Archive through July 06, 2003
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: OLD X2 FOLDER: X2 BPV: Archive through July 06, 2003
By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, April 01, 2003 - 04:44 pm: Edit

Tos,

That does blur the line between X1 and X2.

Why wouldn't we refer to this as what SVC calls "X1R"--production X1 ships?

Here's a thought.

Suppose the empires experimented with two different evolutionary threads: On the one hand, production X1 --X1R-- for mainline combat: DNX's, BCX's and all those X1 powerhouses that everybody wants to play with.

But suppose the Empires got to like having a few super-advanced ships to spend their X-points on. Suppose they developed a handful of X2 hulls, say light cruisers and destroyers. Say they have a niche similar to CFs and DNL (or pre "X-squadron" X-ships) in GW tech.

And X2 doesn't come into its own until the Xorks force it into the spotlight.

Is that the direction you're going?

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, April 01, 2003 - 05:13 pm: Edit

"Why wouldn't we refer to this as what SVC calls 'X1R'--production X1 ships?"

Because my definition of the start of X2 is new hulls/SSDs. My definition of X1R is upgraded tech on old hulls.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, April 01, 2003 - 05:23 pm: Edit

That's my Definition of basic X1--upgraded hulls.

X1 built as standard production (rather than converted or "hand-built" X1) is "X1R".

I want to inisist on these definitions primarily because they have been used by SVC in the past.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Tuesday, April 01, 2003 - 05:38 pm: Edit

Poll Reopened.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, April 01, 2003 - 06:09 pm: Edit

In fact, SVC has defined those term pretty clearly. He was the one to coin "X1R".

These definitions were in this topic (The X-Files).

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, April 01, 2003 - 07:10 pm: Edit

Here we go again.

I thought X1R was Y185-Y195 -- early Andromedan Wars.

Specially designing a 415 point ship to test the X2 ships against is a silly idea. Because there is no formula, nor will there ever will be one, where you can plug in the boxes from the SSD and spit out a BPV value.

No admiral worth his salt would build an "improved technology" ship that is weaker than a previous tech level ship of the same class.

The BPV of an XCA must be higher than the BPV of a CAX.

How much higher is open to debate.
The current CAXs are generally 240.
The X0 BCHs run about 180.
So the natural progression would put the XCA to the 300-325 range. But that's open to debate.

By big issue is when people insist that the only way to test these ships is by a duel with a B10.

The B10 was never intended to be a dueling ship. (S8.0) specifically says that a SC2 ship should never appear without at least 3 other ships (i.e., squadron strength).

That's why on the X2 playtesting thread, I listed several squadrons of X0 ships that would make a good comparison.

If you want to duel X2 vs. X0, use the XDD/XFF vs. CA. Both ships are dueling ships.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, April 01, 2003 - 07:56 pm: Edit

Quote:

Specially designing a 415 point ship to test the X2 ships against is a silly idea. Because there is no formula, nor will there ever will be one, where you can plug in the boxes from the SSD and spit out a BPV value.



This all stemmed from something I said when I pointed out what a great test of the design to put a XCC up against the B-10K. This would require the XCC to have a BPV range similar to the BBs. It would be an interesting study of Technology vs. Girth.

There was a response to that saying we could design a larger opponant for testing purposes if the XCC BPV was in the 400+ range.

It's not that big of a deal to keep rehashing it. No one was thinking of basing anything too important on that. It sort of was a sub-point.

At least, I that what I think was happening.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, April 01, 2003 - 09:08 pm: Edit

“X1 built as standard production (rather than converted or ‘hand-built’ X1) is ‘X1R’.”

I don’t follow what you are trying to say in the above comment. What is “standard production”? It sounds like you are saying all/most Y190+ production switches to building X-ships, but the facts I can find don’t support that assertion.

Digging up SVC comments from the timeline thread (12/22/02):

"Assume that Module X2 is Second Generation X-Technology, new hulls and new gizmos. Could be improvements of the existing (probably still have phasers) but could be whole new things."

Summary: New hulls, new toys.

"Module X1R might be considered a reinforcements package for the existing X1 and hence would just be more of what was in X1 and, I presume, not part of your conversation."

Summary: More X1 ship classes.

He gives no indication, at least in the quotes I found, that X1R is the standardization of X1 tech. No way to read into that statement that X1 tech replaces all production.

Quite the contrary:
(R0.200) … [Y186-196] “most races produced or converted only a few X-ships per year. Conventional non-X-ships, including new construction, served until Y205 and beyond, forming the bulk of most fleets in the First-Generation period."

We have history that states the entire Fed production run of the CX class from Y181-Y193 is 10 ships.

(R2.201) Fed CX: ... “but lead to the production of 10 more ships of this type, one every year until Y193”

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, April 01, 2003 - 09:18 pm: Edit

Quote:

See, MJC, just because the ISC have a ship that big, does not mean we have to make the rest of them that bog. The ISC ships are generally bigger then the other GW race counterparts.


If you are going to have tehnological leap forward then it ought to be able to beat or atleast contend well the toughest of your foes. Otherwise why look for new technologies when just more of the same ( BCHX and DNX designs ) will grant superiority for less expense.
More as a design concept requires a lot less R&D than better.


Quote:

Ultimatly though, these ships should be designed first and if found to be too capable, then scaled back. The opposite is true as well.

I have a pretty well worked out idea of what the X2 ships should look like and I find my self less and less concerned as to what their BPV will be as long as they are balanced (class to class). I would, however, like to keep them as low as possible while still having them be fully capable. This is a phylosophy the Empires would have as well. To build a 400 BPV ship just to have it be 400 is a waste when a 300 BPV will do the job.


For what it's worth I don't think the current look of X2 cruisers will be 400 BPV ish in 205.
Since we are wanting to tone back the ships that were developed for the trade wars.
8Ph-5s isn't that much better than 12Ph-1s.
4 Diruptors with Disruptor Caps, a 6 impulses delay over the turn break and a +2 UIM and a +2 defracs aren't that much better than what X1s have.
We could easily be looking at 250 BPV in Y205 with the refitted ships in Y205 being 350.


Quote:

Untill SVC says differently, X2 starts in Y205, period. There may be concurrent production of X1R, but unless he's open to "X2 plus", the X2 in Y205 is what we have to work with.


I'm very open to Refits being built into X2 as a whole, not just more ( though usually more ) but also better...such as replacing 3 point BTTYs with 5 pointers.

This'll create the basis in which can have the trade wars and the Xrk repulsing and also give players a little more more flexibility.
A Y225 XCC might not be able to duel fairly with a BB but a Y205 XCA might find it'self matched will in a duel againsta mere DNH.


Quote:

Regarding X2, some people want bigger, some people want smaller. Some want wiz-bang, some want small improvements tech. Some people want a stand-alone module, some want a product that integrates cleanly with X0 and X1. I want it all. I believe that we can have it all simply by massaging the timeline. A series of X2 tuned for cross-generational battle during the trade wars and a series of X2 refits to fight off the Xork.

What follows is my suggestion for how to have it all.

In Y205 the empires began producing all new hulls and SSDs known as X2. X0 and X1 hulls used technology fundamentally unchanged for 100 years. These tired old hulls had exceeded the limits of their design and could be pushed no further. The X2 hulls were a remarkable improvement in efficiency and flexibility but it would take years and a deadly foe before their full capability would be exploited. The Y205 designs were nearly equal in combat to the X1 ships they replaced (read: maximum inter-generational playability) but their reduced operating costs and efficiency made the X1 designs economically obsolete. Each race began offloading their surplus X0, XP and X1 designs to any independent planet in need of a garrison force. Small refits of the Y205 classes occurred during the ensuing Trade Wars but treaty limitations kept the races in technological equilibrium. All that changed when the Xorkellians invaded. War versions of the flexible X2 ships were rushed into production at prodigious rates and wartime innovation continued to build more and more powerful vessels.

In this way X2 won't break the existing game, the trade wars will be a fun free-for-all time and people get the big bad to fight the Xorks.


Right on!


Quote:

Suppose the empires experimented with two different evolutionary threads: On the one hand, production X1 --X1R-- for mainline combat: DNX's, BCX's and all those X1 powerhouses that everybody wants to play with.

But suppose the Empires got to like having a few super-advanced ships to spend their X-points on. Suppose they developed a handful of X2 hulls, say light cruisers and destroyers. Say they have a niche similar to CFs and DNL (or pre "X-squadron" X-ships) in GW tech.

And X2 doesn't come into its own until the Xorks force it into the spotlight.


Something like that.
Concurrent research and design as the X1 stops being experimental the Bigger X1s can be built with War Cruiser, War Destroyer , Heavy Battle Cruiser and Dreadnought designs being manufactured but the scientists going off and devloping more effective systems, rather thjan just maximising performance and proliferation on the existing technologies.
When Y205 comes around the the X2s are basically for experimentation and X1s are the backbone of the fleet.
When Y225 comes around the X1s are heading towards obsolesences and X2s are the backbone of the fleet.


Quote:

That's my Definition of basic X1--upgraded hulls.

X1 built as standard production (rather than converted or "hand-built" X1) is "X1R".

I want to inisist on these definitions primarily because they have been used by SVC in the past.


Correct me If I'm wrong but the way I'm reading it, you are both using exactly the same terms to describe exactly the same ideas.


Quote:

Here we go again.

I thought X1R was Y185-Y195 -- early Andromedan Wars.


I though everyone was agreed that X1R was Y192ish to Y205.


Quote:

That's why on the X2 playtesting thread, I listed several squadrons of X0 ships that would make a good comparison.

If you want to duel X2 vs. X0, use the XDD/XFF vs. CA. Both ships are dueling ships.


Yeah the XDD and XFF are the dueling ships.

A task group of a D7D, D7bk and a D6D ( about 410 BPV ) may well beat a 410 BPV XCC on the groups that it can generate 12 ECM for two of the ships ( and the other ship has no real need to get anywhere closer than 23 hexes ( 15+8 ) from the X2 cruiser, of which, the XCC could only offset 8, leaving it to shoot through a +2 shift.

There will be situations where the task group of smaller, cheap GW ships outperforms the XCC and capitalising on those can allow for voctory by the GW ships despite the "lots of little ships go boom" principle.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, April 01, 2003 - 10:22 pm: Edit

Tos,

My understanding is that the X-ships that participated in the General War and through the Andro Invasion were "hand built" in the sense that they used extremely advanced technology that required a much higher attention to detail and concentration not only from the ship's crews but the construction crews.

I base my points on several assumptions that seem commonsense to me.

Assumption 1) "X2 = Next Big Thing" This is implied in the SVC quote, "Could be improvements of the existing (probably still have phasers) but could be whole new things". You'd need think of X2 as a quantum leap in tech as a precondition to even consider whether ships would still have phasers.

I consider this assumption beyond questioning. Commander's X2 was built on "Next Big Thing", most of us here are thinking, "Next Big Thing" about X2 and it seems to be implied in the few places the X1 rules touch on the question.

Assumtion 2) Sooner or later, X1 technology will become the standard technology used in ship construction. X-tech, like EY and MY tech before them, moves from cutting edge to default to obsolete.

Here, I conceed your point, Tos. SVC's quote is pretty clear. Apparently X-tech never enters general production, which throws my other assumptions off.

I assumed that X1 would be standard for ship construction before X2 comes out, just as MY/GW became standard before X1 came out or late-EY was standard when MY came out. I also assumed that X1 would have to be standard before we would see great ship class diversity, like BCX's and DNX's.

The picture that begins to emerge is more of two grades of warship existing side-by-side. GW tech still forms the bulk of construction, then there are a small amount of super-ships which are the X-ships.

The impression I get is that GW-tech has hit its technological nadir. Presumably they don't have a lot of evolutionary change left in them but that may not be correct either. But GW is still drastically cheaper and doesn't require hard-to-build and/or expensive equipment that X-ships do.

The elite, X-ships, on the other hand, have a wide-open path for evolution and 205 sees ships being produced that are sufficiently different from the Y185 X-ships to be called "X2".

I will have to go back and re-think your proposal, Tos.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, April 01, 2003 - 11:51 pm: Edit

Quote:

I assumed that X1 would be standard for ship construction before X2 comes out, just as MY/GW became standard before X1 came out or late-EY was standard when MY came out. I also assumed that X1 would have to be standard before we would see great ship class diversity, like BCX's and DNX's.


Just because something is the standard construction does not mean that it is the standard with respect to opperation ( which is always a few decades behind construction.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, April 01, 2003 - 11:59 pm: Edit

By "standard" I meant the standard of construction--that all military shipbuilding would convert to X1. SVC has made it very clear that this isn't the case.

Whatever the lead time between research and implementation in the SFU, a ship being used for something other than a test-bed is very much on the implementation side of the equation so the lead time is an unimportant issue.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 02:46 pm: Edit

The Poll Commentary thread has started to go all over the place. So I'll try to bring part of that discussion here.

MJC wrote: (July 6 Poll Commentary thread)

Quote:

I'm looking at 410...not 500...and I'm really into the idea of refits for the X2s so some of the earlier non refitted ships would be down around 320...not bad when the ISC CCX is 315...Atleast I think it's not a bad starting point.



I agree that no XCA should be less than 315.
The question for the group is what is the right range: Closer to 325, 350, 375, 410, or what?

The other thing to consider is that there are two X2 heavy cruisers for each race.

One built in Y205 (The Trade Wars)
The other built in Y220 (The Xork Invasion)

The Y205 is the multi-role ship, while the Y220 is the ubership optimized for fighting Xorks.

Personally, I think 350 BPV is good for Y205, while 425 is probably better for Y220. However, since we don't yet know what a Xork ship looks like, it would be pointless to discuss what the Y220 ships look like, right now.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 03:00 pm: Edit

I still think the absolute max for an XCA is 290-300.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 03:01 pm: Edit

Ya know, making big Dreadnaughts and calling them crusiers just seems silly to me.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 03:07 pm: Edit

I don't know. We've done it before. Look at the jump from Early Years to Middle Years.

Before Y120 most EY cruisers are in the 70-80 range, while the YDNs are in the 100-110 range. Then, in Y120, a new tech level cruiser is built that completely blows away the competition.

Try fighting a Klingon C4 (3 non-overloadable disruptors, speed 24 max) vs. a Fed CA (4 overloadable photons, speed 30 max).

And yet, the Fed CA is a classic multi-role ship.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 03:43 pm: Edit

Only one class of ship would be that powerful; The XCC (or XCA, what have you). The rest are smaller. I have proposed a medeum cruiser that would probably be played more and be a fleet standard. It is very similar to the old CC in size but utilizes the new tech.

The XCC is a fearsom thing but not complicated to play. The main thing added is the ASIF but my version is pretty simple. You power it, and get some advantages. On note paper you would track if thing occured while it was powered or not. If you always power it then no tracking is nessasary. When you take damage you just make tick marks to the side or on note paper to account for the Hull/Cargo hit absorbed. When you finninsh taking damage you can discard it (or make a note of the total for end of game referance but the actions of the ASIF hit absorbtion is public knowledge so you could just discard it.)

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 04:04 pm: Edit

When I was talking about BPV, I meant the MC1 ship for whatever time period. I pretty much figured the rest would fall in line.

For example,
If the XCA is 350, then: XCM 275, XDD 200, XFF 150.
If the XCA is 425, then: XCM 350, XDD 250, XFF 200.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 04:15 pm: Edit

I know this wasn't your point but I'd just like to say...I like the first line. The second line of BPV's is a total no way (for me).

I'm pretty sure Jeff, you feel the same?

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 04:38 pm: Edit

Yes, I agree with the first line for Y205's X2.
The second line might be for Y215 Xork Invasion.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 05:07 pm: Edit

I would consider that same thing as well. But there is a long way to go to get to the Xork invasion. Might be more specific to say Post Y215 (probably more like Y218+).

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 05:33 pm: Edit

That does seem to be a common theme. We have the X2 version 1.0 for post-andros and the Trade Wars, then either version 2.0 in response to the Xorks.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 06:31 pm: Edit

Just my opinion, but I think 350 should be the top of the range and that most XCAs should fall in 325-350, with ISC at 360-375.

But we've all been down this road before.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 06:58 pm: Edit

I'm not hot to set limits as long as the ship s we create are fun and balanced.

325-350 sounds fine as a benchmark but not as a hard and fast limit.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 09:22 pm: Edit

Agreed. A few points, though.

1: The ISC may not retain their BPV advantage anymore. One reason they had it was basically surprise; they'd studied the other races for a number of years and tailored a fleet to beat them. This advantage is probably going to be lost, especially given the ass-whipping the Andros put on them.

2: SVC has stated that planning anything based on the Xorks is fruitless; we don't know what they can or can't do. Best stick with the Y205 stuff and get it off the ground. If it needs upgrading after the Xorks come out, then Module X2R can fill that role. Trying to worry about it now is whistling in the dark.

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