MY idea was that the standard X2-cruiser would be MC1, and not much larger than the X1 cruiser, but that the cruiser produced to fight back during the Xork invasion would be a larger ship with an MC of 1.25

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 12:07 pm: Edit

Basically a XDNL

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 01:33 pm: Edit

Not quite so large, perhaps. Just bigger than a CX or CB, but not so large as a DN. Having an incresed move cost solves quite a few problems, IMHO. Time will tell, though.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 01:50 pm: Edit

I'm thinking the MC 1.25 ship would have box counts very similar to a DNL, but with about 8 more warp. There are numerous tactical reasons why SC2 is better than SC3 but we can make the SC decision at a later date or change S8 once the Xork invade. One reason to keep it SC3 would be to get around the deployment limitations of S8.

I agree that the mainline non-command cruiser would be MC1. Maybe the 1.25 MC X2 should have a CR=11 but I would prefer the standard X2 cruiser with a non-10 CR, maybe even 8. In that way the X1 cruiser retains a valuable place as a fleet flagship during the tradewars when presumably large fleet engagements will be rare.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 02:02 pm: Edit

Yeah, I can see that. If the XCA/CC is a rarity and more of a flag ship than before, it could be SC2 with a MC of 1.25. The CL or DD would be the more common ship, with an appropriate MC.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 02:21 pm: Edit

Interesting arguements. I suppose it is possible. I kinda like the idea of the XCC having the (S8.0) SC2 restrictions. That would put the medium cruiser (SC3) as the mainline ship.

The problem I think is keeping the XCC a two engine ship and not having huge monster engines (box wise. The engine could be said to be smaller but producing more power.) Hmmm, wait, at MC1.25 it takes only 37.5. So that only means two 25 point (or 24 point for some) would be sufficiant. With 4 point batts and a little more APR/AWR. The power curve of an average XCC might should be around 60 (50W+6IMP+4APR). Power curves may vary depending on need and engine size. Feds and Klingons might have 24 point engines with two to four on the saucer/boom.


Alright, I on board with the MC1.25/SC2 = XCC. Now I've got a ton of changes to my SSDs to make!

<edit> That also leaves room for a post Xork invasion refit adding four Ph-V and a few what evers, quite nicely.

This is a fresh approach to the Heavy Cruiser without changing the feel of the heavy cruiser. But if a third engine were added it wouldn't be a heavy cruiser, it would be a XDNL, something I'd rather not see. An XDN after the Xorks maybe, but not a XDNL.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 02:34 pm: Edit

Hmm. If you give it the weapons of a DNL, the movement rate of a DNL and make it roughly the size of a DNL......its a DNL called a CC.

Could we not stick with something that is close to the CX, but more advanced?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 02:41 pm: Edit

Loren,

Exactly what I was thinking. Two 24 point engines, with a couple points of saucer/boom warp. You'd have a move cost of 37, with 13 power left over. A CCX has 42 warp, with 12 left over after movement; almost exactly the same excess power.

I'd like to see 1XDN's (DNX's) for the Xorks; sort of a desperation tactic, I guess you'd say, by refitting the DN's with XP tech. Not as good or pricy as a 2X DN, but still pretty darned effective.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 05:31 pm: Edit

The DNXP could see local service during the trade wars, but due to the cost of maintaining such a ship would usually operate as in the role of a fast monitor. A DNXP probably wouldn't have the strategic speed to catch a Xork.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 06:34 pm: Edit

I guess this is one point where I'm just off by myself.

I still don't see a reason for having a XDNL masquerading as a XCA++. But that's just me.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 06:51 pm: Edit

A MC1.25/SC2 XCC wouldn't be a DNL at all.

It would have typically 10 phasers and 4 torpedoes.

I know that is only a slight difference but in fact any of the others XCCs out classed a DNL anyway. We all prety much agreed that the XCC would be 300+ BPV.

Giving the XCC that move cost and Size Class opens up the head room for that hull. It also has a air of Advancement because of the SC2 hull with two engines (baring the plasma ships as a compairison). With more head room there is room to refit these ships to a more powerful level for use against the Xorks (A BCH level upgrade).

It has a bit of a Cannon paralell to it too. Not that that is very important but does help with the way non-SFB-veterans look at the game.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 07:31 pm: Edit

How does having a Crusier, or DNL, or whatever that is SC2 with a 1.25 MC act an cannon in any way?

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 07:32 pm: Edit

Oh, BTW, with X1 the DNL is about the only ship of near BPV that can give them a run for their money and win about 40% of the time.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 07:47 pm: Edit

For me its a balance thing. We want the CC(X2) to have more power but not so much that it can overload and move 31 all turn with max EW. A higher movement cost allows these ships to have more power without giving them so much that they have no reason to ever move less than speed 31.

Consider, if a CX had a 0.5 MC you would always move very fast. At MC 1 you occasionally have to make choices. At MC 1.5 you would have to make a lot of tough power choices. Tough energy choices are what SFB is all about. Super Bats and Caps takes many of these choices away. Leaving X2 with too much disposable energy at speed would remove the remaining choices.

A secondary reason to me is that I'd like the CC(X2) to be larger than a BCH, which already stretches the bounds of MC1 credibility. X2 will need more room for hull, cargo, labs and other peacetime niceties.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 07:51 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

How does having a Crusier, or DNL, or whatever that is SC2 with a 1.25 MC act an cannon in any way?

---

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 08:31 pm: Edit

Hmm, I really don't think there was much difference in the actual size of the ships there.....the 1701,1701(refit),1701-A.

The 1701 was the CA: ~95 internals
The 1701(refit) is probably a CB: ~105
The 1701-A is a CX: ~115

So, about 10 boxes extra per ship. But, many things stayed exactly the same.

Hull: 16/16/16
LAB: 8/8/8
Impulse: 4/4/4
Shuttle: 4/4/4

Most of the upgrades come in weapon systems and then engines. Remember, the BCH is not a progression of the CA design, like the CA->CB->CX is. It is more like an offshoot.

I just think that the X2 ships should be more like a continuation of the theory

So, ~125 or so internal, with those 10 boxes being mostly power and weapons.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 08:35 pm: Edit

I mean the franchise ships. Externally, the A is a good bit larger than the original. According to the Star Trek encyclopedia, they work out like so:

1701: 289 meters
1701A: 305 meters
1701B: 467 meters
1701C: 526 meters
1701D: 641 meters
1701E: 680 meters

Granted, this is SFB...but I think this continual growth in size is what Loren may have been referring to when he mentioned canon sources.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 08:48 pm: Edit

Yes, and I accidently doubled up on the "n"s for CaNNon.

Anyway, SFB is its own thing but letting the ships grow a bit in size wouldn't be a copyright issue while paralelling canon Trek in a minor way. It is what new players would expect to see and so wouldn't hurt SFB (or ADB).

Mike, I sent you an E-mail.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 09:15 pm: Edit

WEll, yeah, but from what I have heard the idea for an XCA is to go from ~115 boxes to around 150 ro 200 boxes. THat's just huge!! And way to big for a CA.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 10:03 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

It would have typically 10 phasers and 4 torpedoes.

---

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 10:43 pm: Edit

I like your X2S8.331 rule. The MC1 issue not withstanding. But in general it sounds good.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 11:12 pm: Edit

(X2S8.331) I'm OK with this as an after Xork invasion rule. During the tradewars the existing S8 limits work fine. That's expecting 3-9 CC(X2) per race during the tradewars.

Another reason these are called cruisers and not DNL: The treaty signed at the end of the Andro war specified no DN could be built to reduce the chance of sparking a new arms race.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 11:18 pm: Edit

But prior to the Xorks you would probably find the XCC alone 90% of the time. It's the not having to appear with three other ship thing that matters.

Tos: Totally agree with that secand part.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 11:29 pm: Edit

You would find the CL(X2) or the CM(X2) alone, not sure you would find a CC(X2) alone. If the S8 rule didn't exist I would agree, but I don't feel strongly enough about it to overturn an existing rule.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Saturday, June 14, 2003 - 01:26 am: Edit

Loren,

If this new improved CA has 10 phasers and 4 torps it doesn't need to be MC = 1.25.

Cruising range is in my opinion a poor rationalization for a larger ship. If I'm a starfleet admiral and I'm paying for a ship approaching DN size which only has CA firepower, I'll think I made the Fed DN mistake again.

I mean, how long are you going to coop a crew up on a ship without some R&R really and why aren't general-issue ships at that point now?

That said, there might be a need for a specific class of vessel to take the fight to the Xorks. I can rationalize a MC=1.25 CA for that mission with expanded hull for crew sanity, cargo for additional repair parts and perhaps even a specialzed "reserve fuel" system box.

On the third hand (as the hydrans say), the alpha sector didn't need anything special to take the fight to the Andros in the LMC.