| Subtopic | Posts | Updated | ||
| Archive through March 12, 2003 | 25 | 03/12 11:23pm | |
| Archive through March 16, 2003 | 25 | 03/16 08:07pm | |
| Archive through March 23, 2003 | 25 | 03/23 01:56pm | |
| Archive through March 28, 2003 | 25 | 03/28 07:56am | |
| Archive through April 07, 2003 | 25 | 04/07 06:23pm |
| By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, April 07, 2003 - 07:30 pm: Edit |
A new table seems fair, I guess. I'm just brainstorming, but the idea to me was that you sacrifice speed to get better stealth bonuses. You can be virtually undetectable, but you have to really plan your movement carefully to get where you want to be. A nice advantage, that again favors the more skillful player and doesn't just put a super-cloak in the hands of an idiot...something I'm sure we all agree is preferable.
| By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, April 07, 2003 - 09:10 pm: Edit |
Quote:MJC, I gave some thought to your ed/cloak power return idea and I think the gain versus loss in playbility just didn't do it for me.
| Speed Range | Bonus |
| 0 | +5 |
| 1 | +4 |
| 2-4 | +3 |
| 5-9 | +2 |
| 10-16 | +1 |
| 17+ | +0 |
| Speed Range | Bonus |
| 0-4 | +3 |
| 5-9 | +2 |
| 10-16 | +1 |
| 17+ | +0 |
| By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, April 07, 2003 - 09:31 pm: Edit |
MJC, suggest gearing the table to a ship's practical speed--I think it's prectical speed.
IIRC, Practical Speed is speed + EM energy (while EMing) + HET energy (on the impulse of HET).
That does mean that a HET adds 5 to the speed instead of one, but a HET is also a pretty violent maneuver so it should.
I agree with your second table far more than the first.
Y'know, there's no reason not to go to negative numbers, say at 25+ a -1. Only a X2 could *go* speed 25+ under cloak...
| By Geoff Conn (Talonz) on Monday, April 07, 2003 - 10:07 pm: Edit |
Can it?
If so I would rather see greater retain/reaquire penalties than anything else, because I *want* to go faster under cloak.
| By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, April 08, 2003 - 05:14 am: Edit |
Quote:Y'know, there's no reason not to go to negative numbers, say at 25+ a -1. Only a X2 could *go* speed 25+ under cloak...
| By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Monday, May 19, 2003 - 05:32 am: Edit |
Something just struck me, having just gone over the Y-era cloaks for another reason.
What if the X2 cloak worked as a masking, veiling and cloaking device simultaneously, using the best modifiers from each?
eg.
Impulse 1: X2 cloak activated, first impulse of fade complete. Masking device no effect, X1 cloak gives +2 range modifier for cloaking (G13.37) at -3.
Impulse 2: second impulse of fade complete. Masking device no effect, veiling +3 range for cloak (G13.37) at -2.
Impulse 3: third impulse of fade complete. Masking device complete so enemies must roll for lock-on. Veiling is at +5 range so cloak (G13.37) is unmodifed.
Impulse 4: fourth impulse of fade complete, No new benefits.
Impulse 5: X1 cloak completes, granting 2 ECM.
An X2 ship might also be able to save power by using just the mask or veil, rather than a fully fledged cloak.
| By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Monday, May 19, 2003 - 05:39 am: Edit |
PFs can move 31 under cloak now. So can many cloakable ships for at least part of the turn; the SKA, SPF and FHF and most X1 Rom/Orion ships can do it for a whole turn from batteries. The SKX, SEX and K5X can move 31 continuously under cloak on just generated power.
| By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, May 19, 2003 - 07:04 am: Edit |
Quote:What if the X2 cloak worked as a masking, veiling and cloaking device simultaneously, using the best modifiers from each?
| By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, May 19, 2003 - 01:38 pm: Edit |
Not to mention the ever-popular positron flywheel. 
Now there's a set of rules I'm sure SVC wishes he never wrote.
| By Steven E. Ehrbar (See) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 03:51 am: Edit |
Only a X2 could *go* speed 25+ under cloak...
For at least 37 years before the first X2 ship arrives, there have been ships that can usefully move at speed 31 under cloak.
An SPF (in service Y168) can simultaneously move 31, pay housekeeping (shields, active fire control, life support), and finish arming its torp from power. It can then cloak on (mostly mauler) batteries.
Assuming it doesn't have to use more than a few points of battery power that turn, it can start reloading the torp, go speed 31, and cloak off mauler batteries the next turn, too.
| By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 09:10 am: Edit |
I'm sure there are Orions who have no problem keeping their speed up under cloak too.
| By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 09:15 pm: Edit |
Since the cloak cost doubles aswell, that's not a as true as one would think, all you're really doing is paying for arming of weapons and movement once and the droping that sum total again into movement, which does not always reach granting speed 31.
| By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 09:46 pm: Edit |
How do people feel about attaching a timer to the X2 T-bombs such that they could be set to go off at some point in time.
Say the impulse after the T-bomb activates.
This way you could use your T-bombs to hurt ships that choose to stay at speed 0 or are moving at such a low speed that the T-bomb isn't likely to detect them ( like speed 1 ).
| By Robert Eddy (Tar_Zhay) on Tuesday, February 24, 2004 - 08:56 pm: Edit |
Improvement of the cloak how about adding multiple activations and deactivations per turn.
1X would be 2 activations and deactivations for no extra cost. (16 impluse delay)
2X would be 4 activations and deactivations for no extra cost. (8 impluse delay)
Plus a decrese in mine sensitivity, say doubble to -10. so we can fly through a mine feild at speed 11 with a roll of 1 for a mine to go off... :}
Even better a half time cloak where you pay for 16 impluses of cloak.
| By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, February 24, 2004 - 09:58 pm: Edit |
X1's capabilities have already been set.
the notion of a 1/2 cost 1/2 time cloak has been mentioned before and was discarded by most people as making the cloak too easy to use.
Borrowing from the General Systems thread,
It might be nice to give the cloak a capacitor capable of holding some or all of the cloak's energy cost.
Thoughts?
| By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 04:23 am: Edit |
Or the cloak could deactivate after 16 or so impulses if one allocated less than the full amount of power.
| By Robert Russell Lender-Lundak (Rusman) on Saturday, March 05, 2005 - 02:20 am: Edit |
tsk tsk tsk....
Tar_Zhay,
Your far too evil. You know that right? I'm just glad your thinking of ditching the ROmmies altogether.
YAY !!!!
No more running like hell from Plasmas!!!
| Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation |