Archive through January 22, 2003
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: OLD X2 FOLDER: X2 ph-1: Archive through January 22, 2003
By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 07:49 am: Edit

Quote:

They'll have 4-6 five point BTTYs.



No they won't. SVC has made it clear that there will be no five point batteries on any Galactic ships. Several of us have agreed to using four point batteries, instead...which seems reasonable enough.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 08:02 am: Edit

2X Phasers

Okay, revised charts, showing John T's Phaser VI analog of the Phaser 3. Sounds like we have the following:

P5 is analog of P1 for 2X
P1 is analog of P2 for 2X
P6 is analog of P3 for 2X
P8 is analog of P4 for 2X

Haven't done the P8 yet, but I will.

On the same page ( 2X ideas Page) there are heavy weapon charts, as well. Feel free to post from them, or suggest others.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 12:40 pm: Edit

ph-3 analog's range:
Am I correct in assuming that X2 ships will be designed with all offensive phasers of whatever type(s) get decided on? If so, then there's no need to extend the ph-3 analog charts out beyond XX-aegis range.

ph-3 for drone defense:
The X2 ph-3 analog should be an improvement in drone defense over the X0 and X1 small phaser.

With speed <=32 drones, one of the critical pieces to drone defense is the chance of scoring less than 4 points damage at range 1.

The standard ph-3 is 4-4-4-4-3-3, meaning 4/6 chance to kill a 4 point drone.

Both of the current proposals (G-II and VI) have 5-4-4-4-3-3 in the range one bracket.
This is not an improvement in drone defense.
x-x-x-4-4-3 is.

ph-1 analog: The standard ph-1 is effective at range 5, marginal at range 8, and so-so at range 15. OL range for heavy weapons is also range 8.

I think that the marginal range for phasers should stay in line with the OL range for the heavy weapons.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 12:45 pm: Edit

Jeff,

True. One of the defensive phaser proposals was to use the X P1 as a defensive phaser. It can definately smack down a drone out to range five or so, no problem. The GII, while not a whole lot better than the VI, does have the advantage of being a gatling weapon, and can shred a good number of drones. Now, for REALLY good drone defense, let's see a 2X ESG, or 2X IPG. Woof!

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 01:23 pm: Edit

Remember that X-Drones can take more damage and that armor modules are easier to put on since you still get a good warhead. A phaser 1 is the only thing short of the Ph-V that will take out a X-drone. With the ability to fire as two ph-3 this is a fantastic choice as the standard defencive phaser. It would also provide two points of capacitor.

The Fed. Gorn and Romulan XCC could have 10 Ph-Vs and 2 Ph-1s. Give the Klingons and Kzintis and Lyrans 8 Ph-V and four Ph-1s. Hydrans could get 8 Ph-V with four Ph-GII and fighters (What an X2 Hydran fighter might be, sheesh, I dunno.)

Also, I think the Ph-VB table is a better choice (at least for now. I haven't actually done a real comparison yet.)

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 01:38 pm: Edit

Until we know the characteristics of an X2 drone, it's hard to figure what the drone defense phaser will look like.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 01:48 pm: Edit

I put up an alternate P-6. The first three ranges (0,1,2) mirror the old overloaded P3. The rest is just like John's P6. Bottom line, more close in power for drone defense, especially against speed 32 drones.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 03:14 pm: Edit

Mike,

That's a shade on the powerful side, seems to me. Looking at average damage, it's equal to a P-1 at the very close ranges.

That's why I was looking at a halfway point between a P-2 and a P-3 for the P-6.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 09:04 pm: Edit

Quote:

No they won't. SVC has made it clear that there will be no five point batteries on any Galactic ships. Several of us have agreed to using four point batteries, instead...which seems reasonable enough.



Since when?


Quote:

P5 is analog of P1 for 2X
P1 is analog of P2 for 2X



Only if the Ph-5 is you speak of is the PVB, and then you'll need a forrest of Ph-1s to compensate.

Quote:

ph-3 analog's range:
Am I correct in assuming that X2 ships will be designed with all offensive phasers of whatever type(s) get decided on? If so, then there's no need to extend the ph-3 analog charts out beyond XX-aegis range.



That's an interesting question.

Quote:

With speed <=32 drones, one of the critical pieces to drone defense is the chance of scoring less than 4 points damage at range 1.

The standard ph-3 is 4-4-4-4-3-3, meaning 4/6 chance to kill a 4 point drone.

Both of the current proposals (G-II and VI) have 5-4-4-4-3-3 in the range one bracket.
This is not an improvement in drone defense.
x-x-x-4-4-3 is.



I wonder how much handwavium there is for You can done load it to a Ph-3 shot if you want ( and thus capitalise on the improoved defense of the older phaser at R1 )

I would like to say also that I think with X2 ships running at 33 or more, we can jump range and therefore any Ph-3 analog should have an R2 similarity in it's R2...ie a six will still generate 1 point of damage.
Kzintis know; how to kill an I.D.ed Type IVF drone if you're going to jump range to from R2 to R0:- fire 6 Ph-3 shots, if you must.
The Current Ph-3 analog weapons are very marginal at R4 and shouldn't be.

Quote:

12 ph-5!? How many would go on each of the different MCs? There's the MC 1/3 FF, MC 1/2 DD, MC 2/3 CL, MC 1 CA.


Assuming a typical battle pass will get 8 of them in arc, the average damage of the various ph-5 proposals would be:

Average damage caused by an 8 phaser volley with no shift.
Range 5 6 7 8 9 10 11-13
ph-V 60 49.3 41.3 36 30.6 24 16
ph-VA 60 48 36 30.6 25.3 20 14.7
ph-VB 34.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 14.7 14.7 14.7


Combine this with the range 10 overloads, and how can the BPV be measured against an X1 ship?



I'ld like to respond to this.

1) We can just live with a 960 BPV price tag for a CCXX.

2) We can just live with the fact that with 6 PV5s or 8PVB, we'll have eggshells with sleghammers ( and BPVs that'll blow out because we'll still kill an X1 vessel every turn.

3) We claw back the sweetspot of the overload ranges, so that the vessels need to travel into Overload range of the enemy X1s inorder to deliver that kind of crushing blow and therefore find themselves crushed by Overloads.

4) We keep the Heavy weapon overload range to R8 so the X2s move into Overload range of the X1s inorder to fire and then get plastered.

5) We keep the numbers of PVAs and PVB down to 4 and 6 respectively ( or there abouts ) and then padd out the vessels with either Ph-1s or Ph-7s ( Depending on the Racial choice; Lyrans, Kzintis and Tholians going with the Ph-7s )
Would the Feds and ythe Gorns be willing to have 2LF+L and 2RF+R Ph-5s and then padd everything else out with Ph-1s?

6) We could mount such highly restrictive firing arcs on the vessels, that nobody gets to fir more than 4 Ph-5s at the enemy at one.

7) We see if playtesting doesn't formulate an exceptable result...the Ph-5s really don't become tood deadly until R5, were the X1s can put up a pretty good fight.


Personnally I think Options 7, 6, 5 & possibly 4 ( depending on the result of 7 ) will work out quite nicely.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 10:16 pm: Edit

I think the Ph-VB is the way to go. Maybe a little tweeking, but better that the others. The others are too powerful. I would be tempted to just replace my heavy weapons with Ph-Vs or Ph-VAs. That's a pretty hefty blast from those. The Ph-VB is far more reasonable. (Though I would like to see the R5 and R6 go up just a bit.) I'll work on another chart.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 10:37 pm: Edit

Loren, I think you're on to something.

If 4 heavy weapons can be replaced by 4 ph-5, and the ship has more total firepower, then the phaser is too powerful.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 11:48 pm: Edit

That chart above says it all. Photons would not quite be out matched if they always hit but they don't so the first two Ph-Vs would have even that beat (over all average damage over the course of several turns.)

The Ph-VB is better that the Ph-1 but modest compaired. This version will still kick butt.

The 8 x Ph-1 works out to be:
Range 5 6 7 8 9 10-13
Damage 28 17.3 17.3 17.3 8 8
Ph-VB 34.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 14.7 14.7


That makes the Ph-VB a pretty powerful weapon and the others superweapons.
Note: I still would like to see the Ph-VB tweeked up just a bit in that R5 column. I'll do a full R0 up analisys later.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 12:13 am: Edit

I just checked the numbers.
Average damage by range for the various ph-5 proposals
Range01234567891011-1314-15
Tos' Ph-V 8.58.58.58.57.57.56.175.174.53.83321.33
Loren's ph-VA8.338.338.338.337.57.564.53.833.172.51.831.33
Disruptor*108.336.666.666.6655552222
The OL ph-19.57.8376.335.55
John's ph-VB7.83765.1754.333.333.333.331.831.831.831.83
Standard ph-16.55.334.834.333.833.52.172.172.171111


* Disruptor assumed to be OL/UIM at range 8 or less, standard at 9-15

At ranges 1,4,6,9,10, the heavy ph-V and ph-VA beat the disruptor straight up. Plus, at 1.5 energy, it uses less power.

In addition, don't forget that in X2 vs. X1, the X2 will probably have an ECCM shift.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 12:35 am: Edit

How about this:

To make phasers more robust, so as to put 6-8 on a ship, but avoid the "eggshell with sledgehammer" problem...

If a ph-5 is damaged, the first hit reduces it to a ph-2. If a second volley comes in, scores a phaser hit, and the damaged phaser is in arc, then the damaged phaser must be marked destroyed.

We just represent a ph-5 on the SSD with 2 boxes.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 12:41 am: Edit

Quote:

I think the Ph-VB is the way to go. Maybe a little tweeking, but better that the others. The others are too powerful. I would be tempted to just replace my heavy weapons with Ph-Vs or Ph-VAs. That's a pretty hefty blast from those. The Ph-VB is far more reasonable. (Though I would like to see the R5 and R6 go up just a bit.) I'll work on another chart.



The origin of Take a MegaPhaser or a Ph-4 and multiply it by a fraction to get our table, doesn't have to stand, it's just an idea to base the Phaser from, we can mess with numbers to create something more atune to the nessecities of X2 combat...that is something that means a CCXX will have a pretty fair fight against a CX and DDX.


I think I see where the problem is...
Range 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11-13
Loren's ph-VA 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 7.5 7.5 6 4.5 3.83 3.17 2.5 1.83
John's ph-VB 7.83 7 6 5.17 5 4.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 1.83 1.83 1.83
Standard ph-1 6.5 5.33 4.83 4.33 3.83 3.5 2.17 2.17 2.17 1 1 1


If we take a full point of damage out of each result from the Ph-VA at range 9 and 0.5 points out from the average of the Ph-VA at range 10, then we should be able to get a weapon ( particularly with the power requirement being 1.5 points making the throughput lower than for the Ph-1s of the X1s we are fighting ) that can't murder X1 ships soly with phaser and each and every turn.
That being the case we won't have humungous...or should that be overloy humungous BPVs.


If we make those changes to the PVA then we can call the PVA out Ph-5 ( which will be the Ph-1 analog ) and the PVB will be the Ph-6 ( our Ph-2 analog ).

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 01:58 am: Edit

I see a need to maintain the same "chance to kill a drone", but now drones take 6 to kill.
Also, the average damage should be close to the ph-VB or slightly less.

This could be combined with my proposal a couple posts up:

A ph-5 or ph-6 that is damaged is reduced to a ph-2.
The second hit destroys the phaser.
If a damaged phaser capable of taking the damage, it must do so.

I propose the following phasers:
ph-5(c?) Offensive phaser
Range01234567891011-1213-1516-2526-5051-7576-100
109876655544432211
98776554444322110
87766444433221000
76665444333211000
66664433221110000
66543332220000000
Avg7.6776.5654.3343.673.3332.521.51.5.33.17
-1 shift8.337.576.55.54.834.334.173.833.333.172.6721.33.83.5.33
+1 shift76.565.54.53.833.673.172.832.671.831.331.67.17.170


ph-6B(?) Light offensive phaser
Range01234567891011-1516-2526-5051-75
876655444433211
876654444322110
766544333221000
766543332210000
665433321100000
654332210000000
Avg76.175.54.8343.53.172.832.3321.331.5.33.17
-1 ECCM7.336.55.835.334.3343.53.3332.671.831.5.83.5.33
+1 shift6.675.835.174.333.6732.832.331.671.33.83.5.17.170

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 11:24 am: Edit

I just came up with a new Ph-VB chart called the Ph-VB1.

I'll post it tonight.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 01:18 pm: Edit

I'll take all these and post them on the page I have the others tonight.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 04:21 pm: Edit

Jeff,

I see no need for a light-offensive phaser. See comments for P-2XX as to why.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 09:22 pm: Edit

JT, I don't know if there's a need for a smaller offensive phaser either.
But someone else suggested there might be, so I wanted to propose one. Besides, if the heavy phaser proposal turns out to be too much, a second option is already there.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 10:43 pm: Edit

The only one who's on about an updated P-2 is MJC.

Everyone wlse who's expressed an opinion (OK, mostly me) uses the X1 P-1 in this role.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, January 22, 2003 - 12:14 am: Edit

My proposed change to the Ph-VB is on Mike Rapers page. It's just called the Ph-VB1 for now. I did a bunch of analizing to get this. Compairing the old Ph-V(a), the PhVB, and the XPh-1. I compaired Maximum damage, average damage, and minimum damage as one shot and a eight phaser volly.
It now has a smooth damage curve which is what I think the Galactics would be going for. It is about 20% more effective than the XPh-1 for most ranges (I think).

The first versions of the Ph-V would have slaughtered the previous generations and might well have eliminated the need for heavy weapons! Not a good thing.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, January 22, 2003 - 02:01 am: Edit

Quote:

The only one who's on about an updated P-2 is MJC.

Everyone wlse who's expressed an opinion (OK, mostly me) uses the X1 P-1 in this role.



Hey if the Sweetspot of the Ph-5 is R8 or less, then I'm perfectly happy having the Ph-1 as the Ph-2 analog.


Quote:

It now has a smooth damage curve which is what I think the Galactics would be going for. It is about 20% more effective than the XPh-1 for most ranges (I think).

The first versions of the Ph-V would have slaughtered the previous generations and might well have eliminated the need for heavy weapons! Not a good thing.



Sounds like just the thing we're looking for!

So ship can mix and match about 10Ph-5s on the ship or 12Ph-1s...
Sounds good from a Mizia and REecord keep point of veiw.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, January 22, 2003 - 09:30 am: Edit

I still think pre-Xork X2 ships should have very few heavy phasers (say equal to the HW suite) to leave room for expansion when the Xorks arrive.

A Frigate might have a heavy phaser FH/LS/RS at first and some moderate phasers for defense. When the Xorks arrive some of the moderate phasers get upgraded to heavy phasers. So start at 3H/4L and end at 5H/2L. Upguns the ship without adding boxes.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, January 22, 2003 - 11:49 am: Edit

This new proposal of the Ph-VB(1) is not that heavy. It will do better but it's more of an improved weapon. I can see it being the standard. In X2 I can see the Ph-1 actually be ing an improved weapon as well. Being slightly smaller and easier to maintain. This would be reflected in the game but would explain why it becomes the new defence phaser. It can be repaired as a Ph-2 as well. Can fire as two Ph-3s and contributes two cap. points to the ship. It's a good combo I think.

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