Archive through February 26, 2003
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board:
The "X" Files:
OLD X2 FOLDER:
X2 photons:
Archive through February 26, 2003
Who's talking about EY...I was talking about MY Vs MY, a Fed CA Vs a Klingon D6C to be specific.
We don't need to mess with a 2D6 chart to offset ECM.
If we have a 4 impulse delay ( hell a 6 or enen an 8 impulse delay would work ) for conversion to Proximity and we have proximity overloads ( working all the way up to (24/2) 12 point proxi warhead through the R5-8 braket ) then we get this wonderfull little outcome.
Instead of getting 24 point warheads hitting 1-3 on D6, you get 12 point warhead hitting 1-5 with your average damage dropping from 12 points to 10 points BUT surprise surprise the 1-5 to hit chance handles the +1 or +2 EW shift much better than the 1-3 to hit chance.
Overloaded Proximity Fuse is the way to deal with a Klingon who moves to R8 under an ECM drone and dances away.
Inventing some new fangled chart that handles EW shifts better but also changes the Jack-pot chance isn't going to the right flavour.
Vanilla choc-chip is so much better than neopolitan...not.
I would like to note that I balanced the FOUR Photons of the Fed. XCC to the SIX Heavy Disruptors on the Klink XBC. Weapon to weapon they are no where near equal. The Klink XDD will need further balancing to counter the Fed XDD (also with four Photons). It may also have to be cheaper which is OK. That would fit into the Klink style of things anyway.
I must also add my own integrated proposal (in the works) has colored my Photon/Disr. proposal, but it could be made to fit others.
I think the klingon XDD with four disruptors is a match for the Fed with four photons, for the same reasons they've always been...power. The Fed DD, with 30 points, can't hope to fastload 16 point torpedos; it just doesn't have the power. The Klingon can attack turn after turn with overloaded disruptors without to much of a drain; as usual, it comes down the Fed being able to arm and deliver a decisive blow, while the Klingon knifes him to death. Four six-point disruptors against four 12 point photons seems a fair match to me.
Not while moving BUT he could anchor him (or just finnish off at close range) and blast him to smitherines impulse one of the next turn. Every time.
But that isn't anything new, though. The Fed can already do that. The tactics shouldn't change, as long as we keep the balance between power available and weapons consistent. Besides...if a Klingon player gets close enough to be anchored by a Fed who's holding overloads, he deserves to get creamed. Staying away from holding Feds is a must.
L.K.:
Only if the previous blow was Impulse 25 or earlier.
Fastloads still have an 8 impulse delay from the previous firing, although with unpowered tubes he could move to range tractor and on Imp 1 of the next turn, fire said fastloads but then that has always been a Hydran Fussion tactic and it didn't seem to break the game.
MJC: I assume no blow on turn A. Maybe phasers. All power goes to catching the Klink.
Mike R: Yes and no. The difference is the old DD never had the power to do that and the DW only had three photons. It lacked the power too. Also they didn't have fast load.
Now the Fed DDX had the power but not like what is being proposed. The XDD has the power to chace down the Klink and finnish close while handeling his first shots (via reserve). The load the entire OL Photon the next turn and fire before the Klink can do anything. It is only going to TAC so it does have the power. Previous use of reserve power only had to keep a shield basically healthy. She didn't have to use it all.
All I am saying is that a Fed XDD with four photons would be able to clobber a Klink XDD with four Disr. consistantly. Unless, the Klink XDD has something else. (Like four drones 
)
One to one, Photon to Disruptor, the Photon is more powerful because of the damage output and power availability of all X2 ships (remembering that X-Batteries can hold warp power).
Quote:All I am saying is that a Fed XDD with four photons would be able to clobber a Klink XDD with four Disr. consistantly. Unless, the Klink XDD has something else. (Like four drones)
Maybe it should, due to a markedly lower BPV or maybe it'll have a much better turn mode and much better phaser arcs and maybe even a few extra phasers.
We may not want to give the Fed DD 4 photons. Maybe just 3.
I never liked the Fed DDX because it was little more than a NCL with more phasers and a 1/2 move cost. I would have preferred a NCX with 30 warp and a 2/3 move cost.
But that's just me.
Ya, a three photon XDD.
Maybe the photon is a bit stronger than the disruptor.
But drones, turn mode, and a couple extra power should help balance it out.
I'm not saying the Fed XCA and the Klingon XCA should be balanced to tournament standards. But they should at least be in the same ballpark. Something like 335 to 350 is reasonable.
Don't forget firing arcs, too. The D5 has some kick-ass firing arcs, and that's not something to sneer at.
But the Fed use the DDs and FFs of the fleet as fire support platforms, because of the range on the photon not varying by sizeclass.
That and the Fed DD and DDX both have 4 photons. Why would a more advanced ship have less weaponry than the predecessor.
Quote:But the Fed use the DDs and FFs of the fleet as fire support platforms, because of the range on the photon not varying by sizeclass.
That and the Fed DD and DDX both have 4 photons. Why would a more advanced ship have less weaponry than the predecessor.
Because the NCL showed that 3 Photons was much more managable in combat situations and rather than going for Base Busting ( a Fleet action and therefore involving XFFs and XCAs ) the XDDs would be involved in combat in a mano-a-mano situation and therefore would be betteroff simply having better shields for it's buck than the extra crunch power at the cost of the loss of the vessel.
I was thinking about how to make the 24 point photon less able to be manufactured in battle but still exist in the X2 battles.
I think I may have come up with a solution.
State than any Photon tube that gets more than 6 points of power pumped into becomes unstable and thus the Photon can neither ne held nor continued in the next turn.
This means that to get a 24 point photon that can be held, you need to power it as 6+6.
You could build a Photon as 4+8 but you'ld have to eject it at the end of the turn of completion or have fired it during the turn of completion...it can't be held.
You couldn't however arm the Photon as 8+4 as this would allow you to have a 16 point fastloaded warhead but it couldn't be continued ( or even held ) and thus you couldn't get a 24 point warhead that way.
Here's the rub.
People are loave to spend power on heavy weapons during the turn of their attack run.
If people build their Photons as 24 pointers and attack during the Third turn, then the weapon should rally becounted as a two turn weapon and as a three turn weapon SPs and drone waves that can be be built by a three turn weapon be employed against the klingons and the turn upon turn of disruptor fire against the rear of the Fed sheilds will make the 24 Point Photons over three turns less desirable.
More likely people will make their attack runs building what they know are safe 6+something powered warheads and then fail to get the full 24 point warheads because they suddenly want the power of their attack run to be put into something else, building 6+2 ( 16 pointers ), 6+3 ( 18 pointers ), and 6+4 ( 20 pointers ) as much much more likely warhead strengths because of this instability limitation.
Does everyone else agree that this limitation will allow for Photons to not be too deadly and yet still have the capasity to build 24 point photons if the Players really work hard to build it?
CFant: Because they have a different roll to play and the new photon might be more powerful and the ship will have Ph-Vs.
mjc: I like your idea. With X2 batteries being what they are, you might see ships on a reload turn powering their photons up to 6 each on impulse 32, since they can just recharge it in EA in about 0.001 seconds.
What about a point of diminishing returns: 1 point of power -> 2 points of damage up to 16 point warheads, thereafter 1 point of power -> 1 point of damage up to 24 point warheads. Heh heh, and nobody thought they'd ever see an X2 ship stop + TAC to overload weapons.
Dave,
Don't photons cost a lot as it is?
The XDD should get 4 photons.
No admiral in his right mind would accept into his navy a ship that's WEAKER than it's predecessor.
THe captain may not have the power to use all 4, but no admiral will have less than that.
Photons unfortunately, particularly with he effectiveness of the Ph-5 at R8, are running around with a throughput of 1.0 so it's only really the local through put ( and my Arming intability rule makes local through put worse than in the GW and MY periods ) that makes the weapon anything more valuable than SSReo...deminishing returns would lower the throughput below 1 and one has go and ask at that point why the admiralty are using them, when Ph-5s in their place and a heck of a lot more power for movement would then become a very rational design proposition.
Keeping the Throughput at R8 at 1.0 is important.
Okay:
You can have the funding for an XDD with three X2 Photons, ( 3 x 24 ) so you have a 72 point Jackpot or you can have the finding for a 4 Photon DDX ( 4 x 16 ) for a 64 point Jackpot, but you can't have the funding for a 4 X2Photon armed destroyers, which do you choose!?!
The Government runs the UFP not the Admiralty.
After the Xorks invade you'll get that 4 Photon XDD for sure....hey photon refits!!
Jeff,
I'd agree but for one exception...if that new photon is the 50% stronger model that's being tossed around right now, even with three it'll still be more powerful. No ship, not even an X ship, will shrug off three 24 point photons. I'd be nervous as hell if I saw a ship like that coming after me! If we keep a more modes photon, then yes...four would be acceptable.
Since the real crunch power of the Photon can't be gotten back to ( MY period ) unless we move to six 24 point warheads, the 4 on an XCA and 3 on a XDD will do perfectly well even if we add more options to it.
Opponents fear the jackpot. They should. 
But it doesn't happen that often. More often, you get 2/4 at range 8, or 3/4 at range 4.
Ironically, it's easier to jackpot with 3 photons than with 4.
Easy enough to be unbalanced.
As someone said in a previous archive, we're going in circles.
Pick one:
- Keep the photon as it is in X1, but OL range to 10.
- Keep the photon as it is in X1, but 1-turn OL damage goes to 16.
- Keep the photon as it is in X1, but 2-turn OL damage goes to 24.
- Eliminate the X1 rapid-arming, but OL damage goes to 24. (My preference)
Anyone have any suggestions that aren't on this list?
Ill take #3 as a starting point.