It always seemed strange to me that the fusion beam - a weapon with a built-in capability to be destructively overused (the '(E7.42) suicide overload') - had a cool-down turn that you couldn't do anything about.

So, a proposal - allow the fusion beam to fire on the following turn from when it previously fired, but treat that as having the same effects as the 'suicide overload' (IE., E7.421 effects).

Standard direct-fire arming rates (E1.50) still apply, so this prevents the use of the weapon on impulse 32 of one turn and impulse 1 of the next for a 'cheaper' (in energy cost) suicide overload...at least 8 impulses will pass, in which the tactical situation may change.

When using this option, on neither turn (the initial 'normal firing' turn, and the subsequent 'refire' turn) can the weapon be overloaded. The standard Fusion Beam chart must be used both times.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - 07:51 pm: Edit

I always thought it was because the crew had to say back in any case.

But your proposal might have a lot of ramifications.

However, from a Hydran point of view I'd love this ability. It would certainly have me being even more agressive to overrun.

How about if you overload it during cooldown it explodes immediately (given as a side note). Then X-versions CAN standard overload during cooldown (still treated as SSOL).

Heh... SSOL. That's what the target is.

By Xander Fulton (Dderidex) on Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - 08:08 pm: Edit

Well, the damage output is identical to the standard 'suicide overload', and the effect to the firing ship is the same...you lose the fusion beam, and you take another internal.

The net differences are that in taking two turns, you have to put power into the weapons ON both turns (you can't just jam it full of power one turn, and then take the saved energy on the next turn...when you are very close to a very angry target...and throw it in shields). Additionally, it's not a massive blow to a single target shield/arc, but 8 impulses pass (normal direct fire re-arming cycles) allowing the target to potentially bring another shield to bear or take other defensive actions.

On the other hand, it only takes 4 total power (2 points on each of two turns), while a 'normal' suicide overload takes 7 points.

My gut feeling is that the pros and cons balance each other out...and it does make more sense from an in-universe perspective (the weapon is, strangely, DESIGNED to be destructively overused, so...)

By Terry O'Carroll (Terryoc) on Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - 09:34 pm: Edit

IIRC the fusion beam fires "a beam of excited tritium atoms" at the target. So presumably, part of the effort of loading it involves filling it with tritium, probably at extremely low temperatures (and Hydrans normally live at cryogenic temperatures anyway). The fusion beam after firing is likely to be very hot. Attempting to fill the hot firing chamber with gas will cause the gas to expand quickly (and violently) causing an explosion before you have even loaded it.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 12:45 am: Edit

I will leave aside the obvious argument that you can't change fusion beam rules this way after thirty years of fusion joy.

I think if this rule was adopted, it would sufficient to allow only standard loads (that would destroy the weapon and do one point of internal damage) if you wished to fire on the reload turn.

By Xander Fulton (Dderidex) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 12:54 am: Edit

That's exactly how I was proposing it. In fact, not just standard loads on the reload turn, but on the firing turn, as well. Shooting an overload really DOES make it 'too hot to reload', and even shooting a normal load with another coming in right behind it is enough to destroy the weapon and do another internal.

It's really a pretty minor suggestion, when you think about it in comparison to the existing suicide overload rule. No additional damage at all, same effect to the firing ship, and while it takes less power (4 pts over 2 turns instead of 7 pts on one turn), you are spreading the damage out over 1/4 of a turn...providing plenty of time for your target to turn a new shield, reinforce a shield, or increase range.

There is pretty much no situation where you'd want to 'suicide' the weapon (losing it, and taking another internal) and do it in this way - broken out over two turns - instead of the existing option for one massive punch.

By Terry O'Carroll (Terryoc) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 01:15 am: Edit

---

Quote:

There is pretty much no situation where you'd want to 'suicide' the weapon (losing it, and taking another internal) and do it in this way - broken out over two turns - instead of the existing option for one massive punch.

---

By Xander Fulton (Dderidex) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 01:31 am: Edit

I did note that it suffered the penalties of (E7.421) on the second turn. That is, even if you 'discharge' it, you lose the weapon and take the internal just for arming it that turn.

And the points you note in favor of it are exactly why I think it balances out vs the disadvantages. The biggest is probably the ability to take a quick shot (losing the weapon, of course) on reserve power.

Still, if the Hydran had decided that a suicide overload was an appropriate attack, it's USUALLY a better idea to have burned those extra points of power in that initial attack, and let the second turn be an escape turn...more power to put into shields and engines.

If you are taking a standard shot, you will be less effective against the target than the suicide shot would have been...and if you decide to fire on the second turn, that's power spent on the second turn you would not normally have been.

I'm not saying it's a worthless idea (or it would be silly to propose it)...just that MOST the time, the regular 'suicide' use of the weapon would be the only destruction of it you'd be willing to endure (for the resulting massive punch and sparing you power for a getaway on the following turn). And that while this does have some additional tactical flexibility, it loses a bit, too.

[And, seriously, how many times have you seen a Hydran willing to suicide overload in the first place? I think I've maybe seen it happen twice in all my time playing SFB...about as often as successful Klingon mutinies, actually!]

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 03:02 am: Edit

Saw it in a 14 player FFA, for 26 damage from one shot. YOWCH!

By Mike Strain (Evilmike) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 05:58 am: Edit

Depends on the situation.

I managed to end a turn at range zero in a Ranger on top of a Lyran BATS. Knew I wasn't going to live anyway, so I suicided the fusions and mangled the BATS on impulse one of the following turn.

Weirdly enough, my ship survived.

But I've seen many Hydran players suicide their fusions....most of the time it was a mistake, but when done properly (range 0-1) can be absolutely devastating.

By Xander Fulton (Dderidex) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 11:37 am: Edit

Right. And how many times, when they 'suicided' the weapon, would it have made sense to sacrifice it taking two regular shots 8 impulses or more apart rather than that one, really powerful, punch?

(As you say, both times I saw it done, it was very much in that 'ship about to be lost in a few impulses ANYWAY, so might as well')

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 12:06 pm: Edit

Mostly it would be an opertunity fire thing OR the potential would serve as a deterant. That's the main factor really. The deterant costs nothing. Just the mere ability has tactical value.

"Ha, you fired your fusions and missed! Now I can over run you behind my drones (which will eat up your gatlings."

"Double HA. Not so fast little pussycat!"

By Xander Fulton (Dderidex) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 01:43 pm: Edit

It's pretty much a bumblebee 'deterrent', though. Sure, he COULD fire them again on the turn you wanted to overrun him, but he loses two internals per shot (and one is his heavy weapon) in doing so...and since he almost certainly didn't arm them during EAF (he'd lose them possibly without ever getting a chance to shoot, if doing so)...he ends up burning almost all his battery to take those one or two shots, anyway. Which leaves him pretty vulnerable.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 02:06 pm: Edit

Alexander Fulton:

Frankly, at this point, you are (to me) contradicting yourself.

You have argued that it is okay to make your change because the Hydran will spend less total power over two turns for the same damage, but you have also noted that the opponent will have more time to react to the shots and thus (among other options, some of which can be combined) turn a new shield.

The advantage of the suicide overload was pretty much explained by Mike Strain, and that is for the extra power you do all of the damage in one impulse on one facing enemy shield. Like it or not, 39 points of damage (rough average for four fusion beams at Range Zero) on two different 24 box shields results in a lot less internal damage on the target than 79 points of damage (rough average for four suicide overloaded fusion beams) against a single 30 box shield.

By Xander Fulton (Dderidex) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 03:57 pm: Edit

SPP - that was exactly my point. My argument is that this proposal (of a suicide overfiring on the reload turn) is NOT unbalancing, even though it costs much less power...because it's also much less effective a choice. [And this is just a 'choice' thing - I'm not suggesting deleting the existing rules, merely adding this as another option to the fusion beam. You can either 'suicide overload' the traditional way if you really need that massive punch...or on any turn that you fired the weapon normally, you could on a subsequent turn when you NORMALLY would be unable to use the weapon fire it, again, at the normal damage...taking the 'suicide overload' penalties, though]

You'll almost never want to do it, in fact. It does present an OPTION, and to Loren's point maybe it's some small deterrent against an immediate over-run on what would be assumed to be a 'helpless' Hydran ship...but it really is much, MUCH less effective than the existing 'suicide overload' option at pure damage-to-target generation. (But, then, it does take a lot less energy to use)

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 04:30 pm: Edit

Alexander Fulton:

And there is no reason to do what you suggest.

The value of the suicide overload is that you have the possiblitity of pounding through one shield for a lot of damage. Almost 40 internals on average through the typical cruiser's #1 shield. You are calling for a maximum of almost 30 points of damage through two different shields, a reduction of almost 25% (closer to, but not quite, 40% if I scored my damage on a flank shield rather than through the #1 shield) in the expected damage assuming you hit flank shields and not a 30 box shield. You get less overall damage and destroy your fusion beams. If I am going to destroy my fusion beams, I want the solid punch of the single shot.

You are also overlooking enemy damage, that is to say while you are imagining all four fusion beams being fired, it is entirely possible that enemy return fire will have reduced the size of the Fusion array before you get the second shot, which further reduces the damage you will get with it.

So, no, I am not interested.

This does not mean that you may not convince SVC, but you have at this juncture convinced me not to be supportive of this proposal.

By Xander Fulton (Dderidex) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 04:53 pm: Edit

The idea is not really to make this a powerful new capability. As you note...the damage reduction vs the normal suicide overload is 25%-40% (assuming the enemy can turn a new shield), although there are a number of other tactical considerations (such as: what is left after the exchange)...at the same time as the total power needed to do it drops from 7 pts to 4 pts (roughly a 40% reduction in power).

25-40% reduction in damage for 40% reduction in power needed to do it, while introducing additional tactical considerations, appears to make the suggestion roughly commensurate with the existing capability.

And, as noted, I'm really only throwing it out there because it seems to make sense in-universe. Mostly from a comment in a game I'd been playing with newer gamers - along the lines of "What is this 'I can't do anything with the weapon this turn'? It's a weapon I can SUICIDE OVERLOAD...put so much power into it that it not only blows up, but takes a chunk of the ship with it, and here I have this turn where I have to be all 'whoah, whoah...be careful with that thing and let it cool down, we'd never want to damage it or anything'..."

And in thinking about that, it seemed that, yeah, a weapon with a suicide overload feature probably ought to be able to be used in equally destructive ways during it's 'cooldown' turn. I mean, a weapon designed to be destructively overused is a weapon designed to be destructively overused. A 'mandatory' cooldown turn that you cannot interrupt seems...counter to that idea.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 05:10 pm: Edit

Alexander Fulton:

And as I noted, you have talked me out of it, but the guy you have to convince is SVC, not me.

I could, for what it is worth from the background, as easily state that the rule already flatly states that the weapon CANNOT BE ARMED (emphasis, not shouting) during the cooling turn, not just that it cannot be fired, but that you cannot allocate any power to it when it is cooling.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 11:44 am: Edit

No. This change will NOT be made.