Joesph R. Carlson:

Couple of good observations there... First that a "New" menace after the defeat of the Andros would make for a interesting "hook" for the X1B module, and second that "General" production ships (such as the CA, DD and FF) were used in the "peace time" years for the middle years up to the General war (obvious exceptions for declared wars, of course).

Could be a kind of a "mini reset" for SFBs after the General war but before the advent of later generations of technology.

Hard to see how a "Parasite" menace could be wide spread enough to threaten all Alpha Quadrant races at the same time (unless that is what the Zorks are supposed to do... (grin))

What about a resurgence of wide spread Orion Piracy attacks? With the end of the General War, the ISC Pacification Campaign and the Andro Menace, all of the Major and Minor races will be hurrying to demobilize the vast fleets of warships that they built.

Sounds like an open invitation to the Orion Cartels to go back into business with a vengence!

Lets just say that if the Orions did start making more attacks on civilian freighters, it would be the "General" ships of the line (the Heavy Cruiser, Destroyer and Frigate classes) that would be detailed to patrols. Certainly less need for command ships and various specialist variants. You wouldn't send a Mauler on patrol, nor would you send a Drone bombardment ship or a tug.

There might even be a role for CX based ships that carry attrition units, just as Joseph has indicated, noting that the DDX and FFX classes could fill in for the needed escorts as needed.

By Stewart W Frazier (Frazikar2) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 06:00 pm: Edit

But wouldn't that be the CWX (CL sub) and the DWX (DD sub) on patrol for the most part (some races would retain the FFX for some things) leaving the CAX/CCX for what was the DN job??

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 07:00 pm: Edit

Stewart W. Frazier:

I suspect not.

Joe clearly understands the difference between using command ships (such as the CCX) and general duty ships (such as the CAX, DDX and FFX hull types).

In a sense, Joe's vision of that particular kind of future harkens back to the days of smaller scenarios where multiple ship squadron battles are relatively rare.

Might be a good thing for the game, IMO.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Thursday, November 10, 2011 - 11:09 pm: Edit

Jeff,

The "new menace" idea works also. The background material indicates large area of each empire are isolated and some areas devastated. So CAX for patrol seems to make sense to me.

The Federation carrier I have in mind (CVX) would have six F-101Cs and six F-18Cs. I think a post-GW upgrade for fighters carried by X-carriers would be to have a phaser-2 that can fire twice a phaser-3.

Stewart,

CWX and DWX classes lack the endurance of the FFX and DDX classes. See (R2.209 and 210) in module X1B.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 09:54 am: Edit

Joe,

I'm not against a "new menace" just not sure what it could be.

Heck, SVC might already have something in mind and just hasn't told us about it (yet, that is!).

Might have a problem getting approval for a phaser 2 fighter design.

By Richard B. Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 10:41 am: Edit

During the X1 period the Andros were a pretty huge menace, don't think more is needed.

After the X1 period, still have to hunt down remaining Andros. The new menace during this time is the Xorkaeliean from what I remember. Maybe Nicozians if they ever get done.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 10:44 am: Edit

Joseph,

I have to take issue with your 11:09 pm post from yesterday for a couple of reasons.

Jeff has already mentioned the first, a ph-2 that can be fired as a pair of phaser-3s. The background material is very explicit that only the Hydrans built X-tech fighters and your proposed capability is much too close to an X-tech ability for me. I don't object to more capable fighters being introduced after X-tech is deployed, and in fact such fighters already exist. There are several fighters that get their "C" or "D" upgrades after their empire has already deployed X-ships. The extreme case is the F-14D, which was deployed sometime in the Y190s. (I don't recall the exact date.) But in all these cases the improved versions reflected improved "standard tech", such as the ability to carry more drones (or plasma-D torps). You are suggesting giving fighters a "rapid pulse" phaser, which is explicitly X-technology.

My second objection is that I don't think your proposed fighter group for the CVX makes sense. The background material clearly states that X-tech made attrition units obsolete, but it is also clear that this didn't happen immediately. It was a gradual process. So I think that X-tech hulls carrying attrition units can be justified, but only if the attrition units themselves are good enough to justify the cost. This cost reflects both the tactical cost in weapons or other systems given up to make room for the fighters (or PFs), and the strategic costs in that a ship dedicated to carrying attrition units will have a longer logistics "tail" than one that does not. I supported X-tech PF tenders in Module X1R because I think PFs are still quite useful even in the X-tech era. Similarly, I think the X-tech heavy scout carriers that most empire received make some sense because the fast heavy fighters are still dangerous. But F-18s and F-101s? I don't think they are good enough to justify the commitment of a rare (even for the Federation) X-cruiser hull.

For the record, I could support a CVX carrying 6 F-111s and 6 F-14s or F-15s, again because the fighter group is powerful enough to justify the costs. But given the scarcity of X-tech hulls, I believe that if they are going to carry attrition units they should either carry the best available, or not be deployed at all.

Just my .02 quatloos worth.

By Donovan A Willett (Ravenhull) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 11:20 am: Edit

Another justification for the X-tech scout carriers was since they couldn't use escorts hunting Andro bases (nearby friendly warp sigs interferred with the scans), the fighters could also be vital protecting it from Andro counter strikes.

Late X or X1.5 ships would be after Unity and the only real use of fighters would be for being sent hunting pirates, whom themselves would be more and more likely to be X-tech themselves.

So, yeah, the X-tech carriers in X1R were probalbly the last of a dying breed.

By John Wyszynski (Starsabre) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 12:11 pm: Edit

LTX - Advance Tech LTT - I think that there is a need in X1 era campaigns to have a tug unit available. But I can see how full fleet tugs could be a problem in terms of game balance. Like putting X tech on size 2 ships, it may too difficult to form warp bubbles around a full size tug with pods as there are about the same size as a dreadnought. But a LTX with a pod would be about the size of a heavy cruiser and the warp power of a non-X1 CA (30 boxes). So these would probably be about the right balance.

DNX - It is established that they could not be fully converted, but what about doing something similar as the YDN and DNE ships. These ships only had the heavy weapons of a YCA or CA, with only a few more phasers. So a Federation DNX would have only four photons and the Klingon C9X would have only four disruptors. Furthermore the engines could be limited to 18 boxes per engine (or equivalent). There may of been a handful that were built before the efforts were generally abandoned.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 02:35 pm: Edit

The X1R carriers had heavy fighters, except some of the Hydran ships. These carriers were heavy strike or assault carriers. What I am suggesting is more of a fleet carrier with space in the rear hull for 18 single spaces for fighters (6 heavy and 6 superiority or two squadrons of superiority fighters 9+9). As to escorts convert the battle frigate to X-tech as a dedicated escort.

Federation example: CVX; 2xFBE-X; DDX; DGX. This squadron would be an X-ship replacement for a CVA group. For a carrier resupply ship convert one of the fast war cruisers. Just need a new fighter. Something between a F-18 and F-14.

Alan I don't disagree with your analysis. F-14Cs and Ds were advanced fighter built in small numbers. These were used by the SCS ships and bases. I don't think a carrier with 18 F-14s is good idea so we are left with F-18s or the next fighter that replaces the F-18 (something between a F-18 and F-14).

The new menace could be plural. Souldra invading some of the off-map areas, Orion piracy in some areas, maybe the first appearances of Xorkaeliean raids and recon in force groups, a new monster.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 03:18 pm: Edit

Joe,

I have to wonder if you're splitting hairs with regard to a new (unnamed & undesigned) fighter that splits the differences between the F-18 and F-14 types.

Type	Size	Spd	Phaser	Drones	Dmg	Other Wpn	BPV	Year	DFR
F-14D	1+	15	1xP-G-FA	4xI 4xSpecial	12	-	17	195	4*	J	F1
F-18C	1	15	2xP-3-FA	4xI 2xSpecial	10	-	12	183	3*	J	F5

What are you thinking? a "Dog" variant of the F-18?

Type	Size	Spd	Phaser	Drones	Dmg	Other Wpn	BPV	Year	DFR
F-18D	1+	15	3xP-3-FA	4xI 3xSpecial	11	-	15	196?	3*	-	-

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 03:26 pm: Edit

I wouldn't mind seeing an F-18D but I think SVC has said it wasn't going to happen.

If I'm misremembering, and an F-18D is at least possible, I wouldn't increase the phasers or drones. Instead, I would give it the F-15 drone-launch rate.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 04:13 pm: Edit

Hmmm.... A F-15 Drone Launch rate.

So you want to up the F-18 drone launch rate from 1 type 1 drone and 1 type VI drone per turn (targeted at a single target IIRC) to 2 drones?!?

How much of a BPV improvement does that equate to? +1BPV +2?!?

That would improve the fighters ability to inflict ship damage, but doesnt do much against smaller targets or multiple targets. If SVC has something strange in mind for the future, it doesn't necessarily make Joe Carlesons idea for an improved fighter any really apparent comparative advantage.

Is this a direction that would improve SFBs?

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 04:25 pm: Edit

An F-18D with F-15 launch rate works for me. I think adding additional drones/phaser tips the fighter into the 1+ space category.

Jeff,

I think the x-ship with their x-aegis will take care of the small targets. A small increase in ship damage potential is a reasonable goal for a single space fighter. I think the F-15 launch rate achieves that.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 07:26 pm: Edit

Ok, And I'm fine with leaving the F-18D as a single space fighter.

The only other point that I suggest we establish is that any such variant must not b e added to the General War era... it would be a major change and would (IMO) change the game balance for too many scenarios.

Is YIS date for a F-18D (defined as a F-18C with the F-15 launch rate installed) of 196 okay, or does it need to be set back a couple of years?

By Stewart W Frazier (Frazikar2) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 07:48 pm: Edit

Hmmm, that could work as the F18C has a launch rate of one drone per turn [it does not have the 'exception' under (J4.242)]...

By Lee Sims (Ssims2) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 08:25 pm: Edit

Has there been any mention of X-Bombers?

X-fighters presumably didn't work due to the difficulty of getting X-seeking weapon guidance tech into a 2-space fighter frame. The Hydrans don't have seeking weapon-armed fighters, and the X-MRS has considerably more available space than even a heavy fighter. X-guidance could conceivably have fit on a 4-space bomber, allowing it to use X-drones.

Play balance-wise, bombers have built-in limits - the restriction to ground bases. With the increasing obsolescence of attrition units in the 190s, planetary defense would be one of the few areas where such units would still be useful. R&D into X-bombers would have been low priority until the 190s, when Andromedan raids put a premium on local defense. X-bomber technological feasibility studies, at least, are a given once this started happening.

The logistics of X-bomber deployment are another question. Bomber ground bases would certainly require upgrade to X-status in order to maintain X-bombers. X-bombers and X-bomber bases would probably be less expensive than a full X-upgrade of a major planet's defenses, but the expense is still non-trivial for what remains essentially an attrition unit. Of course, if the sacrifice of 6 X-bombers allows the survival of a colony world, or at least buys time for a successful evacuation, then the Federation at least would consider this money well spent. Complicating things is the difficulty of deploying X-bombers in an environment of widespread Andromedan convoy raiding.

What might an X-bomber look like if it could work? Possibly a 4-space bomber with integrated Megapack, 3 integrated EW Pods, and (for drone empires) X-drone capability. Maybe add a bit to the best speed and damage of existing bombers. In service would be no earlier than 192 or so.

By Terry O'Carroll (Terryoc) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 08:39 pm: Edit

No mention that I'm aware of for X-Bombers. I think it's a conscious decision made to exclude X-tech from attrition units for flavour. Hydrans get X-stingers because Hydrans need fighters for part of their flavour. The General War is dominated by fighters and PFs, I think the X-era is intended to return to ship vs ship.

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 09:20 pm: Edit

I think Lee may have a good idea here. X-Bombers are outside the typical attrition units, and would be a quick way to deploy X-Units to various planets that are in the wave of, first the Andros, then general upticks in local Orion Pirate activity.

It fits the Federation political concerns of, "My constituents want protection NOW!", the Klingon habit of having defenses everywhere, the Romulan House systems of having their own defenses at their strongholds, and the Gorn's well know cheapness, etc. etc.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 10:12 pm: Edit

I sort of remember in the discussion leading up to X1R that X-technology was proposed for limited use on mega packs which was rejected. I don't think X-PFs were considered beyond this way lies madness (maybe it is just my opinion). I don't think X-bombers are viable. No x-weapons, drones, or energy weapons were installed on anything smaller that a frigate.

The back ground in X1R (page 30) indicates X-technology was difficult and expensive to produce. A bomber is a four-space attrition unit built with technology related to fighters.

By Donovan A Willett (Ravenhull) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 10:13 pm: Edit

I think that X-bombers would be putting too much money into something that is way to fragile. The only way I could see them working is if they were able to generate some kind of quickly regenerating shield, but if they could do that, why couldn't full sized ship do it.

But, the need for a local defense unit makes sense. Maybe something that is SC5, but too large to fit on a ship's mech links (kinda like how bombers are compared to fighters). More of a Skiff than a PF. These local defense vessels could use partial X-tech, or maybe use full X, justified by them spending most of their time 'on the ground', and as such can be built cheaper, but easily fixable.

A planet or base would have 3-6 of these assigned to it, and maybe have a few 'flotilla' bonuses (like EW grouping), but would operate more like a full warship than a PF. Bases would operate with them docking like starships, externally or interally as the case may be, and planet/astroid based ones operating from a small base that does not have 'landing pads' on the SSD, but would have requisite repair facilities, the squadron landing around it.

By Lee Sims (Ssims2) on Friday, November 11, 2011 - 10:56 pm: Edit

>No x-weapons, drones, or energy weapons were installed on anything smaller that a frigate.

Except X-MRS, of course.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, November 12, 2011 - 11:30 am: Edit

Given the restrictions on Bombers that already exist, I have to wonder if there is any value in even pursuing X-Bombers.

It might be a possibility for Module X4 "General War II, Revenge of the Coalition!"

Those nasty nefarious scientists slaving in the Klingon Imperial Scince Bureaus have really done it this time!

They have developed a new generation of Bombers and Fighters with unimaginable speed and range, not to mention shuttles and skiffs with extended range abilities to unleash a true Blitzkreig against the Federation!

Where is Kosnett when you need him!

By Michael C. Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Sunday, November 13, 2011 - 09:31 am: Edit

Well,

given the fact

1) that the outer regions of all the empires had taken a whipping, and so were "wilder"

2) All those colonies needed defenses

3) XP were all getting used up building X Ships and bases

4) You would think that there would be SOMETHING built as an "attrition unit" designed for long service life.

So something like a cross between a Interceptor and large Bomber. So the crew is maybe 10 beings.

Hmm, me will propose something...

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Sunday, November 13, 2011 - 05:09 pm: Edit

Mike,

Check me on this, but IIRC the history states (and its been repeated by both steves) that attrition units continued to be present at colonial defenses for many years after the general war.

The second issue is the contradiction between "Attrition Unit" and "Long Life".

I wonder if (just talking out loud here) what is needed is a size class 5 "patrol boat" that is tactically superior to a single (or even a pair of) Patrol Boat(s).

Say a Police ship with a Movement Cost of 1/5=0.2 or even a1/6=0.17 that uses a suite of low energy cost weaponry and combined with a high (or relatively high) combat speed.

Say like the Defiant class gunboats from the late 1960s and early 1970s in the real world US navy.

You might even put type D drone Racks on it and specify no reloads, a single phaser 1 and a pair of phaser 3s and a heavy torpedo (disrupter or photon or something in that catagory)

Just saying that it doesnt have to be a X1 or X2 gunboat as that would be DOA.