Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board

Archive through February 16, 2003

Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: OLD X2 FOLDER: X2 SSD's: Archive through February 16, 2003

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 05:06 pm: Edit

11 X2 Fed Ships. These BPVs are higher than I would like which means you should all love them. Drones are included in price at 2BPV/drone. AWR and FLAG refits add to the shown BPV. The G2X drone rack operates like a GX rack but has two magazines making it much easier to reload. The launcher and the active magazine is destroyed on a drone hit.

http://sfbfog.iwarp.com/SSD/Federation/

Xork Invasion Y215
XBCJ YIS Y225
XBD YIS Y216
XCA YIS Y205
XCAD YIS Y218
XCCG YIS Y217
XCCJ YIS Y219
XCCP YIS Y217
XCG YIS Y216
XCL YIS Y205
XCM YIS Y216
XDD YIS Y205

I still need a Frigate.

The XCM is a maxed XCL but doesn't exist earlier due to treaty limitations.
The XBD is a maxed out XDD but doesn't exist earlier due to treaty limitations.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 05:50 pm: Edit

Tos,

Why would the Feds ever mount rear-firing photons?

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 09:19 pm: Edit

Less crunch. It should play better.

Also, its different. Different is good. Same is bad.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 10:16 pm: Edit

But Feds are all about crunch.
It looks like the bottom half is put on backwards.

The FH torps with the C turn mode makes the ship very different. With FH and RH torpedo arcs, this ship will always have 2-3 torpedos in arc.

Tos' CA is designed for a range 10 dance.
It isn't very difficult to get all 5 torpedos to fire on the same turn, with FH RH torpedo arcs.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 10:31 pm: Edit

Quote:
As a SFB player I should at least know that. I'm talking about the no brainer the 1/2 point is. Simply 2:1. If you don't use fractional accounting then it still works out because the number of phasers is usually even (until damage comes in). With .75 or .66 it wont work out that easy. I could be made to but why should we make major design changes and limits just to accomadate that little balance issue.

Ever wonder why Ph-3s seem to come in pairs?

We could do 2/3 and then have tripplets of the Advanced Point Defense Phasers, but it'ld just be easier to do 0.5 power and slightly less powerful weapon.

Quote:
Why would the Feds ever mount rear-firing photons?

Less crunch. It should play better.

Also, its different. Different is good. Same is bad.

You could find yourself unable to generate a prpoer retrograde ( say you have a GSV and a cruiser and some destroyers and a larger enemy force, so the Cruiser charges whilst the GSV and DDs move into retrograde, so as the protect the GSV from an enemy over-run, then the Cruiser could easily find it'self retrograding with the rest of the group but facing the wrong direction ( retrograding in a forward facing )) and thus need rear facing photons to build up just enough damage to rip apart the enemy shields.
Then their is the fact that Klingon rear sheilds tend to be weak but Klingon ships tend to be fast. You Do your Obliques, then turn away and the Klingon falls within range of a pair of standards ( and her turn mode is not free ) and you blast a narrow volley of ( say 12 pointers ) to pull down the sheild and even though the enemy is free to sideslip he cannot turn ( without a het ) and so your rear Ph-5s do a little mizia...heck, with the emmence Caps on the X2 ships, the Rear Phasers could be employed on the same impulse as the Photons for a goodly amount of internal damage 50% of the time.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 11:01 pm: Edit

Just for my own entertainment, I've made up a "pretty" SSD for a Fed XCA. Not vastly different than some of the other stuff we've seen, at least in terms of number of boxes and what have you; just a different concept.

Federation XCA

The unusual firing arcs combine with the better than normal Fed maneuverability for a bit better phaser coverage without needing as many to get the job done. I also incorporated a few other things based on some posts I've read and find sensible in some way:

Only one type of phaser. Since the P5 can be downloaded to fire as a P6, why not just have P5's? Less parts and maintainence, plus all the defense you could ask for.
Some inherent stealth. Not quite as good as the Orion, but a neat concept for a ship like this. Harder to detect, something I can see for an advanced ship.
Less NWO. Probably cargo in most cases, but could be Flag for a command version, sensors for a scout-capable version, or what have you.

Might not be what everyone is looking for, but you gotta admit...it's different!

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Saturday, February 01, 2003 - 12:10 am: Edit

It is different, and a cool looking SSD.
What is it? Stingray class?

I agree with you on the Feds having only one type of phaser. Just like the old CAs have only ph-1, Y205 Feds with all ph-5 is the way to go.

A Fed ship should have a bit more restricted phaser arcs. Every phaser on the ship points down the Klingon oblique arcs (#2 and #6 shield centerlines).

It would work as a Klingon ship, but not a Fed.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Saturday, February 01, 2003 - 12:19 am: Edit

Especialy with the new flexability of the Ph-V.

Feds had better learn from the past.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Saturday, February 01, 2003 - 07:54 am: Edit

Quote:
A Fed ship should have a bit more restricted phaser arcs. Every phaser on the ship points down the Klingon oblique arcs (#2 and #6 shield centerlines)

Why? The normal fed has FH + LS/RS. That's better overall coverage. With this design, you get better forward coverage. Remember, X2 is supposed to be all new; you can't restrict a given race to particular phaser firing arcs "just because." The Feds applied some things they learned to a new design, just like the other races will.

By Andrew C. Cowling (Andrew) on Saturday, February 01, 2003 - 08:13 am: Edit

Quick query on the SSD: is there a reason for range 9-10 overloads being more accurate than standards, or is it a typo/carryover?

(Looks like one viciously nasty ship, though - nice work.)

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Saturday, February 01, 2003 - 10:40 am: Edit

I think I took it directly from Jeff's chart, and I can agree with it. The old photon topped out a 1-3 for it's max overload, and I can see keeping that trend for this one, as well.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Saturday, February 01, 2003 - 11:14 am: Edit

The question is still out on the photon. It's hard to tell what is right for that weapon. Only playtesting will sort it out, but for now it's the ships that matter. Weapons charts can be changed.

I personally feel the for the Fed the side saucer mounts benefit from the new arcs (FA-L/FA-R) rather than the 180° side arcs. I wrote to Mike some time ago that I thought they would rotate the side mounts around forward a few degrees to acomplish this. I like this for another reason, visually it indicates a new design pardigm. (Of course the over hull will show that as well but it's a good change.)

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 08:41 pm: Edit

Okay, a few new SSD's to spark some thought. These are two XDD's...one Klingon, one Federation. I know the Klingons traditionally don't operate DD's, but this one is a bit big for a frigate, and small for a cruiser. Besides, it's X2...we can posit whatever we want!

Federation XDD
Klingon XDD

The photon table is by Jeff Tonglet; the Drone racks are by Tos (double magazine G racks). The ships would have an SIF, but I don't know what that would look like quite yet.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 08:51 pm: Edit

Mike,
I just sent a new version of my XCA. Please let me know if you get it. Thanks.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 08:53 pm: Edit

The Fed is a little shy on warp. If my count's right he only has 18.

he needs 24 to be 1rst gen X and the same or more for 2nd.

Any particular reason why you mounted phasers on the warp engines?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 08:55 pm: Edit

Jeff,

I got it. It'll be up shortly!

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 11:50 pm: Edit

http://www.geocities.com/raperm2002/FED_X2_v3.GIF

Thanks for putting it up.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, February 06, 2003 - 01:01 pm: Edit

Jeff's X2 Fed DD.

Federation XDD

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, February 16, 2003 - 07:44 pm: Edit

Mike,

Do you have a ISC CCX SSD handy?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, February 16, 2003 - 07:56 pm: Edit

Yup. I do. I'll send it to you.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, February 16, 2003 - 09:24 pm: Edit

Thanks.

Do you have a X1 CCX? I was kinda hoping to edit that.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, February 16, 2003 - 09:32 pm: Edit

Sure don't. Never got around to doing one. Sorry about that.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Sunday, February 16, 2003 - 09:58 pm: Edit

Try using SSD8.0. It works great for making SSD's.

By Aaron Gimblet (Marcus) on Sunday, February 16, 2003 - 10:15 pm: Edit

Okay, Johns doing ISC. I guess that means the Hydrans are Mine. Yay.

Someone know where I could find a copy of X1 gathering dust? Went looking for it today in my local bookseller, no joy.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, February 16, 2003 - 10:21 pm: Edit

Try Ebay.

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