Under passive FC then how well can it defend itself?

Additionally, beyond R5 the Fed is immune to fire other than plasma. That means OL range not as risky for the Fed.

You gain bennefits but come under restrictions too.

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 08:54 pm: Edit

Easiest would be to actually play it, the X ship has a lot of options and should change it's approach depending on what the Fed is doing.

The most obvious approach is to EPT ballet, possibly on passive fire control. So it will close to range 10-12 or so, launch EPTs, then avoid range 8. Thanks to the speed differential and high warhead, the torps will hit for decent damage barring WW; phasers will be kept for anti-drone duty (they're still quite decent at that even on passive). This does assume that the fighters have already been dealt with.

Alternatively the Rom could go for a long range phaser duel, using it's superior phasers and EW to force the BB to slow and reinforce against the sniping. Once the BB slows, it becomes an easier target for plasma.

If neither of those is attractive, or as a supplement to the phaser attrition strategy, bolt from the glory zone. While your design is far from optimised for bolting (just X and L on the forward oblique, assuming the D's are kept for drone defence), they could still chew up shields or fighters. Seek the rear torp to discourage pursuit a little.

I would be wary of trying to overrun the BB even in it's off turns, thanks to the Gatlings, but might duck into range 5-8 on a photon cycle turn.

In all approaches, take breather turns as needed to refill batteries, repair shields and rearm; the BB might win a straight slugging match, so don't let it get one.

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 09:05 pm: Edit

Against three CA's, there won't be any need to defend itself, since the CA's don't have drones.

Against the BB (nine racks), use normal drone defence methods. Thin out a big wave with D-torps (just remember to launch them before 5 hexes), manouevre to take several shots and use rapid pulse phasers at range 1 (effective range two - still a fifty-fifty chance of getting six points on the first shot). If there are too many to safely handle on passive and you're not willing to run them out then turn your fire control on.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 10:26 pm: Edit

As I mentioned, here is the Rom XDD, based very much on the SKX.

Romulan XDD

The major changes are fairly clear;

• More warp power, per the curve we've been seeing for 2X
• Less phasers, but better (mix of P-V's and P-I's)
• S torps upgraded to M
• More control spaces
• A bit more impulse
• Less trac, batts and shuttles, but a pair of D racks for defense.
• Modest shield upgrade, as preferred in Ken's poll.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 10:34 pm: Edit

Romulan XCA
Romulan XCC

This is my first take on 2X Rom's. I stayed away from geewhiz tech. IE: No SIF etc.

I have the Plasmas being 32-48 speed.

I tried to stay with std ship building practices of the Rom's. And the BPV is deliberately set high to accommodate any possible new tech.

The forward Opt boxes on the CA are limited to Non Power or weapon. IE: F.Hull Lab etc. The rear OPT. boxes can accept power or possibly PL-D racks. I'm not firmly wedded to them so they may just be removed in the second iteration.

By Aaron Gimblet (Marcus) on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 11:15 pm: Edit

In response to the earlier comments on the Hydran...

1.) Transporters. I dont see it needing more. The Hydrans historically dont have many, and their BCH has only 2. I dont see them needing more transporter capacity in the 2X era than they do earlier, and thus I dont see them developing that way.

As for the Hydran BPV being highish.. if we find in play that the design cant cut the mustard by itself, its a fairly minor thing to make the fighter bay larger. Classicly, Hydrans were not-quite competitive without their fighters. (barring examples like the Lord Bishop, king of CA Hulls when introduced. I am not intending to reprise that kind of hull for hull dominance for the Hydrans...)

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 11:25 pm: Edit

New SSD: Fed XCA2 http://sfbfog.iwarp.com/SSD/Federation/

This ship follows the XCA=DNLX paradigm. This would be a rare ship. The MC1 XCM2 (not drawn yet) would be the main cruiser. The plentiful light cruiser would have a MC3/4. I was surprised at how high I calculated the BPV. Design assumes some sort of SIF TBD.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 11:35 pm: Edit

Rom XDD. That will easily beat a SPX and if it has a plasma speed advantage over X1 might give the FHX a run for its money. BPV would be closer to 265, more if cool X2 gadgets like the SIF or 48 speed plasmas are installed.

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 01:09 am: Edit

Aaron's Hydran - I take it I've missed some transporters, but even on checking the SSD again I can't see any. Should the two central trac be tran? Am I going blind?

Mike's Rom XDD - I agree with Tos that it's superior to the SPX. Assuming no non-SSD improvements beyond X1, would guesstimate 240-250 or so. I would have put the P5 in the center, P1's on the wings (following SKA P1/P3 arrangement), and left it the four tractors that every SK has. I'd have thought about a third S torp (in the boom, like the SKL) rather than upgrading to M torps, but think Mike's twin M's is better.

Kenneth's XCA - assuming no non-SSD benefits beyond X1 and that the sensors are blinded normally, the listed 375 BPV feels about right to me.

By Aaron Gimblet (Marcus) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 01:13 am: Edit

Following Change to Aarons Hydran- Yes, the central two Trac should in fact be Tran. 2 Transporters just right for Hydran. 0 Transporters... Umm... problem.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 01:17 am: Edit

New SSD: Fed XCM2 http://sfbfog.iwarp.com/SSD/Federation/

This would be the standard MC1 Fed cruiser mentioned above. It would have a SIF TBD. MC of saucer is 0.5 when detached, center warp is attached to the saucer.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 02:04 am: Edit

---

Quote:

BPV would be closer to 265, more if cool X2 gadgets like the SIF or 48 speed plasmas are installed.

---

---

Quote:

agree with Tos that it's superior to the SPX. Assuming no non-SSD improvements beyond X1, would guesstimate 240-250 or so

---

• +4 warp
• +2 impulse
• +1 bridge, aux, and emer
• +3 on each shield
• S torps upgraded to M
• +2 D torp racks
• +2 BP's
• Reduction from 8 P-1's to 4 P-V's and 2 P-1's.
• -2 shuttle
• -2 battery
• -1 trac
• +2 cloak cost

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 02:55 am: Edit

Holly cow Mike, what is it like 4:00 am where you are? Having SSD dreams?

Just sent an extensive analysis of your Fed SSDs. I hope it was helpful.

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 03:16 am: Edit

XDD vs SPX, no tech changes, notable SSD changes:

-10 C Warp
+ 4 L Warp
4 R Warp
+1 Aux
+1 Emer
Shields -6/0/0/0
+1 Plas-M-FP
-1 Plas-S-LP
-1 Plas-S-RP
+1 Plas-D-LS
+1 Plas-D-RS
-4 B.P.
Replace 9 P1, various arcs, with 4 P5 & 2 P1.
-1 shuttle
-1 battery
+1 Trac
-1 Tran
-5 F Hull
-4 A Hull
-Redundant 6 on Sensor
-Redundant 0 on Scanner
+Turn mode A not B
+HET 6 not 5-6
-8 Cloak cost
-2 Max T-Bomb
+/- size class 4
+Housekeeping 2.5 not 4
+Movement cost 0.5, not 0.67

Start with the 228 point Sparrowhawk-X. Improve the torps, cloak, turn mode and available power at all reasonable speeds (32.5 vs 33 at speed 0, 16.5 vs 12 at speed 31). Adjust the phasers, keeping roughly the same total phaser power. Pull a few free hits (71 rather than 81 internals).

My lower estimate of 240 is just 12 points more than the SPX. Now that I've done a box for box, I'll stand by the higher one of 250.

Sure, it couldn't go head to head with a DNG at range 1, but if it's allowed to play to it's strengths I'd expect the DNG to get sent packing.

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 03:25 am: Edit

BTW Base SKX BPV is 160.

Box by boxing from the SKX....
Warp +16
Other power +4
Control +6
shields +3
S to M-torps +12
D-torps +12
Phasers roughly even
shuts -5
batts -4

about +44 from systems, plus call it a 10% surcharge on those improvements since it can cloak, so +50 or so for around 210 in all.

When it comes down to it, I'd still rather have it than a SPX.

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 03:40 am: Edit

Couple of typos in the above, oh well.

using 240 as my estimate, I do think that that XDD could defeat a SKX (160 BPV) and a SEA (80 BPV) not less than 50% of the time.

Until and unless someone actually playtests these ships proving anything will be difficult. My own experience is that even X1, properly run, will slaughter non-X ships. Playing against careful X-ships is very frustrating for the non-X player and frankly not much fun for either side.

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Eagle) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 08:04 am: Edit

Mike, I see you kept the AP plasma. Myself i see no tactical justification for it, and neither would the Romulan Senate who pays the bill!

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Eagle) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 08:10 am: Edit

Ok, folks one little question: Where is the bpv room for any gizmos? We need gizmos; all these ships are just X1 on adrenalin. As SVC said in P6 "I want X2 to be different!" And I agree.

Oh, another little thing: The looks of the Hawks series was because the ships were built by what the Roms allready had on hand (R4.xx): War eagle engines, F5 booms etc. The X2 series does, IMHO, NOT need to look like the Hawk ships. The Roms can and should evolve (this would also make the new series more interesting)
Considering the success of modularity THAT feature is likely to stay.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 08:30 am: Edit

Andrew,

I'm afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree. To me, you're approach to deciding the BPV of the ship makes no real sense. You compared it to an SPX, and note that the XDD has less power, less weapons, less or equal shields, less crew, less BP's, and smaller "tracs", but decided based on that that the ships is worth more BPV? You shouldn't compare it to the SPX, in any case, but the SKX...that's what it's based on. I still don't see how that ship can be expected to easily beat a Fed CX, or a Klingon DX, or a Gorn CCX...all of which have BPV's of less than 240. Note I'm not trying to start a flame war, but that I honestly do not see how that ship, with the minor changes made to it, is suddenly such a powerhouse.

Let me try illustrating this in another way. Take a Fed CA; just the vanilla one. It has:

• 4 standard photons
• 6 phaser-1's, with LFL, RFR, and FH arcs (2 each)
• 16 hull
• 30 warp
• 4 impulse
• four 1 point batteries
• shields at 30, 24, 20, 20, 20, 24
• crew: 45
• BP's: 10
• BPV = 125

• four "x" photons
• 12 "x" Phaser 1's, 4 FH, 3 each LS/RS, 2 360
• 16 hull
• 42 warp (40% increase)
• 4 impulse
• 2 AWR
• 2 GX racks
• 5 three point "x" batteries
• Shields at 40, 32, 32, 32, 32, 32
• Crew: 50
• BP's: 16
• All "x" abilties not on the SSD
• BPV = 225

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 09:53 am: Edit

The CX is 240 BPV r.e. CL23.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 09:54 am: Edit

Continuing the above (had to get a shower). The change from the original skyhawk A model to the SKX is worth 38 BPV. That buys all of this:

• F torps upgraded to S
• Batteries upgraded to "x" batteries
• 35% increase in shields
• 50% increase in warp power
• More crew and BP's
• The addition of 4 X phaser 1's (while removing 4 phaser 3's) for a gain of 2 X phasers in total.
• Double seeking weapon control.
• All the X benefits not listed on an SSD, such as aegis, priority of movement, extra HET, etc.

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 10:12 am: Edit

I compared it to the SPX, noting the superior weapons, power availability and agility. I allowed a modest reduction for the smaller internal hull and concluded that it was overall a little better than the SPX.

I'm confident it, if permitted to play to it's strengths, could beat a DNG consistently. It might well be disadvantaged against the Fed CX of the same (240) points value, but I wouldn't assume this without playtesting it - for instance it has more power available at high speed.

My estimate of 240 BPV is just an 80 BPV improvement over the SKX; the Fed CA to CX is 115 points. Yes, the CA to CX upgrade gets more stuff per point than the SKX to XDD, but that's starting from a mediocre design, not the rather nice SKX.

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 10:19 am: Edit

Just so that we're all on the same page, here are the revised X ship BPV's listing in CL 23:

Fed CX 240, DDX 170
Kl DX 250, FX 130, DXD 260
Rom SKX 160, K5X 150, KEX 240
Kzin BCX 245, CCX 250
Gorn CCX 260, CMX 260, BD 150
Thol CCX 220, CPX 225, NCX 240
Hyd LBX 290, RNX 300, DGX 280, LNX 180, SCX 220/150
Lyr CCX 240
WYN FZX 150

In general I feel that these still underestimate X1 combat power under optimum (EW, no special restrictions on the X ship's strategy, neutral or better terrain) conditions.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 10:30 am: Edit

BPV
SPX 228
Where there are two numbers, the first is quantity, the second BPV. Where there is one number it is BPV.

Power
Warp -2 -10
Bat -2 -5
HK 1.5 3

Manuever
MC 5% 11.4
TM 10% 22.8

Weapons
2M2D vs. 1M2S 4
Speed 40/48 16
4P5+2P1 vs. 9P1 -4

Fluff
General -9 -9
Shuttle, 11HP -1 0
Command 2 8
Tracks -4 -4

Defense
Shields -18 -3
SIF 5% 11.4
TB -2 -2
Cloak 8 16
BP -4 -2

X2
Non-SSD Gadget 5% 11.4

Total 293


Now I assumed some non-SSD things that were not explicate like plasma speed and X2 shuttles (11 HP, unknown speed), SIF, miscellaneous X2 gadgets, etc. Since each line has an associated BPV these changes can be removed if my assumptions are wrong (forgive the poor formatting). Also if you feel I have given something a bad BPV to something let me know. The moral of the story is this ship with fast plasma will whoop ass on a SPX and regularly take down a FHX.

The major advantages are Turn Mode A, reduced movement cost, fast plasma and cloak cost. Take this thing out against 3D5K, my preferred playtest opponent, play a patient game with lots of cloaking and see how it does. This ship can move 30 under cloak while charging both torps with 4-power left over. It has 2 torpedoes that can travel 15 hexes and still do 40/80Env damage. What BPV would you give a ship that can do that? This ship may not win against 3D5K (368 BPV w/drones), but I suspect it would be a lot closer than you would think.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 11:02 am: Edit

A few things, then. One, warp boxes cannot be worth 5 points. If that is true, than a Fed CF will gain 30 points in BPV over the right away, just from warp alone. Using those calculations, the SKX would pick up 40 points of BPV from warp, and it's only 160 as it is. I think five is to high...three or four is probably closer.

Secondly, as I told Andrew, you're comparing a DD vs a CL, and giving it BPV bonuses based on having better turn rates and cloak costs...something already inherent in a DD. Don't compare it to a SPX...compare it to the parent ship, SKX.

Third, regarding fast plasma. Yes, a ship with fast plasma gets an advantage over those without it. But, all plasma ships get plasma sabots, not just 2X. So the field is level there.

Using your analysis about what the ship can do...

---

Quote:

This ship can move 30 under cloak while charging both torps with 4-power left over. It has 2 torpedoes that can travel 15 hexes and still do 40/80Env damage.

---