I don't know Ken, the Fed NHS is a scary beast.

By building those, you also free up the GSX to do what it was designed for (survey), and the GVX to do what it was biult for (kicking arse). NHS' would support fleets.

I do agree on most of the others though.



⁴²

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Friday, July 18, 2003 - 12:05 pm: Edit

Robert my main caveat about using the NHS is the fact that it wont be able to keep up with an X squadron.

If your talking just GW ship's in a fleet I'll concede the NHS.

By Steven E. Ehrbar (See) on Friday, July 18, 2003 - 09:41 pm: Edit

What if X1 turns out to have been a mistaken, overly-expensive overly-complicated branch that required impossibly good crews, driven by war pressures? Have X2 branch directly from GW tech as the real new technology ships, on fundamentally new hulls, without necessarily being a pure superset of X1 capabilities.

Old GW ships and the X1 ships would then get refitted directly to X2 tech, the GW going into National Guard fleets and the X1s as refitted old but general service designs.

(Just an idea.)

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, July 18, 2003 - 09:51 pm: Edit

Steven: I basically agree with that first paragraph.

We all pretty much agreed that no ship should be able to be REFITTED to X2. GW ships could get partial X1 refits.

I see X1 as remaining pretty capable into the X2 era because of their pure war design. An X2 XCM should be warry of a CCX even though it out BPV's it by a significant margin. This is because the CCX is a pure warship loaded with weapons.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, July 18, 2003 - 09:57 pm: Edit

Steve, this would be a good basis for implementing Jessica's reduced-movement-cost idea, but building on a late-general war power curve.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, July 18, 2003 - 10:19 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

What if X1 turns out to have been a mistaken, overly-expensive overly-complicated branch that required impossibly good crews, driven by war pressures? Have X2 branch directly from GW tech as the real new technology ships, on fundamentally new hulls, without necessarily being a pure superset of X1 capabilities.

---

By Steven E. Ehrbar (See) on Saturday, July 19, 2003 - 06:38 pm: Edit

My idea (as it's developed since my post) is no X1R refits at all, as X1 tech is abandoned as too complicated/expensive/demanding on the crew. Instead, there would be effectively X2R refits, as the cheaper/simpler but equally-to-slightly-more effective X2 tech was placed on GW classes.

In essence, the "real" technology curve becomes EY-MY-GW-X2, with X1 merely as a historical footnote. X1 ships would universally get refitted to X2 since it would reduce maintenence/repair costs.

Powerful GW ships (DNHs, SCSs, BCHs, CCHs, HDWs) would (as soon as practical) get X2R upgrades and fill out the X2 fleet. GW CAs and CCs would be upgraded to X2R-CCHs; GW DNs would become X2R-DNHs.

Other MY/GW ships still in service (NCAs, CWs, CLs, DWs, DDs, FFs) would continue on patrol until X2 construction replaced them, then join the National Guard or mothball fleets, and eventually get X2R upgrades while in the Guard/mothballed like the EY ships got GW refits.

Obviously, the Xork invasion would screw up these plans, and you'd see everything from surviving GW FFs to X2 DNHs and probably even the R8 GW-refitted EY ships used in the resistance.

This is a rather radical direction to go, of course.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, July 20, 2003 - 03:44 pm: Edit

I think T-Bomb alotments should remain the same as GW ships with respect to ship class. Though still a dangerous time it is a time a realative peace where combat, though realistically expected, is not the mission at hand in most cases. When the Xorks come there may be some sort of refit shortly after and that can inlude a better alotement of T-Bombs if need be.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, July 20, 2003 - 08:54 pm: Edit

Teah, but I wouldn't mind T-bombs jumping up to 12 points, I guess it depends on how tough Hyrans fighters get.

Maybe, just the larger transporters ( 2 BPs or 1 Crew Unit ) that can beam a shuttle from the shuttle bay to space or back, allows the X2s to beam NSM as T-bombs and therefore every X2 gets 1 NSM in it's wartime T-bomb allotment ( but we might just leave that for the Romulans ).

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, July 20, 2003 - 10:00 pm: Edit

1) In my old group we had T-Bombs at 12 points and you could buy Half Mines which were 6 points. I would be open to a 12 point T-Bomb but I think its one of the last thing that needs considering. We need to balance every thing else first.

2) Cargo Transporters being able to transport an NSM??? That would be a proposal better left until we know what the Xorks are like. It's a bit extreme but if the Xorks are then it doesn't sound impossible.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, July 20, 2003 - 10:10 pm: Edit

I would say the NSM layed via transporter would be a flow on effect from Andro.

Certainly laying Shuttle by transporter would be ( although they must be non seekers ).

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Sunday, July 20, 2003 - 10:29 pm: Edit

There is no way that galactic races are going o be able to lay a NSM by transporter. And beaming a shuttle?!?!?!

Just say no.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, July 20, 2003 - 10:55 pm: Edit

beaming a NSM is defintely not going to fly.

I kinda like the idea of being able to launch or recover a shuttle by transporter but it runs up against the total inability of the galactics to understand or use Andro tech.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, July 20, 2003 - 11:17 pm: Edit

If some andro-tech is going to be interpreted, I'ld rather it was that then the PA pannels.


I'ld limit the beaming of NSM to explosive NSM, no captor mines or the like...might limit it to romulans only.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, July 20, 2003 - 11:22 pm: Edit

Not a problem on andro tech because I belive it is an auto-reject item.

NSM's are simply beyond anything I'd care to see beamed.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, July 20, 2003 - 11:38 pm: Edit

Are we talking about an X2 improvement for Y205, or a post-Xork improvement?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, July 20, 2003 - 11:46 pm: Edit

Beaming Shuttles... No way. That screems of wrong to me. I would like to see NSM beamed either, at least for now. Who knows what well need to battle the Xorks. Probably not this but who knows?

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 07:03 am: Edit

The other vaguely Andro tech that I wouldn't mind see, is for the Lyrans to have an internal bay in which to house PFs and then beam the PFs in and out at will...assuming the PF shields were dropped and the Lyran X2 ship had a lowered shield.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 08:02 am: Edit

Oh, stop the insanity. This is getting out of hand.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 12:09 pm: Edit

Re: Beaming of NSMs from above.
I would like to see NSM beamed either,...

That should read "I would NOT like to see..."

Silly me, forgot the 'nt at the end of the "would" and compleatly turned around the message.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 03:28 pm: Edit

I agree with Mike.

I am done talking about beaming NSMs's. it doesn't play well with GW tech among its problems.

I kinda like the idea of beaming shuttles, but SVC has banned andro tech from the Galactics so it is probably a non-starter. Also it opens the door to launching drones that way.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 04:24 pm: Edit

Of course, those ideas might be suited for a new race. Perhaps one that has no heavy weapon but small phasers and good transporter tech.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 04:36 pm: Edit

I think there was something like that printed already. In C4 or something.

Still, no way.

By Ed Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 06:52 pm: Edit

One thing we have looked at recently is the Dial-a-yield TBomb. For each point of power you put into the tbomb you get 5 points of explosive strength up to a max of 15. In all other ways it acts as a t-bomb. The draw back is it costs power when the normal one does not. It also gives you room for improvement down the road. Instead of having to carry different sizes just increase the power available to it.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 08:05 pm: Edit

start it at 2 for 10 and we're in business.

I'm leery of starting off with 15 pointers.

Hold cost? Number carried?

It should take warp power only...