The Klingon D5X has the same disruptor pattern and numbers as the standard D5.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 12:07 pm: Edit

An interesting option for disruptors would be to give them a 6-impulse delay over the turn break.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 12:52 pm: Edit

Heyyyy Tos, not bad. Just that little extra thing that may well make it work. I like it. Simple and not too much. But a real life advantage.

It would make the disruptor a little out of step with phasers but in a good direction. It an advantage you don't HAVE to use. It allows you to wait a little longer for that perfect shot AFTER others have passed their commitment line.

By Daniel Zimmerman (Nam) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 01:05 pm: Edit

Not sure if this was covered yet, but (at least in the series) we see launchers capable of firing more than 1 torp per tube. (more seen with feds than Klingons, iirc), but I think this is at least an interesting idea.

What if you replaced, lets say, the 4 disrupters on a D5 and made them only have 2 disrupter launchers... they would be 2 box weapons.

Each launcher could hold up to X disruptor bolts. You can fire 2 in an impulse with no penalty. If you want to fire more than one in an impulse, EW penalties would apply. (ie firing 3 would give a -1 shift to both shots, firing 4 would give a -2 shift to all shots, etc).

I originally thought that the launcher would only be able to fire 1 with no penalty, but if you are replacing 2 disr. you should have the ability to fire two bolts at no penalty.

And there would be a firing delay between each shot (anywhere between 4-8 impulses). Mizia approach would be way to deadly if you could fire the next impulse with all of your torps.

All bolts that remain at the end of the turn can be held, at the std cost for holding torps. And you could fill your launchers at any time during the turn with battery power. (ie could give a lot of punch, but at the cost of a) losing your reserve battery power and b) the -1 per extra.

By Mark James Hugh Norman (Mnorman) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 01:22 pm: Edit

Martin: MJC was refering to heavy cruisers, and the DX has 2 more disruptors than the D7C. I personally prefer the X1 arrangement of the CA having more weapons than the CL.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 03:06 pm: Edit

Disruptor cartridge:

Disruptor races (excluding Tholians) were able to adapt the disruptor cartridge from fighters for use on the ship. Each charge can only hold a standard disruptor and cannot be overloaded. They cost nothing to hold and can fire to the same range as the ship. It takes 16-impulses to replace a spent cartridge. Disruptors can still be loaded, overloaded and fired identically to X1 disruptors and doing so does not interfere with swapping a disruptor cartridge. The firing delay over a turn break is identical no matter how the disruptor is fired. Cartridges are recharged using the same procedure as recharging the disruptor on a fighter. Each ship has two cartridges per disruptor. When the disruptor is destroyed the cartridge installed is also destroyed.

If a disruptor is charged and fired as a standard load, but not an overload, it may be fired a second time by using a cartridge. A disruptor cannot be fired twice without a cartridge and two cartridges cannot be used to fire twice in a turn. The firing delay between the first and second firings is identical to the over the turn firing delay.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 08:43 pm: Edit

X1 allowed disruptors to hold up to 4 points of power a turn.

Racial disruptor improvements:

Klingons:

• 2 shots a turn, 8 impulse delay.
• Standard or OL (2x) strength.
• Can only hold 4 power over a turn break.
• The decision to fire standard or OL is made at the point of firing (similar to particle cannon).

• Extra (3x) strength, 6 power shot.
• One shot per turn.
• Can hold only 4 power over a turn break.
• Must completely empty the disruptor when firing (just like X1 and X0)

• OL disruptor cannon.
• Effectively 4x strength disruptor.

• UIM/Derfacs included as standard equipment.
• {No longer a need to print to-hit charts without it.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 09:00 pm: Edit

Jeff,

I'd agree with all of those as good ideas, but would submit another option for the Lyrans. Since they already use a capcitor for the ESG, a standard disruptor with capacitors would be a good move for them. It would also help alleviate their power supply issues (the ESG is a power hog, IMHO). Is that an acceptable alternative?

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 09:22 pm: Edit

Shows how often I play Lyrans.

One shot a turn, up to 6 power, capacitor capability.

But how do we distinguish between a standard and an OL shot without making the system too much like a particle cannon?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 09:27 pm: Edit

I don't see any issue with making it something you declare at the moment of firing. It adds some flex to the weapon, and lets the player balance his reserve power. I think that ought to be fine, myself.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 09:41 pm: Edit

Racial disruptor improvements (Take 2):

Klingons:

• 2 shots a turn, 1x or 2x (OL) strength
• Can be armed for 8 power
• Can only hold 4 power over a turn break
• Hold cost is half the power held
• Decision to fire Std or OL is made at the moment of firing.
• UIM/Derfacs standard, no burnouts.

• 1 shot a turn, 1x, 2x, or 3x strength
• Can be armed for 6 power
• Can hold 6 power over a turn break
• Hold cost is zero
• Decision to fire Std or OL is made at the moment of firing.
• UIM/Derfacs standard, no burnouts.

• Replace disruptor bolt with disruptor cannon
• 2 turn weapon
• Arming cost is 2+2 (std) or 4+4 (OL)
• Cannot be held.
• Decision to fire Std or OL is made at the EA of the first turn's arming cycle.
• No UIM/ No Derfacs

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 09:51 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

The Fed still take 1.33 points of real damage at R8.

---

Holy ••••!!!

How will the Federation ever survive!?!

42

---

---

Quote:

MJC: Would you really be attacking with a light cruiser. Klingon ships at X1 gain an additional 2 disruptors. Wouldn't the X2 Klingon also have 6 disruptors

---

---

Quote:

The Klingon D5X has the same disruptor pattern and numbers as the standard D5.

---

---

Quote:

An interesting option for disruptors would be to give them a 6-impulse delay over the turn break.

---

---

Quote:

Heyyyy Tos, not bad. Just that little extra thing that may well make it work. I like it. Simple and not too much. But a real life advantage.

It would make the disruptor a little out of step with phasers but in a good direction. It an advantage you don't HAVE to use. It allows you to wait a little longer for that perfect shot AFTER others have passed their commitment line.

---

---

Quote:

Not sure if this was covered yet, but (at least in the series) we see launchers capable of firing more than 1 torp per tube. (more seen with feds than Klingons, iirc), but I think this is at least an interesting idea.

What if you replaced, lets say, the 4 disrupters on a D5 and made them only have 2 disrupter launchers... they would be 2 box weapons.

Each launcher could hold up to X disruptor bolts. You can fire 2 in an impulse with no penalty. If you want to fire more than one in an impulse, EW penalties would apply. (ie firing 3 would give a -1 shift to both shots, firing 4 would give a -2 shift to all shots, etc).

I originally thought that the launcher would only be able to fire 1 with no penalty, but if you are replacing 2 disr. you should have the ability to fire two bolts at no penalty.

And there would be a firing delay between each shot (anywhere between 4-8 impulses). Mizia approach would be way to deadly if you could fire the next impulse with all of your torps.

All bolts that remain at the end of the turn can be held, at the std cost for holding torps. And you could fill your launchers at any time during the turn with battery power. (ie could give a lot of punch, but at the cost of a) losing your reserve battery power and b) the -1 per extra.

---

---

Quote:

Martin: MJC was refering to heavy cruisers, and the DX has 2 more disruptors than the D7C. I personally prefer the X1 arrangement of the CA having more weapons than the CL.

---

---

Quote:

X1 allowed disruptors to hold up to 4 points of power a turn.

Racial disruptor improvements:

---

---

Quote:

Now how do we balance the photon against this?

---

---

Quote:

Jeff,

I'd agree with all of those as good ideas, but would submit another option for the Lyrans. Since they already use a capcitor for the ESG, a standard disruptor with capacitors would be a good move for them. It would also help alleviate their power supply issues (the ESG is a power hog, IMHO). Is that an acceptable alternative?

---

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 11:27 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

I'ld rather not have racial disruptors, but if we did I'ld like to see a timeline where they started getting each other's tecvh so that when the Xorks do invade the ships will have very effective weapons to hurl at the invaders.

---

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

Now how do we balance the photon against this?

---

Let's not, lets have disruptor ships being cheap by BPV in comparison to Photon ships.

---

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 11:48 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

If the Klingon XCA and the Fed XCA have too big a difference, then it's a broken module.

Most people who buy the module will try to duel with the two ships, so they need to be balanced.

They don't have to be balanced to tournament standards, but they have to be close to each other (no wider than 335 vs. 350).

---

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 11:52 pm: Edit

And what is so wrong with putting in the R-section or the Z section that the Fed XCA fights the XD7D in the most balanced form of a duel?

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 06:35 pm: Edit

Let's not freak-out

One of the things that has been going wrong in the discussion of the development of X2 disruptors is that people have been compairing the Crunch Power of the Jackpot at the primary firepoint of the Federation XCA with the return fire of the Klingon XCA.

This is not the correct standpoint from which to develop the X2 disruptor. Rather we should consider ( as always ) the Defensive Fed ( that is Fed who fires alternate Photon tubes on alternate turns ) firing with average results.

If a Federation XCA has 4 Tubes ( and it's probably going to ) and the design range of exchange ( due to the Ph-5 working so well at that range ) will be 8 hexes then the Fed shall fire 2 tubes in one round of which only 3/6 of them hit.
Thus only 1.0 photons should be considered as hitting in any one turn when we compair to Disruptors for 24 points of damage.

If a Klingon XCA has 4 disruptors and a +2 UIM and fires them on overload at Range 8 every turn, then the each turn the Disruptor array will be considered to inflict ( 4 x 6 x 6/6 ) 24 points of damage.

These results means that the weapon systems come out as being equal in their primary design situation which means they will be very easy to Balance in their entirity.


There will be other balance issues that I think should be considered.

• Disruptors firing with +2 UIM and +2 Defracs and being fired from Caps will have a very similar flexibility of a Photons having a 4 impulse delay between switching on or off the Proximity fuse...this is even more true if the R15 fast load limit reamins.


• Disruptors firing after the 6 impulse break with power from the caps balances out to Photons using reserve warp carried over from an earlier turn to turn the 2 points being put into the Photons into 8 to build 16 point fastloads. This will take 20 to 24 points ( depending on the fed thinking about 8 point standards ( 4 point prxies ) or 12 point standards ) of warp power from the five 5 point X2 BTTYs.

If a Klingon ship with 12 X2Ph-1 had such fantastic arcs that she could fire 10Ph-1s and she fired her first volley of Disruptors from the disruptor caps she would still have 26 points of power in her phaser caps. So on the second turn, she could fire ( with a six impulse delay ) 4 overloaded disruptors for 24 points of damage and on the 8th impulse she can still fire 10 of her 12Ph-1s assuming they can all be brought to bear.

The Feds 32 points ( through the 16 point fastloaing ) of damage will be reduced to 24 if it looses one Photon tube which is equal to the damage generated by the disruptors BUT the disruptors can do it without touching the BTTY power so they come out as being very near to even.


• Disruptors firing being fired from Caps will generate flexibility that equates to some extent to the flexibility of being able to launch proximity overloads.


• Disruptors firing with +2 UIM and +2 Defraces will be very similar to the 6 point Proxie and the 12 point standard that Federation ships are likely to be able to generate.


• The Instability rule that makes Photon arming more difficult will drag the usual Photon warhead strength down to 16 or 18 or 20 rather than 24 and thus the Disruptors will have a slight advantage over the Photons, and disruptors are designed be slightly advatagious to offset the some of the crunch power effect.


All in all the Klingons proably won't need to have 6 or 8 Disruptors or Disruptors that do an extra overload damage value or disruptors that will do splash damage, they just need a few tweaks and they'll be about as good as photons.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 07:37 pm: Edit

As I've said before, I've switched from being in the Faster Photons camp to the Bigger Photons camp.

Federation ships have the following characteristics:

• Opponents fear the jackpot
• Feds don't dance.
• Feds don't maneuver.
• 2 Full OLs will score light internals, even against a fresh shield.
• A photon that hits is a miracle.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 07:37 pm: Edit

------------
The disruptor and the photon should have roughly the same average damage over two turns.

-------------------------
Range 8 standards:

Disruptor:
1-4 for 3 points.
An average of 2 per shot,
or 4 over 2 turns.

Photon:
1-3 for 8 points.
An average of 4 per shot,
or 4 over 2 turns.

------------------------------------
Range 8 OL:

Disruptor:
1-5 for 6
An average of 5 per shot,
or 10 over 2 turns

Photon:
1-3 for 16
An average of 8 per shot,
or 8 over 2 turns.

The disruptor does more, but this is balanced by the fact that to get more, the Klingon has to get to range 8 twice, while the Fed can stay away on the reload turn if he wants.

------------------------
X1:

Disruptor:
1-5 for 6
An average of 5 per shot,
or 10 over 2 turns
60 points.

Photon (full OL)
1-3 for 16
An average of 8 per shot,
or 8 over 2 turns.
32 points.

Photon (fast OL)
1-3 for 12
An average of 6 per shot,
or 12 over 2 turns
48 points.

---------------

Disruptor:
Accuracy, consistency, flexiblilty, decent damage

Photon:
Inaccurate, inconsistent, not as flexible, but the chance at a jackpot makes up for it.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 08:08 pm: Edit

I can deal with this as a basic analysis.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 08:11 pm: Edit

That's basically what I think, too. The real sticking point seems to be the overload limit. Some feel that 24 is too much, if we keep the number of photons the same as it's pretty much always been (i.e., 4 on a CA, 2 on an FF, etc.). I'm fine with the 12 point based photon, myself.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 08:18 pm: Edit

Oh wait, this is the disruptor thread.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 09:09 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

That's basically what I think, too. The real sticking point seems to be the overload limit. Some feel that 24 is too much, if we keep the number of photons the same as it's pretty much always been (i.e., 4 on a CA, 2 on an FF, etc.). I'm fine with the 12 point based photon, myself.

---

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 09:18 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

X1:

Disruptor:
1-5 for 6
An average of 5 per shot,
or 10 over 2 turns
60 points.

Photon (full OL)
1-3 for 16
An average of 8 per shot,
or 8 over 2 turns.
32 points.

Photon (fast OL)
1-3 for 12
An average of 6 per shot,
or 12 over 2 turns
48 points.

---

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 09:33 pm: Edit

Well, that's one way to look at it. Another is this:

Disruptor:
Range 5
Six disruptors
Max alpha strike damage potential: 36


Photon (full OL):
Range 5
Four photons
Max alpha strike damage potential: 64


See? It's that consistant damage across all ranges that makes the darn things so dangerous. And, before anyone says the above is either impossible or highly improbable, it does happen. I know, because it happened to me. Imagine my disgust when my shiny new DX took 64 points on the chin from that range, from a very lucky narrow salvo. Shield gone, pretty badly damaged, and he hadn't even fired his phasers yet. I know it doesn't happen often, but it illustrates the point I'm making here...the photon is pretty darn dangerous right now, so we'd best tread carefully with any changes we make.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 09:37 pm: Edit

You know with the R23 to 30 range having a +2 Defracs and R16 to 22 having a + 2 UIM and the Feds having an R15 limit on fastloads, the ability of the Feds to base kill from range or kaufmann retrograde is quite reduced.

R16-22
4 Proxies of 4 damage
8 points of damage
4 Proxies of 6 damage
12 Points of damage

4 +2UIM Disruptors
8 shots of 1-5 with 2 points for a hit
13.333 points of damage


R23-30
4 Proxies of 4 damage
8 points of damage
4 Proxies of 6 damage
12 Points of damage

4 +2Defracs Disruptors
8 shots of 1-4 for 2 damage
10.66 points of damage

Even with 12 point standards and 6 point Proxies the Feds are not going to be the great long range opponents that people say 12 point standards would build.
If the Klingons get six disruptors then it gets even worse for the Feds.


Admittedly in the R9 to 15 zone the Feds will marginally advantaged.
Four 12 Point fastloads with 1-2 and 1 to hit.
R9-12
4 x 12 x 2/6
16 points of damage each turn
Note carefully that those 16 points of damage cost 24 point of warp power every turn to generate.

Four disruptors with No bonus from UIM or Defracs
4 x 2/3 x 3
8 Points of damage every turn.

At 13 to 15 the Fed firepower halves but the Klingon doesn't.

But at that kind of close range and the Klignons having Phaser caps able to power the Disruoptor Caps, the Klingons can probably zoom into Overload range and do hellish damage with their Overloaded +2 UIM Disruptors.


Maybe R9-12, 12 point Fastloaded standards will be the Federation; tactically generated version of the R10 overload!?!


But mostly the fact is that Klingons will not need to mount 6 Disruptor on their XCAs until after massive ammounts of firepower are need:- the XOrk invasion.