Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board

Archive through May 11, 2003

Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: OLD X2 FOLDER: X2 disruptors: Archive through May 11, 2003

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, May 08, 2003 - 08:56 pm: Edit

Quote:
Dream on for a +2 UIM.

Bite me.

No seriously.
I'ld like to heard a legitimate reason as to why it shouldn't come to pass...X1 cruisers already get to hit GW cruisers at R8 with an autohit so the idea of it being an autohit thing just won't hold water.

Quote:
And yes, this AT mode would be instead of the heavy disruptor.

We have each race nicely differentiated.

The Klinks get the AT disruptors (6 on a cruiser)

The Lyrans get heavy disruptors (4 on a cruiser, more later. some case to be made for 6)

The Kzinti get disruptor cannon (4 to a cruiser)

I don't think that is at all a good idea.
I think for simplicity sake we need to keep the Disruptor the same across all the races...we might be able to get away with having a Disruptor Cannon for the Kzintis because that at least is a different name for the weapon.
If we start saying that Ph-5s can't down fire as Ph-3s because it's too confussing but we allow allow ourselves to have three different forms of Disruptor...what will Orions have...alll three?...we winde up creating the kind of unlimited Confussing that'll make X2 worse than the old X1.

I'm still not even remotely convinced of the via-ability of the AT Disruptor.
• Logically it would hit the shield not directly on and so some of the attacking disruptor damage would skip off.
• Even if you penertrate who is to say that the angle of the impacting shot won't pass through the shield and zoom past the some place close by to the hull and then pass out of the shield ( assuming the damage is strong enough ).

Even if we say that the parabolic bend in the shot is so great that the hit comes in on a line that is directly perpendicular to the tangent of the shield at the point of impact and thus follow on damage will strike the vessel, there is no garrentteeing that we can detect how many meters out the shield is from the ship and therefore how to get our computers to calculate the correct fire angle and curvature factor into the Disruptors.

Personnally I don't think that the AT disruptor could be called even remotely possible ( like superluminal ship to ship combat is possible ) and won't be very much fun for anyone playing against it and I don't think it is the solution to the Disruptor perceived weakness...which doesn't actually exist to any degree like that people think it does.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, May 08, 2003 - 09:25 pm: Edit

MJC,

A +2 UIM gives disruptors an auto-hit out to range-8 under EW-neutral or favorable conditions.

That's enough to nix the idea right there.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, May 08, 2003 - 10:19 pm: Edit

Like I said in my earlier post.

The Disruptor already autohits GW ships ( even GW ships with an outstanding crew ) in that range braket under the new and suppossedly fixed X1 rules.

I say if it works okay for the X1 rules that are out and about then it'll probably work for X2...and will be less of an anti GW thing than the X1, because it'll work across the entire spectrum.

+2 UIM only takes the through put of the Disruptor at R5-8 up from 1.2 to 1.5, it's a simple solution that doesn't require huge numbers of rule rewrites or reproducing the tables.

I'ld say it's simply the best solution around...but then I already think 6 +1 UIM Disruptors on a cruiser with no 32 impulse penalty is an X2 wonder weapon as it is and so Disruptors won't need very much improvement as it is!.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, May 09, 2003 - 02:03 pm: Edit

A X1 disruptor only auto-hits if it has the EW advantage. I don't see a reason to make it any easier. Rolling dice and having some chance of missing are parts of the game.

As I wrote in the X2 drone topic "Simple" doesn't mean "better."

Anyone who played the very early versions of Magic the Gathering can tell you how unbalancing the "simple" mox and Black Lotus cards were.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, May 09, 2003 - 09:01 pm: Edit

Quote:
A X1 disruptor only auto-hits if it has the EW advantage. I don't see a reason to make it any easier. Rolling dice and having some chance of missing are parts of the game.

As I wrote in the X2 drone topic "Simple" doesn't mean "better."

Considering how easy it will be for most X2 ships to have an ECM drone there's still a high chance of a mis and quite frank there are lot of no die roll damages...PPD wave locks?...drones against targets that are EW neutral!?!...point blank range.
Making one range braket an auto hit isn't going to much of a problem, considering how weak the damage of the Disruptor is and and how fantastic the Defenses of the X2 ships will be the autohit aspect isn't that much of a problem...hitting a ship that puts in an unexpected amount of Caps-to-SSReo and BTTY in it's defense will have a muchh bigger unexpected change to the attack run than finding that you rolled that 1 in 1296 chance of all four disruptors rolling a 6.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, May 09, 2003 - 09:59 pm: Edit

Quote:
Making one range braket an auto hit isn't going to much of a problem, considering how weak the damage of the Disruptor is and and how fantastic the Defenses of the X2 ships will be the autohit aspect isn't that much of a problem.

What about the GW or X1 ships? Getting autohit by four to six disruptors every turn is going to suck, no matter who you are...and at that range, an ECM drone isn't going to help you; it's going to be shot down.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, May 09, 2003 - 10:45 pm: Edit

Quote:
What about the GW or X1 ships? Getting autohit by four to six disruptors every turn is going to suck, no matter who you are...and at that range, an ECM drone isn't going to help you; it's going to be shot down.

Which range shoots down the ECM drone?...we are talking about the R5-8 braket. The X2 Klingon ( fully reftted ) is going to kill a Type VII ECM drone with three Ph-5s put into the effort on average...that's a lot less phaser firepower to fire on the enemy when you fire.

Guess what Most GW and X1 ships can give pretty good.

Is this 6 +2UIM Disruptor Klingon cruiser fighting a Fed CX and DDX?
Cool...four Fastloaded 12 point Photons plus 4 fastloaded standards every turn right back at you comes out on average as ( assuming the standards are at say R10 ) 12 x 4 x 3/6 + 8 x 4 x 1/3 = 34.66.
You are looking at a spread between zero and 80 points of damage averaging out at 34.66 and the Klingon is dishing up with his heavy weapons, 6 x 6 x 6/6 for 36 points of damage...period.

Considering the X2 Klingon will probably have fewer drone launchers and in a perfect oblique will get its 10R8 Ph-5s to fire against 9R8 Ph-1s and 6R10 Ph-1s, the extra 1.33 points of damage won't matter very much.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Saturday, May 10, 2003 - 09:36 am: Edit

Sorry, I'm not convinced. There is no good argument anyone can use to convince me that an R8 auto-hitting heavy weapon is a good thing...especially not one that can fire every turn, and will likely have superior firing arcs (if the X2 Klingon follows the pattern of it's late war predecessors). Nope, just can't buy it. You can escape into mathematics all day long, but the fact is you're advocating giving a race a heavy weapon that can't miss with overloads regardless of range. That isn't balanced no matter how you slice and dice it.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Saturday, May 10, 2003 - 11:10 am: Edit

And it's boring. Nothing new or different.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, May 10, 2003 - 09:00 pm: Edit

Quote:
Sorry, I'm not convinced. There is no good argument anyone can use to convince me that an R8 auto-hitting heavy weapon is a good thing...especially not one that can fire every turn, and will likely have superior firing arcs (if the X2 Klingon follows the pattern of it's late war predecessors). Nope, just can't buy it. You can escape into mathematics all day long, but the fact is you're advocating giving a race a heavy weapon that can't miss with overloads regardless of range. That isn't balanced no matter how you slice and dice it.

Well I wouldn't take the Disruptor beyond the X1 Firing arcs.
I really why Americans think they can throw around any old superlative...You are only autohitting under Neutral EW at one particular range braket...are range braket at which the Ph-5 is going be to auto-hitting in the EW neutral state aswell.

Lots of things have autokill effects and don't unbalance the game...tractors cause drones to run out of fuel...Nebulae destroy shuttles and fighters...Why should auto-hitting at a particular range be all that bad?

In an EW neutral Enviroment Drones strike their targets Autohitting and do full damage all the way out...as do SS...so the idea of a static damage value is not broken and their is a defense against the attack...generate more EW!.

More over I am advocating that the +2 Defracs burn out on a 1 on a D6 and the +2 UIM go back to 1 or 2 on D6, which means after a few turns (Specifically 9 on average if it has as many UIM as the X1s ) the UIM will all have burned out and the Klingon has dropped back to 1-4 hitting...something the Feds and Kzintis ( if they go to the DC ) won't have...the Klingon XFF will have even fewer turns to fight this way.
Indeed UIM burnout beconmes the new die chaos factor burning out after over a long period of time or very quickly and leaving the ship serious reduced in capasity for the remainder of the battle.

The 36 points of damage able to be generated in an autohit by an X2 Klingon cruiser ( or the 12 by the Klingon XFF ) even doing it every turn won't be enough to garrenttee the destruction of an equal BPVed opposing force in a rapid enough time.
6 Disruptors already is a wonder weapon...we should be looking for a slight improvment and improving three range brakets ( 2 of which are quite long ) won't be too over the top.

I'm prepared to have the +2UIM miss on a natural roll of 6 with some technolbabble about sensor data overload at closer range generating it's own occassional phantom target for the targeting computer to possibly fire on.
It'll still work very nicely against an X1 or GW ship flying an ECM drone...thank you very much.

But I'ld rather see where playtesting takes the +2 UIM before I throw in a "but it doesn't work properly at one specific range braket" clause.
Or more accurately the a guy I ran it past said to avoid that kind of special rule...he's the guy that told me X1s already auto-hit by getting that -1 shift and that therefore the +2 UIM would need to miss on a natural...I'll blame him now because I don't want a bunch of posts saying I have a double standard for my own propossals as I do for those of others.

Quote:
And it's boring. Nothing new or different.

Like R5 battle passes with a Klingon X1 Cruiser against a GW Fed arn't boring!?!
Ohh look all of my Disruptors hits...how unexpected!
Oh look 36 points of phaser damage from my bearing 9Ph-1s...wasn't that unlikely!?!

And he can't fire because his phaser won't break the BTTY barrier and he knows he'll miss with half ( that being generous, I can aford 1 point of ECM to make that two thirds ) of his photons endering that attack theoretically ineffectual.

The game is either boring as it is now or exciting as it is now...the fact that the enemy can smash you to bits with a good roll (fed ) or if you fail to shoot down his drones ( Kzinti ) still carried enough excitement to make it playable...the only possible boring factor would be Lyrans Vs Klingons and even the UIM burnout would create a "risk factor" as would phaser fire and ESG-drone interactions.

+2 UIM is workable...+2 UIM missing on a natural roll is workable...let's not get ourselves in a mind set that an autohit game is a broken game.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Saturday, May 10, 2003 - 09:50 pm: Edit

MJC, you seem to be missing the point. So, let me try to explain why this is a bad idea. You are proposing a heavy weapon that, while overloaded and under normal play conditions, cannot miss. Autohitting at a particular range isn't bad...but autohitting at every range a weapon can reach is definately bad. That's what you're giving us here...an overloaded disruptor that can't miss under nominal conditions.

To this, you say "generage more EW". First of all, EW is an optional rule and may not even come into play. Secondly, why should I have to generate EW just to give you the slightest chance of not missing with overloaded disruptors regardless of range? Even the old Supplement 2 didn't take disruptors that far, and it's considered broken by pretty much everyone I know that's seen it, SVC included.

You also point out that phasers are autohit weapons. Apples and oranges. The phaser-1 has been an autohit weapon out to range 5 from day one...no DF heavy weapon that exists in the game can match that, nor should they. I'm sorry, but you will never make a convincing argument that +2 UIM isn't unbalancing.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, May 10, 2003 - 10:28 pm: Edit

You seem to be missing the point twice over.

• It's only auto hitting for R0 ( not even the Feds Dreaded R0-1 ) and R5-8...it won't Auto hit at the other UIM range or the Defracs range.

• If we say that a natural roll of six on the X2 disruptor still misses then we don't have an auto-hit when players aren't employing ECM.

Personnally I don't see why you think Auto-hitting DF weapons are game breakers...boring perhaps when two meet each other but that's about it.

If the enemy doesn't like the the fact that he can miss & the Klingon will autohit and isn't using ECM he should set up his attack run better to make the primary fire point closer than R5!

It's a simple solution...it probaly isn't needed...Disruptor Caps and a 6 impulse double broadside rule will be hell on wheels as it is...but it's a simple solution and still ramains playable.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, May 10, 2003 - 11:12 pm: Edit

If we are going to talk about the some players don't use EW debate then the XD6.34 already gives X1 cruiser the ability to smash ships at R8 with an autohit ( it's an outworking of the Outstanding crew that an X1 ship must buy under the current rules ).

Without EW play there already is an autohit going on at that range.
If it could be allowed for X1 then it can be allowed for X2.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Saturday, May 10, 2003 - 11:19 pm: Edit

OO.......Auto Hit.......Automatically a product half the folks on the board won't buy.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, May 11, 2003 - 01:29 am: Edit

MJC: X1 ships are not required to buy outstanding crews.

The rule states that X-ships cannot gain benifits from an outstanding crew because it takes one to just opperate the ship. They all get an outstanding crew that functionally, on an X-ship, opperate as a normal crew.

Also, an auto hit at 5-8 but a natural 6 still misses is the same as what the disruptor is now. UIM at 5-8 is a 1-5 die roll to hit. Curently the Disruptor is the most accurate weapon in the game. Why does it need to be better?
XD6.34 only gives a -1 if you can out generate the enemy by two ECCM. That is a major difference from a natural auto hit.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, May 11, 2003 - 07:23 am: Edit

I highly recommend you read G21.111

1-6 but 6 still missed is better than 1-5 because the Positive EW target will not gain it's first reduction.

Quote:
MJC: X1 ships are not required to buy outstanding crews.

The rule states that X-ships cannot gain benifits from an outstanding crew because it takes one to just opperate the ship. They all get an outstanding crew that functionally, on an X-ship, opperate as a normal crew.

Well it seems strange for an advanced technology ship to have 8 swing points instead of 7 swing and 3 ECCM.

It's not really clear but I say only G21.2121 gets overcome by the X rules and G21.211 remains but I'ld ask a question in Q&A to find out.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, May 11, 2003 - 08:58 am: Edit

Quote:
It's only auto hitting for R0 ( not even the Feds Dreaded R0-1 ) and R5-8...it won't Auto hit at the other UIM range or the Defracs range.

� If we say that a natural roll of six on the X2 disruptor still misses then we don't have an auto-hit when players aren't employing ECM.

About these two statements. The first, I don't understand at all. Looking at the disruptor table, this is how it looks...

Overload/UIM Disruptor

0	1	2	3-4	5-8
1-6	1-5	1-5	1-5	1-5

According to that table, if the X2 disruptor gets the benefit of a +2 UIM and can auto-hit under normal conditions, it looks to me like it can do so at any range.

Regarding the second, that's the first time I've seen that mentioned. Has this been part of the deal all along? If so, that alone should be enough to point out that it's a bad idea, if you have to create a spot rule just to give the thing a chance to miss. Loren is right...the disruptor already hits on a 1-5; saying it misses on a six is the same thing. Yes, I know all about the EW shift rules, but by the statement above you're applying this miss on a six rule for players not using EW. In other words, it makes the disruptor act like it already does. Why bother?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, May 11, 2003 - 12:52 pm: Edit

Quote:
Well it seems strange for an advanced technology ship to have 8 swing points instead of 7 swing and 3 ECCM.

It says clearly that X ships have better targeting computers. This is reflected in the extra 2 ECCM. Originally natural but now in addition to the normal six. So this is a function of the X ship not the crew (though x- ships require outstanding crews their abilities are saturated with dealing with the new technology so the "Outstanding" benifites are ignored.)

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, May 11, 2003 - 02:18 pm: Edit

Loren,

Minor correction:

X-ships have 8 EW circuits, not 6 + 2 ECCM.

X-ships lost the +2 ECCM with the recent revision.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, May 11, 2003 - 02:23 pm: Edit

Ya, I understood that I just mis-stated that. Thanks for the crearification.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, May 11, 2003 - 08:06 pm: Edit

Quote:
About these two statements. The first, I don't understand at all. Looking at the disruptor table, this is how it looks...

Overload/UIM Disruptor
0 1 2 3-4 5-8
1-6 1-5 1-5 1-5 1-5

According to that table, if the X2 disruptor gets the benefit of a +2 UIM and can auto-hit under normal conditions, it looks to me like it can do so at any range.

Look, I don't know what you've been smoking but I sugest you grab an X1 Disruptor user SSD before you start making comments.

This is where I'm comming from for overload range.

Ranges	0	1	2	3-4	5-8
Overloadeed Disruptor	1-6	1-5	1-5	1-4	1-4
Overloaded UIM Disruptor	1-6	1-5	1-5	1-4	1-5
Overloaded +2 UIM Disruptor	1-6	1-5	1-5	1-4	1-6

UIM gives a bonus, overloaded to R5-8 and regular to R16-22.
If I'm talking about a +2 UIM then it applied only to the ranges that the old UIM applied to.
Defracs applies only to R23-30 so if I talk about a +2 Defracs then it would apply only to R23-30!

Furthermore!
D6.3 states:-
Some of these rules are used at all times as standard rules to explain such things as terrain effects (P0.0) and small target modifiers (E1.7). These standard rules are marked as such in this section. It is not possible to play the game without them although in the simplest scenarios they will not be used.

Now personnally I think players who don't play with EW can take a long walk off a short pier from the point of veiw of design but let's continue.

But to continue.
If you play without EW and you hit on a 1-6 but miss on a six, then it'll have no improvment in ordinary free space...as though free space battles without EW are ordinary but as soon as you start dealing with;- Dust clouds, Asteroid Feilds or WWs ( all things you can enounter under EW free play ) ( you might still find opponents using EM depending on what parts of the EW rules are still retained under local play conditions ) ( I'll admit that X ships ignore small target modifiers anyway and therefore I can't list them as something to get a shift from ) you'll find that 1-6 but miss on a natural 6 is better than 1-5.

To make that clearer:-
If you play without EW and you hit on a 1-6 but miss on a six, then it'll have no improvment in ordinary free space but as soon as you start dealing with;- Dust clouds, Asteroid Feilds or WWs you'll find that 1-6 but miss on a natural 6 is better than 1-5!

It still gives some kind of advantage to player who don't use EW, but why we should tailor a game such that they get "a fair go" is beyond me...we should treat EW as though it were an integral part of the game and carry on from there letting the non EW players choose not to use it with the consequences of having less effective ships.
If I take a D6D to an EW free game then I only have myself to blame if I can not get it's full BPV worth of value out of the situation...so too with X2 ships I think.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, May 11, 2003 - 08:23 pm: Edit

Quote:
Look, I don't know what you've been smoking but I sugest you grab an X1 Disruptor user SSD before you start making comments.

I suggest you do that, MJC. As I said, an overload UIM disruptor does not hit at a 1-4 on range 3-4...it hits on a 1-5. Look and see. Loren tried to tell you that, too, and you didn't listen. I don't know where you're getting that table from, but it isn't from any disruptor table I've ever seen. Here, take a look at this: it's a link to the Klingon Tournament D7 from this very website. Look real close at the OL/UIM line.

TD7 SSD

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, May 11, 2003 - 08:44 pm: Edit

Mike is right.

That's the whole point of a UIM--to give those marvelous 1-5's out to R8.

Now that this issue is settled, we go back to having a civil conversation.

We beat up ideas here, not each other.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, May 11, 2003 - 09:03 pm: Edit

Bugger me...you know since the UIM only gives you one bonus range braket I must have convinced myself that it only gives you one range braket in overload mode.

Okay I'm sorry.
So a +2 UIM will give you a R1-2 zone where it'll miss within the overload range...so you're still wrong.

Now I've got half a mind to revisit the Overloaded Photon proxi and change it from R5-8 to R3-4 & 5-8...stupid lousey Klingon Disruptors always hitting everything almost all the time.

I still say +2 UIM with no natural miss works...X1 ships playing with out EW already do this (apparrently through the R3-8) so there's no need to make a special rule to stop the possibility of an autohit.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, May 11, 2003 - 09:30 pm: Edit

MJC,

It may well "work", it's just not an idea I'm particularly attached to.

As I have said before, I'd prefer to do new and different things with X2 and a +2 UIM isn't that. Seems like it would take a lot of the randomness of the dice roll out of the equation.

Your milage may vary.

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