second into the stage-two chamber and finish arming from reserve power ... and should I then be able to launch the second torp also on turn three??? If so, how soon after the first -- eight impulses or sixteen???

Of course, in no case may a single photon tube launch two torps within eight impulses of each other, even over a turn break.

Oh, this idea was presented as a Federation ONLY tech ... no other photon-using race (ie, Tholian, Orion, WYN, etc) may use this tech.


Garth L. Getgen

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, January 03, 2003 - 01:25 pm: Edit

Just make it a 2-space weapon and nobody with an option mount will touch it.

I'm surprised that didn't become the photon tech for the omega sector humans. Would have been more interesting that just mega/mini photons.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, January 03, 2003 - 03:11 pm: Edit

Garth: That is very similar to the X2 photon I designed. Yours is very interesting and I may consider replacing mine with yours.

If you set up to fire two sets of photons in one turn you will have at least a full turn delay between firings and two turns to do another double fire. So with that in mind I thing an eight impulse delay is long enough. The enemy knows after a cruiser fires eight photons that they have time.

One question though, as a X2 weapon it can be fast loaded as well, how would you handle that?

I have an idea but I let you answer first.

I think it should be a 1.5 space weapon. (one box). There is only one firing mechanism so it isn't double the size.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Friday, January 03, 2003 - 05:31 pm: Edit

Dangitall, I forgot about the fast-load rules in X1 tech. {sigh} I'm not sure how to handle that. {shrug}

As far as what size mount it takes, if it's a Fed-only tech, who cares??

I haven't been following the other topics here, but one thing we talked about back on GEnie and when I was posting SVC's comments to rec.games.board is the idea that some X2 tech should be race-specific. Feds get nifty photons that not other race can use; Kzinti get nifty drones no one else does; Klingons get SOME nifty drones that the Kzinti do but the Feds don't, and they get really cool disruptors; Lyrans get to do something neat with ESGs; Romulans and Gorn both get some sort of plasma upgrades, but each get a different set; etc, etc. If ADB is still thinking along those lines, that's why I said this is a Fed-only tech. Perhaps maybe X2 Omega might get it, too.


Garth L. Getgen

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, January 03, 2003 - 05:53 pm: Edit

"As far as what size mount it takes, if it's a Fed-only tech, who cares??"

You must consider the Orions. The cloak is Romulan only (mostly) but the Orions use is reguarly. They also use the ESG which is really Lyrans only. Hellbores too. They'll get their mits on any new Photon tech. as well.

Dangitall, I forgot about the fast-load rules in X1 tech. [sigh] I'm not sure how to handle that. [shrug]

Answer. Allow it but only in the second chamber. A fast load cannot be armed in a chamber that has been occupied by another photon that turn. So you can't fire one and fast load another. You could fast load one and start another in the first(A) chamber but the A chamber torpedo couldn't be ready until the following turn.

The alternative is that the fast load process feeds the entire process through the full system (chambers A and B) so only one torpedo per tube could be armed as fast load. Hmm, this is better. You can load two torpedos over a two turn process or one as a fast load each turn. Why load over the two turn process? Because you could fire the first then eight impulses later finnish loading the second via reserve warp for two full photon torpedos in one turn. You could do that a maximum of once (for two shots) every two turns or you could just fast load each turn (one shot). Fast loads cannot be held.

It's starting to sound complecated, no?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, January 03, 2003 - 06:09 pm: Edit

It sounds nice, but with the fast load, you don't really need it. I'd say this. The photon, over it's evolution from EY to 1X, has improved by adding more options (overload and proximity), improved range, and fast loading. The only two areas untouched are accuracy and damage. Accuracy is fine; touch it, and mess the game up. So, I'd sugges bumping the damage base from 8 to 10, and possibly expanding the firing arc from 120 degrees to 180. Modest improvement, but darn useful to the Fed. And, best of all, it's simple. I also like the idea of down-loaded photons, as well.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, January 04, 2003 - 03:04 am: Edit

I'ld like a CCXX, to have 2 LF+L, 4 FA, 2 RF|R and 2 RA, rather than 4 uber-photons through the FH arc...but that's just me.

I don't like the doubled chamber idea for photons.

I'ld rather see a 3 turn arming cycle for the Photon with max energy of 12 points, ( max power on any turn of 8 points ) and a maximum damage of 24 points.
If it retains the ability to fast load 12 point warheads ) and regular load ( 16 point warheads ) then it'll have tactical options during the arming period but also have better damage.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Saturday, January 04, 2003 - 03:16 am: Edit

The return of the characteristic Fed Slowdown...

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, January 04, 2003 - 03:38 am: Edit

With the option of 12 point 1 turn, 16 point 2 turn or 24 point three turns, only Fed captains that choose to SLOW DOWN shall get it.

With drones and Phasers the Feds don't need MORE 1 turn arming weapons.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, January 04, 2003 - 03:40 am: Edit

On second thoughts, a 20 Point two turn warhead wouldn't be bad...that's a three turn 24 point warhead fired during the second turn and armmed the right way.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Saturday, January 04, 2003 - 11:11 am: Edit

The last thing the Feds need is more crunch for their photons. 16-point held overloads nearly break the game as is.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Saturday, January 04, 2003 - 02:45 pm: Edit

Perhaps going abover 16 makes an overload unholdable...

By michael wheatley (Mike_Wheatley) on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 09:12 pm: Edit

Rather than improving accuracy in general, what about "local" improvements, by widening the range brackets?
E.g. "Neo-photon" to-hit table:

RANGE:	0-1	2-3	4-6	7-10	11-14	15-42
STD	-	1-5	1-4	1-3	1-2	1
OVER	1-6	1-5	1-4	1-3	-	-

I'm not quite sure how to handle PROX photons...

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 02:40 am: Edit

They use the same brackets with the prox to-ht numbers.

Although the outer limit should still be 40 than 42.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 05:32 pm: Edit

I had a thought about the 2X photon that might be worth looking at. Two common gripes about it are that it's badly affected by EW, and that it can't be fired at R1 unless overloaded. So, rather than make the photon bigger or more damaging, I chose to change it from a d6 based weapon into a 2d6 weapon. This gives three fairly modest benefits; modest, at least, when compared to just bumping up damage and range.

First, it makes it less susceptable to EW...surely something the Feds would look at. Second, it lets you fire it at range 0-1 in standard mode, a nice but not unbalancing benefit. And third, it has a modest increase in overall accuracy...in fact, it's not any more accurate than some 0X weapons. Range is still limited to 40, and you can still auto-hit at R0 and 1 with overloads. Here's the chart. Thoughts? I personally like this a bit better than just making it bigger and more powerful. It adds flexibility and helps alleviate two weaknesses the weapon has, something the designers would probably look at.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 07:30 pm: Edit

I like it.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 08:30 pm: Edit

Mike,

Damage vs hit probability is a crucial balance with the photon. Better to-hits or less EW degradation are advantages that would replace more power. It's not necessarily a bad thing for the Feds, you understand, but there's a give-and-take.

Going to a 2d6 hit chart, even if we more or less duplicated the d6 hit percentages, would be enough of an advantage to ratchet damage from 24/tube max to 20. The slightly improved hit probs are worth no expansion in power at all.

Here's how the percentages stack up:

range	0-1	2-3	4-5	6-8	9-15	16-23	24-30	31-40
2d6 table	10	9	8	7	6	5	4	3
% hit	92	83	72	58	42	28	17	08
1d6 table(std)	0	5	4	3	2	1	1	1
% hit	0	83	66	50	33	17	17	17
1d6 table (OL)	6	5	4	3	0	0	0	0
% hit	100	83	66	50	0	0	0	0

You realize that a 12 to hit with OLs at 0-1 makes it as good as a mauler with a better firing arc?

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 08:45 pm: Edit

OL Photons currently auto-hit at 0-1, so I dont see the problem.

If this chart were adopted, I'd like to see a max 18 point OL Photon.