Archive through May 20, 2003
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: OLD X2 FOLDER: X2 Playtest Reports: Archive through May 20, 2003
By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, May 19, 2003 - 11:36 am: Edit

Doesn't matter. 24 is too much when you can immediately follow up with another 16. Look at it this way. A Fed XCA that has four 24 point photons with a 16 point fastload option can dish out a possible 160 points (4x24=96,+ 4x16=64) damage in two turns. That's more than a Fed battleship (8x16=128). With no penalty imposed, that's a huge amount of damage. Do we really want a cruiser of any generation to have that kind of power?

By Mike Fannin (Daelin) on Monday, May 19, 2003 - 11:45 am: Edit

96+64 = 160

Are you including phasers in that calculation, but not in the comparison?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, May 19, 2003 - 11:51 am: Edit

Nah, just had a senior moment.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, May 19, 2003 - 12:29 pm: Edit

Since, like X1, if a ship can achieve a negative shift it can have a -1 to hit perhaps the old photon to hit chart brackets and the 20/15/10 warhead used.

I'll look over it tonight and maybe creat a new chart that maintains the proximity advantage of my proposal (which was my main goal).

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, May 19, 2003 - 07:56 pm: Edit

Quote:

Doesn't matter. 24 is too much when you can immediately follow up with another 16. Look at it this way. A Fed XCA that has four 24 point photons with a 16 point fastload option can dish out a possible 160 points (4x24=96,+ 4x16=64) damage in two turns. That's more than a Fed battleship (8x16=128). With no penalty imposed, that's a huge amount of damage. Do we really want a cruiser of any generation to have that kind of power?


Is 80+60 that much better!?!

140 Points of damage is a huge amount of damage, especially since a Gorn CCX can do that already.


Considering that a Fed cruiser must pay huge amounts of warp to get those shots ( and wait 8 impulses ) you'ld expect that only a very lucky player Fed or a Smuck opponent would get hit by the lot.

Average damages are what we should be looking at, Feds have always had the ability to get lucky and cruch the enemy.


I would also like to mention that I'm not for a 16 point Fastload ( or even a 15 pointer ) and think that the a smaller improvment to the fastloads ( say 14 points ) or even none at all is a better option.


.

But the real problem is that you are trying to set up a bettle where the Unrefitted Fed has assumed Parity with the Unrefitted Klingon.
Out Background we have set up is that the KLingon ecconomy is shot and needs a few decades and a good reason to manufacture anything other than weak but cheap ships.

When you are firing 6 integrated UIM Disruptors ( or heavy Disruptors ) with Disruptor caps and 10Ph-1s in a perfect Oblique, then you will have parity to those 24 Point Photons and thier 9 bearing Ph-5s ( although you might still be behind 16 point fastloads as some of the tales I'v written about a week ago indicate ).
The fully refitted ships will have balance, not the unrefitted ships!

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 08:27 am: Edit

MJC,

The two ships we tested were balanced just fine. They're very similar to the unrefitted Fed CA vs. The unrefitted Klingon D7. Had Hal fired his disruptors at R8 instead of waiting, things might have gone differently. The problem isn't the ships...it's the weapon. These have to be balanced against a GW opponent, too, and right now the Fed isn't. 20+ point photons are looking like too much.

Think of it this way. There are existing rules for what you want. The mega-photon rules have been in print since what, '96? And from what I remember, they were considered even before that for DN's to have a more powerful weapon. Those rules, per SVC, will never be official. What you're proposing is an even better version, one that can be fast loaded.

Don't get me wrong. We've been disagreeing alot lately, and it isn't a personal thing at all. For the record, I started out in favor of 12 point standards and 24 point overloads. It's in the threads. But I've since changed my position, and I honestly do not believe that 24 point photons are in the best interest of the game. I think another solution is in order.

By Ed Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 08:40 am: Edit

How would it work if we just kept the 16 point overloads and then not limit the overload to 12 points in 2X ships, let them have the full 16 point overloads, or just 20s and 12s it keeps the damage max to 128 points either way. The 16 X 16 would force the fed player to make important decisions concerning power allocation. 32 points for full overloads limits his choices.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 09:08 am: Edit

"let them have the full 16 point overloads, or just 20s and 12s it keeps the damage max to 128 points either way."

While the same it is not equal. Allowing 16+16 means 4 + 8 power. Allowing 20 + 12 means 5 + 6 power.

Of course you also mentioned this important affect.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 12:02 pm: Edit

Ok then how about:
10 point standards
12 point max fast load
16 point max HOLDABLE OL
20 max OL (17 to 20 not holdable).

In this way most would elect to bring photons to max OL with reserve warp. This will both slow the Fed some and reduce the damage he can absorb via reserve to specific reinforcement. OR he doesn't add to the photon and keeps them at 16 (depending on the circumstances).

Note: I realize the 12 point fast load max is only two points above the new standard but I think this is fine.

WIth this I think the tactic of starting the game with 20 pointers in the tubes will be curtailed (though you could use reserve warp to bring them up).

It could be brought further and say that once loaded to beyond 16 the photon becomes so unstable that it must be fired or ejected with in 1/4 turn. So if you load a 20 point OL during EA you MUST fire or eject by impulse 8 or if using reserve warp, with in 8 impulses.

I like that.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 12:03 pm: Edit

The above is going to really make the Feds have to think carefully and on their feet.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 01:10 pm: Edit

That's very similar to the proposal I had originally put up about overloaded 24 pointers...that 16 was the max you could hold, and that anything more required both an even arming pattern, and couldn't be held. Worth trying. I'll give it a spin next playtest, which may be this coming Saturday.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 01:37 pm: Edit

Cool. I think that last part would allow for a choice in arming pattern (doesn't have to be even). So you maintain some of the original flexability. Here is the proposal in a concise form.

New arming level for Standard load.
Photons armed to 10 points are considered standard. All standard armed Photon Torpedoes can be fitted with a proximity fuse.

Fast Loads
Same as X1. Maximum warhead of 12 points.

Overloads
The maximum Over Load warhead for X2 Photon Torpedoes is 20 points.

Restrictions: All warheads over 16 points cannot be held. Additionally they must be fired or ejected within 8 impulses after loading via EA or reserve warp.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 01:46 pm: Edit

I still think the X2 fastload should be an improvement over X1. YTou would think that in the time between periods, which is about 25 years or so, they would be able to even out the power imbalance that prevented the one turn 16 pointer.

The 20 pointer: No holding is fine, but the 8 impulse restiction is silly. You are making the photon sound like a plasma. If armed to 20, they have till the end of the turn.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 01:47 pm: Edit

Can you do a chart, especially for proximities? If I read that right, you're basically combining standards and proxies together. Is that right? If so, you might reconsider. The old supplement two did that, and it was a big part of the problem for the photon. Sitting back at R30 and chucking 10 point proxies will spell doom for pretty much any fixed installation.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 03:22 pm: Edit

No no, I just affirming that a ten point photon can be fitted with a proximity fuse (which would halve the damage). The largest proximity fused damage would be 5 points each torp.

What I'm trying to do with the 20 point/8 impulse thing is encurage the use of reserve power to arm beyond 16 points. I'm open to 16 impulses or scrapping the idea. But I feel it scales back to massive power of freely usable 20 point torpedoes. Also it discurages the 20 point max OL as a choice to enter a scenario with.

A simple "No hold beyond 16 points" may surfice.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 03:33 pm: Edit

Okay, I get you. I think that the eight impulse hold limit makes sense, as it represents the fact that you have a very unstable warhead you're holding, and you have to get rid of it quick. It also makes the player have to think about what he's doing, rather than just handing over the uber-torpedo to someone and letting them blast away. It's an advantage that will favor skill.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 04:17 pm: Edit

And maybe by the Xork era it can be held until the end of the turn.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 04:41 pm: Edit

Hmmm, there is a turn break situation that must be dealt with.

Say I raise my 16 point photon to twenty with reserve power on impulse 28. Should that limit my time to fire to four impulses? Or should I still get the full 8 (i.e. fire by impulse 4 of next turn). Further, if the latter, what should be the hold cost? Three or some part of three? Or none. None is very dangerous because that will become a tactic to arm it on turn A and fire it on turn B while replenishing the batteries on the same turn.

I just wrote a long thing about how to hold it but realized that wont work. It is better to say it cannot be held over the turn break. If you want to fire it on impulse one of turn C then DON'T overload on B but rather during EA of turn C. If you did load it on turn B;impulse 30 and missed your chance to fire then you blew it. Too bad, learn a lesson from it.

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 04:43 pm: Edit

Allow it to be held... but with Reserve Warp only.

Handwavium.

42

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 04:56 pm: Edit

Revised OL rule:

Overloads
The maximum Over Load warhead for X2 Photon Torpedoes is 20 points. Overloaded Photon Torpedoes over 16 points are called "Critical" or "Critical Photon".

Fastloads: Fastloaded torpedoes CANNOT be brought to Critical levels. Fastload standards could be held on the subsequent EA and brought to Critical during that EA or later with reserve warp. Fast-Overloads cannot be held therefore cannot ever be brought to critical levels.

Restrictions: All Critical Photons cannot be held. Additionally they must be fired or ejected within 8 impulses after loading via EA or reserve warp. Warheads over 16 points cannot be held over a turn break. (i.e. if overloaded with reserve warp on impulse 30 and not fired the torpedo would be considered lost after the fire segement of impulse 32. It could be fired on impulse 31 or 32.)
Note: When bringing a photon to Critical on a third or subsequent turn holding energy for the previous warhead must be paid first, then the additional energy to bring it to critical level can be applied (either during EA or with reserve warp).

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 05:02 pm: Edit

Mike: Incomming E-mail.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 06:31 pm: Edit

Gods, couldn't we please keep the photon the nice simple, dial-a-weapon that it has always been?

Just give it a max 20 point warhead, and a 16 impulse delay after firing a said 20 point warhead. THis delay is caused by the force of such a large energy discharge. If you try to fire them again before the 16 impulses are up, your ship will explode from the shock.

There. Simple.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 07:35 pm: Edit

What's so complicated about the above? I mean that's the whole rule. Looks pretty simple to me. And that really only applies to the Critical Overload. Standard OL remains the same.

It is simple, you dump in the energy for Crit. OL and you have eight impulses to fire it or eject it. It can't be held over the turn so be careful when you add the reserve warp. That's it. (except basically you can't Crit a fastload.)

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 09:11 pm: Edit

Quote:

The two ships we tested were balanced just fine. They're very similar to the unrefitted Fed CA vs. The unrefitted Klingon D7. Had Hal fired his disruptors at R8 instead of waiting, things might have gone differently. The problem isn't the ships...it's the weapon.


No it was the ships.

1) These ships only had 42 shield boxes on the number 2 shield...it need 50....the Feds 39 was even fewer, you need it to be 50 or on the #6 & #2 48 bit any weaker and you're falling down.

2) The Fed actually got a reduction in it's shield #7 so it fell short.

3) There was no Caps-to-SSReo or shield shunting to protect the vessel.

4) The Klingon was not running around with the 6 Disruptors required for parity but only four .


I still say you tested a weaker Klingon than Fed and it's little wonder the Fed won.
I still say you got reasonably lucky with your rolls although you were milkng the advantagious range brakets.
I still say the Defensive Capasities which will help the Klingon more than they help the Fed ( as all defensive capasities except free stuff ) were not employed.


The 24 point Photon has not been proven to wrong...yet!


Quote:

Don't get me wrong. We've been disagreeing alot lately, and it isn't a personal thing at all. For the record, I started out in favor of 12 point standards and 24 point overloads. It's in the threads. But I've since changed my position, and I honestly do not believe that 24 point photons are in the best interest of the game. I think another solution is in order.


You might be right, having the Fed massively over BPV in the early stages of the X2 period the product might not work increadibkly well even if they do have parity during the Xorks wars.

We might need the Feds to take a hint from the phaser department.
If the Fed had three 24 Point Photons with room for a refit to having the forth at the same time as the introduction of the fifth and sixth Disruptors, then you might get closer balance and better playability.


Quote:

I still think the X2 fastload should be an improvement over X1. YTou would think that in the time between periods, which is about 25 years or so, they would be able to even out the power imbalance that prevented the one turn 16 pointer.


I wouldn't!!!


Quote:

The 20 pointer: No holding is fine, but the 8 impulse restiction is silly. You are making the photon sound like a plasma. If armed to 20, they have till the end of the turn.


Yeah, any smuck who overloads a 16 pointer on impulse 32 with reserve warp power whilst the enemy is still outside overload range deserves everything he gets.


.


Ladds can we move all of this to the Photon topic.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 10:11 pm: Edit

I jusst don't like it. You give it an upgrade and then put an aweful limit on it.

It should be like a hellbore. If you Crit overload, you have ti fire it that turn, or discharge it.

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