Archive through April 11, 2003
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: OLD X2 FOLDER: X2 plasma: Archive through April 11, 2003
By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, March 31, 2003 - 09:25 pm: Edit

Just a reminder that we have a topic for BPV talk.

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Monday, March 31, 2003 - 10:32 pm: Edit

BPV in use doesn't correlate well with the length of games. I've seen a PF duel (yes, one PF each) take five hours and I've seen a 1700 point game played to completion in the same time.

By Geoff Conn (Talonz) on Wednesday, April 02, 2003 - 11:43 pm: Edit

By Kenneth Jones

Geoff. Using the std Sabot rules posted. You can't interrupt the Plasma's move for a last second shot at it. So std Sabot (sp40) 8 impulses it could jump from R2(3) to R0. But SuperSabot (sp48) could do it 16 Impulses out of the turn. Simply making it much more powerful. And much harder to balance vs GW.

These are not drones. Except for pseudos, you know what the plasma will do and how much it will take to kill it or reduce its warhead to an acceptable level. You simply need to plan ahead when you decide that counterfire is going to be your defensive option, no different from when you would do so versus GW plasma, albeit earlier.

And as these Xships will have more power, it will be quite easy for them to carry credible firepower and maintain very high speeds which will kill plasma ships. Therefore the option to have a supersabot can arguably be required to meet the X2 ship at a greater range to protect the plasma ship.

At the very least, I think super sabot deserves playtesting versus any X2 hulls currently under discussion.

Improved direct fire versions of plasma do not, imho.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, April 06, 2003 - 07:25 pm: Edit

Minor proposal

Due to advances in shielding and construction a X2 R-torp is finally small enough to be able to swivel. It's only waited 100+ years to get that extra 60 degrees of tracking.

Mike's X and my Z torp, they do NOT swivel.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, April 09, 2003 - 03:36 pm: Edit

How about a plasma that has built in ECM making it harder to hit? Maybe the launching ship can add ECM points on the turn of launch (max 6)?

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, April 09, 2003 - 03:47 pm: Edit

Tos,

I can see that.

We can do one better by allowing the arming ship to give a torp 6 points of any EW, ECCM or ECCM. As a partial balance we do this instead of the stock 3 ECCM. We could give them 3 free and another +3 at +1/point of power basis.

I also like Loren's proposal of a limited cloak on plasmas.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, April 09, 2003 - 04:24 pm: Edit

This is a repost over from the X-SSD topic.


++++++++++++++++++++++++
What if Roms figured out how to cloak their Plasmas, partially. You still have lock-on but the range modifier is the effect. You launch the plasma with 4-5 extra power to cloak it (depending on plasma size of course). On launch it begins fade out so launch (L) it is Range + 1. On L+5 it Range + 5. It never cloaks completely and every one has lock-on.


Additionally, I wondered if the Roms could have such a thing for their ship where they could fire under the +5 range modifier. The moment they do the modifier is deleted and begins to re-fade. The cost is the same as full cloak but must be noted and announced as the partial cloak. If a ship wishes to fully cloak it must fade in and pay for a new cloaking process. Maybe call it Tactical cloak. A ship under tactical cloak cannot use EW but can use active fire control.

This would mean that the Romulans would use the same plasmas as X1. Though they would get the Phaser-V. As far as the Tactical Cloak (TC) Plasma goes, perhaps it could be a track able unit where each launcher gets 3 and more can be bought via Commanders Options.

It would have to be tempered.

Also, I'm just throwing out ideas.

Maybe, like the ESG EW field idea the effect would apply to the Tac Cloaked ship. It would have little effect on the torpedoes but would limit the phasers to equal the enemies.

Quote:

John Trauger:
I like it. We could call it "veiled plasma."

The problem is I also like my big, nasty Z-torp and we really can't have both.

Ah, decisions...

We could only veil small plasmas. Say cap the capability at S-torps...



John, limited size...agreed. Type R and larger can download if they want to fire a Veiled Plasma.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, April 09, 2003 - 04:32 pm: Edit

John:

In addition to size limits (maybe should include type-M) such things as EPT and Shotgun should be ineligable to be veiled. Hmmmm...so if we allow the Type-M to be veiled thats a 40 point warhead. Anything over 40 points can't be veiled so a Type-G COULD be enveloping and veiled. Might a Type-L qualify? I'll have to look it up.

Second, if you like that Plasma of yours why not make it a Gorn weapon and give the Roms their veil tech. to their old Plasmas.
So the Gorns get a super torp and the Roms get veiled torps. Both are in line with their races style.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, April 09, 2003 - 05:49 pm: Edit

As an alternative to the photon-plasma, sure.

I could give the Gorns the Z-torp though it means allowing the Gorns to steal the "biggest plasma torp in the game" crown from the Roms. I have some resistance to that, but it's mostly sentimental. If we want to shake things up a little with X2, hey, sure.

What I was suggesting would be not allowing larger lauchers to use the veiled option. Instead of a standard plasma set for a XFH being 2xR(or 1xZ), 2xM, it would be 2xR(or 1xZ), 2xS(veiled), giving us the best of both worlds.

I wouldn't want to use the veil for M-torps. They bargain-basement R-torps, really.

There should also be a final-turn arming cost associated with veiling a torp.

I would also suggest that, like bolting or firing at SC 4- targets, you could only veil one D or K torp per turn. Or eliminate the veil option for those entirely.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, April 09, 2003 - 07:05 pm: Edit

Note: I did associate a power cost with veiling.

Being in X times the main line torp is the M. The R is still "Special". So here is what I see: The Gorn do steal the BIggest baddest torp in the Galixy crown in line with their new attitude as "Butt Kickers" (ref. another discussion regarding this yesterday). The Gorns think they have it over the Roms when during a skirmish the science officer notes that though he can not actually see it sensors say there is a plasma comming their way. When it hits and downs the number 2 shield he says "Yezzz, zat wuz a plazzmuz, Captain. Zee Romulanzz have a new wepunzz!"

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, April 09, 2003 - 07:26 pm: Edit

*X1* the mainline torp is the M. If you continue the trend of bigger torps that we saw going from GW to X1, the next step in the progression is the R as mainline.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, April 09, 2003 - 08:15 pm: Edit

But that's what I ment by the Romulans get no new plasmas but get the V-Plasmas. The Gorns get the scarry new big plasma. So, the V-Plasma IS the next progression instead of bigger plasma. They still have R-Torps (but can't veil them. It's just too much energy to cover up.)

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, April 09, 2003 - 09:45 pm: Edit

Loren,

The only difference really is whether a R- or M- launcher could underload a torp and veil it.

We could just veil al torps regardless of size and keep the rom plasma at X1 levels.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, April 10, 2003 - 12:02 am: Edit

Quote:

Tos,

I can see that.

We can do one better by allowing the arming ship to give a torp 6 points of any EW, ECCM or ECCM. As a partial balance we do this instead of the stock 3 ECCM. We could give them 3 free and another +3 at +1/point of power basis.

I also like Loren's proposal of a limited cloak on plasmas.


We'll need to keep a lot of the restriction that are applied to loading EW to Fighters from the carrier if we are to pull it off.


Quote:

Second, if you like that Plasma of yours why not make it a Gorn weapon and give the Roms their veil tech. to their old Plasmas.
So the Gorns get a super torp and the Roms get veiled torps. Both are in line with their races style.


I'ld rather not go for the Plasma of this Race is different to the Plasma of that.
If it's a plasma totrp then it's a plasma torp.
If we want a simliar but different effects for varrious races than we'll have to go for a Ion torp or something.

Personnaly I think the Roms will need the fast plasma of the Super Sabot and the super Sabot and the Veiled Plasma will be too powerful and the Gorns will have some very powerful ships ( arming plasma doesn't cost all that much ) so there's not much to do with 48 Warp and so it'll be the Roms who need the Super Sabot, rendering the Veiled Plasma not able to be placed in the game.


Quote:

*X1* the mainline torp is the M. If you continue the trend of bigger torps that we saw going from GW to X1, the next step in the progression is the R as mainline.


No it'ld be a plasma with a 53.33 point warhead.
I could definatly see the Gorns getting a 50% increase in fire power by developing an X Plasma with a 60 point warhead and the Rom trumping them with a 100 point plasma W just to keep themselves in the lead. A four turn Arming cycle and no super sabot and fastloading to three turns and a massive arming cycle should just about allow such a weapon to not be a game breaker.


Quote:

But that's what I ment by the Romulans get no new plasmas but get the V-Plasmas. The Gorns get the scarry new big plasma. So, the V-Plasma IS the next progression instead of bigger plasma. They still have R-Torps (but can't veil them. It's just too much energy to cover up.)


Launching whilst cloaked and having a cloaked plasma that uncloaks on the way out is better than firing on a plasma that basically is immune to phaser fire.
Loaning ECM to the plasma all the way out to R15 is better than having a veiled cloak.
The veiled cloak is a bad idea.


Quote:

Loren,

The only difference really is whether a R- or M- launcher could underload a torp and veil it.

We could just veil al torps regardless of size and keep the rom plasma at X1 levels.


Sure Veiled plasma is a great anti-GW weapon but it's a lousey anti-X2 weapon.
That's the exact opposite of what we need if the X2s are to be intergate-able into the game.
The main target of the Roms will be the ISC, Who will go pretty fast they can under load their PPD on the second turn and Plasma are pretty cheap to load, the Feds, who can arm as low as 8 point standard or as high as 24 point photons but you can expect them to use their accelleration limites to arm 6 ( and get a stable photons ( or worse 8 if some people will have their way )) and then top it off with 2 on the second turn and thus have a very high battle speed on the turn of attack for the Roms, or the gorns who are playing for plasma which are cheap on ships that have a lot of power...all in all the Roms need the Super Sabot more than they need anything else.

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Eagle) on Thursday, April 10, 2003 - 12:25 pm: Edit

Limited cloak on plasma? Oh, got a headache.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, April 10, 2003 - 12:52 pm: Edit

Well, first of all, we are just working out ideas here. My intention is to find ways to make the game fresh. In the past the Gorns and Romulans have been similar except for the cloak. The Gorns making up for the cloak with bulk.

I find I would not like to see the veil on both the plasma and the ship. That is too powerful. I like the V-Plasma as a divergence from bigger and faster. However, MJC may well be right and this would inherantly be bad for mixing with GW. I must admit I skipped over checking on that. Maybe the V-PLasma could start out as +1 only and improve. Or +1 with some ECM that could be off set. That might make it more GW friendly.

Well, there is always my old Plasma Shroud idea (absorbs the first ten points of phaser fire). But I so liked the V-Plasma because the Gorns would not be able to copy it.


There needs to be something fresh.

Enveloping bolt?

Maybe too Hellborish, no?

A Splashing Bolt (divide among three shields evenly). Sort of PPD'ish.

My old Plasma Gatling that SVC had me write up as pratice. Loaded as a Shotgun the resulting Plasma-F can be bolted one per impulse. Once fired the rest can only be held for 32 impulses. If over a turn break holding energy of one point per shot must be allocated or the remaining plasma bolts are lost. One firsed as a gatling all shots can only be bolted.

By Roger Dupuy (Rogerdupuy) on Thursday, April 10, 2003 - 04:09 pm: Edit

Plasma Stasis Cannon

History and Description:
Romulan admirals and military analysts took a hard look at:

1) the disappointing results of the end of the General War,

2) the limited effectiveness of the current plasma torpedo during the Andromedan Invasion and

3) the anticipation of the next generation (X2)ships operating at higher speeds with increased phaser firepower.

Instead of looking for ways to improve the plasma torpedo, Romulan engineers sought to develop a direct fire weapon that would compliment their plasma torpedos.

In the years that followed Romulan military engineers developed an advanced cannon that fired a cluster of volatile plasma projectiles held in stasis. When this cluster hit a target, the impact released and detonated the plasma. Although it could be fired every turn, it took a large amount of energy to fire and was somewhat inaccurate. The inaccuracy was compensated if additional turns were spent tracking the target. One (1) point of energy is used the first turn to track the target and then six (6) points are used to fire the weapon on the second turn. Accuracy can be further improved if two (2) turns are used for tracking and then six (6) points are used to fire the weapon.

Arming(any source)
1 turn: 5 points
2 turns: 1+6
3 turns: 1+1+6

No holding

To Hit (2d6)

turn0-23-56-910-1415-26
176543
298764
31110986


Damage
22 points regardless of range.

Defensive Fire Option
Any phaser in arc can fire at a range of zero at the plasma erupting from stasis on(and only on) the impulse the warhead successfully hit. The damage ratio is 3:1 (phaser damage to warhead reduction) instead of the normal 2:1 because the plasma is still emerging from stasis thus the stasis part of the warhead cannot be affected.

notes
I just wanted to propose a Direct fire weapon that did not resemple a PPD or Photon but filled a much needed gap in the Romluan arsenal. I think a DF weapon is easier to balance against GW era ships AND X2 ships. Upgrading plasma torps with the speed increases being proposed -albeit cool- can really blow away GW Era ships. At the same time if there is just a slight increase then they don't balance with other X2 ships. I like the flexibility of it being able to fire every turn (with the accuracy limitations) and having the accuracy increase for every turn the weapon 'puts a bead on' the target. Of course, all the numbers and values can be tweaked in playtest. The 'defensive fire' option is just that: an option. If this option makes the weapon too weak then the total damage should be increased.

Ok.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, April 10, 2003 - 06:14 pm: Edit

Similar to the Plasma cannon I proposed on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 10:51 pm in this thread. The damage for mine isn't consistent over range, and there are three sizes, but the idea is similar.

We need a place to post proposals, with no comments. That way they can be easily reviewed.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, April 10, 2003 - 06:51 pm: Edit

That's what Integrated proposals is, right?

By Roger Dupuy (Rogerdupuy) on Thursday, April 10, 2003 - 07:00 pm: Edit

Mike, I read your proposal. We both want to have a Rom DF weapon.

If I remember, the 3 sizes matched the three classic Plasma Torpedo sizes. For me, I wanted something that didn't resonate so seemlessly with GW tech.

Also, yours is a 2 turn arming, mine is 1, 2, or 3.

You mentioned the damage difference.

Finally, the "defensive option" gives it a plasma torpedo-ish feel. High damage potential but also defensible with phasers. It may change but, I'm ok with it now.

All that being said, I am happy that you are with me in the Romulans having a DF weapon.

By Roger Dupuy (Rogerdupuy) on Thursday, April 10, 2003 - 07:09 pm: Edit

John, you are funny. Mike created the 'Integrated Proposals' right? Also, I thought that in that section one needed to 'throw it all together" i.e., ship systems, amount and type of phasers, and lots of text?

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, April 10, 2003 - 09:53 pm: Edit

I'm still not convinced that a speed 48 super sabot and a five hex increase to the glory zone won''t give the current set of warheads exactly what they need to be 50% more deadly.

By Geoff Conn (Talonz) on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 12:21 am: Edit

IOW, you are against rom df weapons, yes?

Personally I agree. I play plasma because it is NOT a direct fire weapon.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 04:45 am: Edit

Well.


If the Kzinti go for the Disruptor cannon as their heavy weapon.
And the Roms and the Gorn go for a DF Plasma.

Can anybody find me somebody to love a race that uses a seeking weapon as anything other than an ancillary heavy weapon.

There will be no seekers as the primary heavy weapon!

And that will be a bad day for the game.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 08:25 am: Edit

Who said anything about making the Romulans a DF only race? The plasma cannon weapons proposed (at least by me) are supplemental. My "vision" of Rom 2X ships is that they would maintain the modular design of the hawk series. So, you could have plasma modules, or plasma cannon modules. The CCX I designed had a heavy plasma in the command module, and either 2 medium plasma cannons or 2 plasma S's in the modules. It gives them (IMO, anyway) more options than they had before, and a chance to compete in environments where seekers aren't the best option.

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