Archive through May 22, 2003
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: OLD X2 FOLDER: X2 Playtest Reports: Archive through May 22, 2003
By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 12:24 am: Edit

Loren,

I do not have a problem with the power for 20 pointers having to come from batteries.

I do have a problem with dumping 8 points of reserve warp into weapons that are going to be useless in 8 impulses.

If it were not warp power, that would be one thing. But to get the ability to use these 20 pointers, the Fed is already giving up speed, or the option to increase speed etc. The further penalty is not needed, and is overkill.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 01:19 am: Edit

Before holding to that arguement I would point out that the Fed will likely have 48 warp plus a few AWR. If he is giving up speed it wont be much.

You can dump the energy in at any point so you usually wouldn't put the energy in until you are ready to fire (in any case to keep your options open). If the Fed is giving up speed he would be anyway. In a way it is to his advantage in that if the planed oppertunity is missed the power is saved (since he didn't crit hit photons during EA). But when you do Crit them be sure its what you want. If something changes you might miss your chance and lose the whole wad.

I have to admit to some attraction to the technobabble of it too; The Critical Overload. Further I see some interesting bits of fiction and a reason why the Feds don't go around holding what amounts to Mega-Photons. I also see it as a piece of Field Engineering Prowess made fleet standard practice because of some Ledgendary Engineer finding a way to Critical Overload the new more stable Photon Torpedo (the more stable part is what allows the ten point standard).

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 01:46 am: Edit

Quote:

Before holding to that arguement I would point out that the Fed will likely have 48 warp plus a few AWR. If he is giving up speed it wont be much.


48 Warp + 4 AWR - 4 x 4 ( for conventioal overlads ) - 8 to put up to 20 points.
That's still a top speed of 28.
4 x 6 -8 brings us to 20 and 4 x 2 -8 bringsus to a top speed of 31 not having the full ten points to got to 32.

These speeds might seem to be bloody fast but compaired to the Klingon with Disruptor Caps it's not and compaired to the GW task group speed is probably the X2 cruisers only advantage.


It's the 16 Fastload that scare me.
Top speed of 21, so even the GWs should be able to outrun that problem.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 01:50 am: Edit

Oops double post.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 01:53 am: Edit

Taking out 8 points for EW makes everything slower.

A.S.I.F makes everything slower.

Special Bridge makes everything slower.


You'll even go slower on account of your house keeping if you've only got 4 Imp instead of 6.


So X2 bnattle spedds for the Fed might be very slow indeed.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 02:28 am: Edit

For a three turn run it would be 4 + 4 + (2 [to hold 16 pointers] + 2 [to bring to critical 20]) X 4 = 16 warp on the third turn. The attack run is at full speed.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 03:47 am: Edit

Well, I'll leave it to you guys since I cannot convince you. Anyway, I hope the playtests continue producing valuable results.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 03:49 am: Edit

If full speed is speed 31, you need 40 warp and one impulse to move at 32 and your short by 4 points of warp...and that's assuming you have 4 AWRs!

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 04:20 am: Edit

Truth be told, we don't want them to be able to do walk and chew bubblegum without breaking a sweat. A choice in power uses is a good thing.

Now.....the trick (read possible problem) creates itself if with the same stats the Klingon can go max speed, fire these new devestating disruptors and dance around the Fed trying to pump out the same amount of damage over however many turns.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 04:21 am: Edit

I still don't like the idea of a ship moving faster than 31 at tactical speeds.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 07:22 am: Edit

I'm going to try the game again, but with these photons. Very simple...

Advanced Photons

Range0-123-45-89-1213-40
Hit, StandardNA1-51-41-31-21
Hit, ProximityNANANANA1-41-3
Hit, Overload1-61-51-41-3NANA
Damage, Standard01010101010
Damage, Proximity000055
Damage, OverloadVARIES


The max fast load is 12. No special rules for overloads other than that anything over 16 is treated as unholdable and must be fired on the turn it is armed.

MJC, where do you come up with these comparisons? Now you claim the 24 point photon isn't a game breaker because you can't take out a B-11 with a full salvo?

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 08:08 am: Edit

Quote:

Now.....the trick (read possible problem) creates itself if with the same stats the Klingon can go max speed, fire these new devestating disruptors and dance around the Fed trying to pump out the same amount of damage over however many turns.


Well I suspect that you can...but only for a while.

At 12X2Ph-1s and 6 point Disruptor caps and 25 points of BTTY ( unlikely but the best possible combination for travelling at speed and firing the weapons for a long time (unless there is some point where the power cost for the Ph-5 drops to 1 point of power ).
Paying from 48 warp and 4 AWR and 6 Impulse and obliquing for 10 phaser shots, you've got.
40 Warp and 1 Impulse going into movement and 4 points of house keeping going out ( unless some of us consider ASIF and Bridge thingy as HK ) leaving us with 7 points of power coming in every turn.

With 7 every turn plus 25 BTTY + 36 D'Caps + 36P'Caps, and 24+10+8 going out":-
T1 7+25+36+36-42 = 62
T2 7+62-42 = 27
T3 7+27-42 = -6

So basically you can keep up full battle speed with a ship that's totally maxed out for travelling and firing for just 2 turns in a row before you'll need to slow down and recharge.
Firing Ph-5s for 1.5 power will get stuck inot the Caps more quickly, having just 4 points caps for each Disruptor will also slow the ship down earlier and having 3 point BTTYs will also reduce that ability, so the vessel could more as speed 32 and fire for a while but not forever, and that's when ther enemy must capitalise on the situation.

That's one of the things I like about Caps-to-SSReo, you can walk through fire but at the cost of being practically stationary when the time come to recharge...it's choice...shield damage now, or a prone ship latter.


Quote:

MJC, where do you come up with these comparisons? Now you claim the 24 point photon isn't a game breaker because you can't take out a B-11 with a full salvo?


R5

But that answer is a little facescious.

Unless the Feds have three torps and refit for 4 at the same time as the Klingons move from 4 Disruptors to 6 you are throwing a Xork Invasion period heavy weapon system at early X2 period ships.

Actually I see it as being quite simple, you yourself said that the 24 point photon was battle ship armament.
Eight 16 pointers and 2 rear facing 16 pointers is a hell of a lot more powerful than 4 24 pointers.

Most DNs will stand up to four 24 pointers quite well so the question is not that a cruiser of any era should never have that level of fire opower but rather what BPV does that level of firepower bring us and secondly, does it balance with the 6 Disruptors of the fully refitted Klingon ship?
If the answer to that is (less than the 410 BPV price tag we've placed on these ships AND yes, then we'll do fine.


I love it when you know you're on shacky ground and so make your arguement an implied message that I've lost my mind rather than actually dealing the legitmate concerns of my statements.


1) It'll be better if the Fully trefitted Klingon and Fed balance against each other than if the unrefitted Klingon and Fed balance against each other.
2) Feds need to retain their Fed Flavour by the re creation of value from the two turn arming cycle.


.


Just to take point 2 further.
A ship lets it's Phaser offensive fire power drop to about 55% by making two turn attack runs, despite the slight gain in damage resistance by haveing extra power on the turn of attack, becauase that power wasn't allocated to arming weapons, it's still a fairly big loss.
These ships are a fair bit more dependant on their phaser fire power than they are on their Heavy weapons, especially in comparison with the MY ships.

When you have a 15 point fastload and a 20 poinmt two turner than you've got a 33% increase in heavy damage and any one turn for the loss of a large amount of phaser fire power ( indeed two lots of of 15 is streets head of one lot of 30 except where crunch power is critical ).
Having a 16 point fastload and 24 point two turner, is a 50% increase in heavy firepower for your loss in Phaser damage.
Having 12 point fastloads with 24 point two turn warheads is a 100% increase for your loss of phaser firepower.

The trouble with the Fed Flavour two turn attack run was that two sets of 12 pointers was streets ahead of one set of 16 pointers ( a 33% increase in firepower on the turn of attack for the loss of the off turn damage from both heavies and Phasers ).

To return to two turn arming we serously need to make two turn arming worrth the phaser damage losses.

12 point Fastloads and 24 point two turners will do this.
16 point fastloads and 24 point two turners probably won't.
15 point fastloads and 20 point two turners definately won't.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 08:32 am: Edit

Quote:

I love it when you know you're on shacky ground and so make your arguement an implied message that I've lost my mind rather than actually dealing the legitmate concerns of my statements.



Well, let's see. I've playtested. You haven't. I say that I believe 24 point photns will not play well with the majority of GW ships. You refute this by picking a conjectural super-battleship and placing it in a one-on-one duel with an XCA and use this match up to justify 24 point photons.

Sounds like you're on shaky ground, not me. Here's a quote for you...

Quote:

The idea of the larger and smaller photons thus is no more than an interesting sidebar to the design of SFB: a rule that will never become part of the game. Many players knew about the idea, however, and continued to call for the presentation of the actual rule for experimental use.



Pick up the important part? Let me reiterate it:

a rule that will never become part of the game

Now, this is in reference to the mega-photons in P6. These are not going to be part of the game, per SVC. I suppose he could change his mind, but I doubt it.

What you want, though, is even better that this. A mega photon that can be mounted on any size class of ship, and that can be fast loaded, too. It's so powerful that you feel the need to compare a ship armed with it to a B11. That's too much, and a poor comparison. You should know this.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 11:04 am: Edit

Umm 1 point.

Quote:

Quote:
The idea of the larger and smaller photons thus is no more than an interesting sidebar to the design of SFB: a rule that will never become part of the game. Many players knew about the idea, however, and continued to call for the presentation of the actual rule for experimental use.


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


Pick up the important part? Let me reiterate it:

a rule that will never become part of the game

Now, this is in reference to the mega-photons in P6. These are not going to be part of the game, per SVC. I suppose he could change his mind, but I doubt it.



Mega and Mini Photons are already official parts of the game. IE: FRA Omega. They are official. And part of the game. Just beacause they aren't Alpha doesn't mean that they dont exist.

It just means that the Federation never put them into production because it was simpler/efficeint to do supply for one flavor instead of 3 types.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 11:22 am: Edit

Well I'll be dipped. I didn't know that. There goes one of the reasons I don't like 24 pointers out the window.

Couple of questions, though. Can mega photons be mounted on SC3 and smaller hulls? And, are there Omega X ships that can fastload those mega and mini photons?

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 11:39 am: Edit

Keep in mind that using Omega as a benchmark for Alphan capabilities has been squashed in the past (e.g. no ph-1 on fighters in Alpha, even though Omegan fighters ahve ph-1s).

Only SC2 units and bases can mount the heavy (mega) photon. X-ships have not yet been developed for Omega, and will likely follow at elasta slightly different track when they do.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 12:06 pm: Edit

Yep And the mini is what is used for SC4 generally. So the plain old Vanilla Photon is whats mounted on SC3. (With a few mini's mounted as well.) Plus the fact that FRA ships tend to be a bit under armed photon wise IMO.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 12:10 pm: Edit

I'm not suggesting that Omega be used to justify Alpha. But the MEGA-MINI Photons are a bit of an exception to the rule. The Feds could have used them. But they went with the std. to simplify supply/repair for a fleet spread out everywhere.

But while they could have been used they were an abandonned tech that was only realized by the FRA.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 01:54 pm: Edit

Not necessarily.

Has it ever been established that the Alpha-Sector Federation developed anything other than the photon we all know and love/hate?

Give the Omega humans credit for some individual initiative. Their tech can't just be dependant on what they brought with them from the Alpha-sector Federation. They are capable of dreaming up new toys for themselves.

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 02:05 pm: Edit

SVC stated in Mod-Y that they considered using the Mini-photon on some of the National Guard ships. They chose not to because (not a direct quote) "had the mini-photon been used by the National Guards the Feds would have put it on the DD".

This means to me that the Feds (and the various other Federation members) never developed the mini/mega. FRA developed it on their own.

42

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 03:14 pm: Edit

Comparing an X2 crusier to a GW conjectural BB is a waste of time.

A Crusier should not have BB firepower. It is still just a crusier.

I feel that it should be able to take on a maxed out GW DNH and win more than 50% of the time.

The B10 should still be able to have an advantage as long as it got continued updated refits.

Now, at some point, the "Advanced" X2 X3 whatever crusier will be more powerful than a B10.

We can use wet Navy comparisons.

The U.S.S. New Jersey served for a very long time, getting constant refits to fire control, AA, cruise missles, etc. It would today still be a formidable weapon if it were still in use. Just became to expensive to be in service, when it's roll was replaced with smart weapons and smaller ships able to launch missles.

We can go back further. The HMS Dreadnaught, and then other Dreadnaughts during the WWI period. These Queens of the Sea would probably lose a fight against a state of the art WWII advanced Heavy Crusier(Like the Japanese crusiers), but would still be able to put up a fight for a while.

So, to restate, I still think that an X2 cruiser should be able to beat a GW DNH about 51% of the time. I do not think that it should have the same number of weapons as the DNH, but between the better type of weapons, and the other improved abilities, it should come out on top.

Oh, and shunting phaser caps to shields is a bad idea, as we would be creating monster ships that could take a huge beating. Even without phasers, I would bet that the X2 ship with this ability to crush a ship with its heavy weapons and not take a scratch because of that reinforcing ability.


And MJC, it isn't nice to insult folks. You could jsut state your point without all the flamewar stuff added to it.

By Aaron Gimblet (Marcus) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 04:18 pm: Edit

Okay, you want an X2 Boat to be about 350-370BPV, and fight even with an F-DNH.

F-DNH, 6 Tubes, 16 points each
F-XCA, 4 Tubes, 24 points each

Since the photon was the sticking point... and the DNH will still have internal volume, drone launch, weapons hits, blah blah blah over the XCA.

Now, ~granted~, that you do run into the '24 pt OL followed by Fastloads'... why dont we just say you ~cant fire a photon~ the turn after you dump off a 17-24 point OL. Fred is supposed to be a 2 turn ship. If we dont up the photon crush, we use phasers and fastloaded photons, and its a klink with a different turn mode.

I like that. 12pt Normals and Proxies, 24 Pt OLs, no fire from a photon tube in the turn following the fire of a 17-24 point torpedo. We get a big, crunch, Photon-for-men photon, but we dont get an OL/Hotload Photon hacknslash with phasers for flavour.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 04:38 pm: Edit

Aaron,

Check the photon poll. That option of a "cool down" period for overloads over 16 is indeed a choice. Take a stab at the poll...the more input, the better.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 06:32 pm: Edit

I'd take a photon cannot be "fired" from a tube after firing a 17-20 (still don't like 24) pointer. But still allow a new torpedo to be armed.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, May 22, 2003 - 08:29 pm: Edit

Sort of a "Flush the tube after a critical overload" rule? Hmm, interesting. Could say the radiation would cause a torp to explode in the tube if fired before flushing the tube.

Should it be?
A) "Cannot be fired the following turn but arming could begin"
or should it be
B) "Cannot be fired for 32 impulses but arming could begin at from the beginning of the following turn."

I'm open to this replacing my 8 impulse restricion. It would prevent the two turn average from being too high. (i.e. 80 + 48).

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