Archive through February 21, 2003
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board:
The "X" Files:
OLD X2 FOLDER:
X2 plasma:
Archive through February 21, 2003
The Cruiser will be the first X2 to be launched IMO.
BTW, Rob and Chris, that's a darned cool SSD. Very nicely done. What is an augmented P-1? That concept might be something to discuss in the X2 Phaser topic.
Mike... I put a blurb about Augemented Phasers in the post above...
Quote:Augmented Phasers - Basically a Phaser-1 / 3 with 50% more damage at 50% more cost. An AP-1 costs 1.5 points of power to fire, with a 3 point cap. AP-1s can downfire as AP-3s, but not as Ph-1/2/3.
That'll teach you to look at just the pictures... 
42
I'm tapping my chest and biting my ear as we speak...
now that IS a talent.
Robert cole,
On your FFX:
Interesting ship.
As a first-gen X-ship, the torps are too big, and the phasers are too powerful.
As a X2 ship, its warp is a little low.
What the heck are REG boxes?
Mine racks AND T-bombs???
Comment on the AP: Talk on this board has centered around how the firepower from overoaded phasers made for one-fmensional X-ship tactics, as well as made the ships close to plain-vanilla identical in how they fly.
Your AP has all the power of an overloaded phaser at less cost. It may be too powerful even for X2. It's better than OL phasers which got pulled from X1. We created the P-5 to be a little less powerful for that reason.
The Regenearting shield idea.
Each turn, each shield generates the number of shield boxes equal to the highest number in the Reg Track. No carry over to different shields. There must be at least one shield box on the shield in order for the Regen to function.
A regen box is rolled for when more than 30 damage is taken in one volley. If the roll is a 12, the Regen box burns out, and all shields fail. The Number 2 Regen box takes over the next following impulse, after weapons fire and the shields come back on line (this works a little different for different ships with different numbers if Regen boxes)
The Regen track is hit on a Domcon box, alternating. 1st to Damcon, 2nd to Regen etc.
The Regen box on the SSD is hit on Drone.
John: I agree on the warp. The ship needs 2 more to be even with an FFX, and who knows how much more to be an X2 ship.
I may have listed the AP stats wrong... it may be 2 per shot.
Also... the damage of the phasers is high, but they are fighting against this.
I have no idea how Augmented phasers would fly... but we can add this to the list of X2 weapon proposals.
42
Robert,
I'd say your QT's are overgunned even for X2, not to mention derivative of TNG.
...30 point max warheads? That's almost doubling the power of a photon.
Have you flown these ships? Battle ought to be quick, brutal and not very tactical. Both photons hit and the Fed wins. Just stay out of feedback range if you don't want to go a long way toward leveling the playing field.
Loren made this point early on: It can't just be about greater power. We need new tactical options.
New Technology:
The ISC Plasma Caster
In developing new ways to keep their echelon formation competitive, the ISC developed the plasma caster for its lateral torps and small ships.
The technology proved unusable for torpedoes larger than F-torps, which suited the ISC fine. Even with the increased power provided by X1-technology, lateral L-torps made for serious power problems in prolonged combat.
Each F-torp was equipped with a warp accellerator that would send a fully-armed cannister of plasma up to 8 hexes away where it would burst and launch the torp at its target.
The target must be set at the moment of launch.
ISC ships could only afford to stock a limited supply of plasma cannisters. Lateral F-torps could hold two reload cannisters. Forward-mounted F-torps on DDs and FFs have 4 reload cannisters. ISC ships without cargo boxes stocked two sets of reloads.
Under WS-3 conditions plasma casters may start with a normal F-torp in the launcher and fully-stocked cannisters or a cannistered plasma in the launcher and one empty reload spot. Plasma casters reload their empty reload spaces the same way a drone racks does, by taking the laucher offline for one turn, which loads 2 empty cannisters.
Plasma Casters reload the way all cannister plasma load (see plasma archives). Unlike larger plasmas, the F-torp cannister could hold a completely armed plasma, placing it in stasis until needed.
The warp accellerator part of the Plasma caster arms for 2 additional points of warp power and may not be used twice within a 8-impulse period.
The plasma caster may be used in conjuction with D-torps also. Changes to the rules are as follows:
The accellerator arms for 1 warp and has a range of 5. Only 1 D-torp per round may be launched using the accellerator.
A Plasma-caster-F repairs for 5 or 6 (+1 over a normal F-torp). 5 for lateral plasmas and 6 for forward-firing ones. They may be fast-repaired as standard F-torps without the cannister system at a savings of 1 point, 2 points if repaired without the swivel (not an option for lateral torps -- no swivels)
John: Sounds good, but if the ISC cannot arm lateral L-torps, wouldn't they have problems arming a lateral caster. It would also make for a more ISC-like approach if the Lateral casters had one set of canisters that all of the lateral torps on one side could use.
MJHN,
Who says the ISC can't arm its lateral L-torps? How else would they be able to use them? Last I heard, they could rearm their GW-era lateral F-torps, why not L's?
I considered the one launcher per torp group option and decided against it, at least on the first pass through the system. Multiple torps were there ON ISC ships to drive off multiple small units, such as PFs and/or fighters. On occasion, we have contemplated a return of PFs to the battlefield so the ability to put a shotgun blast of torps out there against PFs could be important. Most of the imte, it wouldn't be.
John, in your post above, you said that the ISC would be unable to arm lateral L-torps, due to power limitations. IIRC, your plasma caster uses exactly the same amount of energy as an L-torp, for a small gain in range.
About PFs, several published scenarios show X1 ships with casual mech-links and PFs, and I don't see how X2 would be different.
MJHM,
I said the ISC ran into power problems, not that they couldn't arm their lateral L torps.
Also, to assess the system, you have to dig through the archives and find my "cannister plasma" idea, because this tech is based on it.
Simply put, the lateral plasma laucher has two spare holding tubes. In the case of a small torp like the F, the cannister holds a fully-armed torp, whereas on larger torps it only holds the first two turns of arming.
Since we're dealing with completed torps in stasis, the power cost doesn't approach that of an L-torp until all the reserve cannisters are exhausted and empty and the ship is arming the torps and shooting them as fast as it can. That will be a while unless the ship is facing a lot of fighters or PF.
even then the arming sequence is very different. The plasma caster's arming would still be 1-1-3 but on the final turn have the option for a +2 to arm the caster. Very different than a 2-2-3 sequence, because the +2 for the caster is optional according to need.
Definite difference in combat rather than a near-constant draw of 2 or 3 will reloading.
Any support for making X2 plasmas require warp energy to achieve their higher speed? You could arm it with non-warp but it won't move as fast.
Tos: Ya, that sounds interesting, indeed.
Extra power, perhaps, but ships have so much warp it won't make much of a tactical difference to require warp.
It will on that last arming turn, though. The plasma R costs what, five points on the last turn? Figure eight points of warp on the last turn instead, and that's an expensive weapon. I like the required warp energy idea, though...excellent call.
So what does that mean? Speed 40 normal, speed 48 if the last turn arming is warp? Or simply have the supersabot(48)require an arming surcharge much like normal sabot, but in warp power?
Geoff: Ya, I think that's it. Interesting enough for me to put in my own notes. I think it would be cool to have someone other than the Feds use warp for weapon.
Of course I would want to see the final Sabot rules first.
Since the polls seem to favor speed 40 for normal, and 48 for sabot, I'd say that's about right, Geoff. For the plasma X I put up on the SSD I made, it would go something like this:
Normal Mode
Turn 1: 3 any power
Turn 2: 3 any power
Turn 3: 6 any power
Hold cost: 6 any power
Sabot (Speed 48) Mode
Turn 1: 3 any power
Turn 2: 3 any power
Turn 3: 6 any power + 6 warp power
Hold cost: 6 warp power only
That sound about right?
12 power is excessive for a single non-overloaded torp.
We may not need a super-sabot.
The old sabot is one point extra on the final turn of arming.
+1-3 on the final turn of arming is all you need.
Tos, why's that? Look at a comparison of the two:
Plasma R, sabot: Speed 40, range 30, max damage 50. Final turn of arming 4+4.
Plasma X sabot: Speed 48, range 40, max damage 60. Final turn of arming 6+6.
That's not a bad cost at all, for that kind of extra power and range, IMHO.
Mike,
That's a heckuva plasma you've got there.
3-3-6 and you get an extra 60, but that's all you get for +3 power vs an R.
consider 2-2-6.
I thought original Sabot cost a minor amount of power. Did I misread/misremember the rules?