Archive through July 27, 2003
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: Integrated Proposal Discussion: Archive through July 27, 2003
By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, March 16, 2003 - 08:29 pm: Edit

Is it the lack of UIM?

Is the six point option the problem?

The DC is supposed to be a weapon where you arm for two turns and fire double strength, and the Kzintis are interested in crunch power.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, March 16, 2003 - 08:48 pm: Edit

Kinda both.

It seems a good GW-era weapon as written.

It would be a good X1 if you gave the 6-point a limited-OL option, maybe add the UIM, maybe not. The X1 vrsion should have a 6-pt fastload option.

But X2? I find I want something more.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, March 16, 2003 - 08:55 pm: Edit

What do you suggest?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, March 16, 2003 - 09:00 pm: Edit

Intergrate the UIM. Use a chart like the one I put on the SSD above; gives it a good to hit, and keeps the crunch power. The real question is how many a Kzinti 2X cruiser will mount. Two? Four? Six? What? I'd say four; that's a potential 80 point salvo, enough to crush any shield on any ship in the game. If the Kzintis are after crunch, this will give it to them.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Monday, March 17, 2003 - 02:09 am: Edit

There's no need for a separate chart for UIM. We all have copies of a standard disruptor.

I figure four is right for the CA, but playtesting will tell.
Hopefully I can get a playtest in on Saturday. The Kzinti XCA with cannons and doubled hull (no SIF) vs. 350-400 points of non-unique X0 Klingon ships.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, March 17, 2003 - 06:20 am: Edit

That's what I mean by integrate it; just make it part of the weapon, with no seperate line. Sort of like what supplement 2 did with the disruptor. Derfracs and UIM were just part of the weapon, and didn't breakdown.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, July 25, 2003 - 08:35 am: Edit

Been working more on my "new" approach to X2, and came up with a few things. A few provisos, though:



That being said, I took a look at what the game universe looks like after the Andro Invasion, and wondered about what the various races would do. Fleets are demolished, resources spent, and planets (including a few home systems) are devestated...not much resources for building up a new fleet of uber-ships, I'd say. Still, they will be done by Y205, so the question is how will each race do it, based on their individual situations? I started with the Feds and Klingons...I know more about them than I do the others, and they are both core game races, so they seemed a good starting point. So, here's sort of where I'm going.

Overall, all the races are going to have to watch their pennies. They are all economically worn out, and X2 is only a part of the military budget. Bases must be re-established, crews must be trained and paid, and rebuilding infrastructure has to be done. With this in mind, I see the Feds and Klingons taking very different approaches on X2.

The Feds: The Feds still have the greatest economic might, and will likely recover from the GW and following conflicts the most rapidly by the nature of their economy and governmental system. Therefore, I plan the Feds to take the most advantage of all the newest toys, with less cost cutting. Quality over quantity would be the mantra for the Feds, just like during the first stages of the MY period. Like then, their X2 ships will be multi-purpose. They will be the best they can afford, and along with these new systems many of the "lessons learned" from the GW will be applied to their designs. They have the resources to start from scratch, while other races do not. So, a small fleet of very high-quality, efficient ships would be the Fed approach. Much of the old Fed flavor remains; photons, heavy phasers, good lab facilities, more forward fire power than flank or aft. The X2 CC I have in the works is actually no larger than the CX, and has less weapons. However, the phasers the ship does mount have much better overlapping arcs, making it better defended against oblique attacks, and providing better seeking weapon defense. Power is only slightly more than X1; ditto shields. The improvments the ship has, combined with a better overall design that allows for more maneuverability and concentrated fire should make up for any major improvments in defense and power. Key Fed systems like the photon have not been signifigantly improved, though I am using a two-dice chart for the photon to offset EW, a problem it's had since day one. Percentages are no different than with the old photon, or are as close as possible. Damage and the like are identical to X1...it has enough crunch already, at least with the way I'm making X2.

The Klingons: Way broke, and almost totally exhausted. The Klingons just can't afford all the nifty toys the Feds get, not and still be able to rebuild a fleet capable of guarding all their territory; a necessity, given the repressive nature of their government. Maintaining control is of paramount importance. They will instead concentrate on more ships of somewhat lesser quality, and getting them online quickly. Certain improvements do exist, but are not tremendously expensive in terms of resources; UIM and DERFRACS are integrated in the disruptor, for example. The Klingons aren't big on change, and will basically go with "the tried and true", particularly since they need to rapidly get a sizeable fleet back up and running. Their X2 ships look a whole lot like they always have out of necessity; function, afterall, follows form. They will use phaser 5's sparingly, perhaps only on the booms. The rest will be P1's, and possibly P6's on smaller ships that might fill escort rolls (after all, a pair of P6's takes up the same room as a P1, but can dish out more damage than a rapid-pulsed P1 in defense mode). The Klingon XBC will again be the mainstay of the fleet, and will be the most multi-purpose ship they have. Just like in the past, though, this isn't necessarily very multi-purpose. Emphasis on speed and the good old sabre-dance are at the heart of the Klingon designs. I do plan to have capacitors for the disruptor, but no damage increases.

Well, that's were I'm headed. Sorry for the long post, but it helps to explain why I'm going where I'm going. I will need lots of help, though, especially on the other races who I'm just not as familiar with.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, July 25, 2003 - 12:05 pm: Edit

No damage increase??? So you aren't going to use the Heavy Disruptor?
I'm surprised because it was such a mild improvement (being only one point).
The integrated UIM/DERFACS, given your above post, being left out make sense but I figured you would still keep the main damage chart.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, July 25, 2003 - 01:07 pm: Edit

Nah. With integrated UIM and DERFRACS, plus capacitors, they'll be okay without another improvement, I think.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, July 25, 2003 - 01:23 pm: Edit

Oh, the other way around. I see. Well, playtesting will tell. And it depends on how many and what the photon will do, I suppose.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Friday, July 25, 2003 - 04:19 pm: Edit

I really don't like the 2d6 photon, but the rest sounds good.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, July 25, 2003 - 10:31 pm: Edit

Quote:

Nah. With integrated UIM and DERFRACS, plus capacitors, they'll be okay without another improvement, I think.


Honestly, 4 Two turn 24 point photons armed as alternate arming fired at R8 will only inflict about 24 points of damage per turn ( and chew through 24 points of warp energy per turn ).

Six O/L Disruptors with intergrated UIM will be inflicting 30 points of damage per turn for 24 points of energy.
Four O/L Disruptors with intergrated UIM will be inflicting 20 points of damage per turn for 16 points of power.

The added effects of the Caps basically mean the Klingons are still in the game, by controlling the battle speed ( with 8 extra points of power and the power it's spending on movement not being required to be warp ) the Klingons can control the range and indeed play Het tricks which the Feds just can't.

Even with flastloaded 16 pointers the Klingons aren't doing to badly and seriously control the range...and being unable to hold those 16 point fastloads would be costing the Feds a lot of SSReo if the Klingon went to the sabrre dance...( 30 matched up with 32 pretty closely which the full 6 Disruptor klingons ) such that for a cheap ships the Klingons are going to be feilding ships that can hold up pretty well dispite being slightly cheaper.


Consider an MY Period Fed CA against a D6.
The Fed has all the quality and the Klingon has just enough quantity to be able to line but is cheaper. 7 Phaser goes a long way against 6 with 2 drone racks to pad out those B3 and B11 Phaser hits.
Sure the CA can pop the D6 like a balloon, if it JACKPOTS, but the D6 can do some serious H&R if all you manage to do is bring each other's shields down. 10 weapons against 5 transporters/ 13 weapons against 3 transporters, that a really disparity.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, July 25, 2003 - 10:39 pm: Edit

Quote:

I really don't like the 2d6 photon, but the rest sounds good.


[Picture Hommer Simpson as the Cosmic Jester.]


Proximity Overloads renders any EW problem...soOOollvVVVED.


[Seriously]
Proximity overload is the quickest, easiest way of getting away from the any effects that EW has on putting the photon on an uphill battle.
Once your at R4 or closer you don't really need proximty overloads because your TO HIT is pretty good ( the UIM Disruptor is at 1-5 and you're at 1-4 and you've got shield smashers ) so moving the prximity miopic zone from R9 to R5 is exactly what you want to do.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Friday, July 25, 2003 - 10:57 pm: Edit

Quite logical, Mike. I'm not sure if it's really as different from the other proposals as you think it is.

Except for the 2d6 photon, that is.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, July 25, 2003 - 10:58 pm: Edit

Oddly enough, though I'm not incredibly favorable toward Mike's 2d6 photons, but I think he should include them. It's one of his unique ideas and I think the Steves should have a chance to consider it.

I will be doing the same thing with some of my not-so-popular-even-if-I-like-them proposals.

Plasma cannon too, though I think they have been partially trumped by the Plasma Carronade.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Friday, July 25, 2003 - 11:24 pm: Edit

I never said the 2d6 photon shouldn't be included in Mike's proposal.

I'm just saying that's one part that I would not include in mine, should I ever write one.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, July 25, 2003 - 11:30 pm: Edit

Didn't mean to imply that. Sorry.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Saturday, July 26, 2003 - 09:16 pm: Edit

Gave more thought to my proposal, and as always, I started with the Feds. Not quite so different as you might think; the XCC still has two hulls, photons, etc. The forward hull is more of the spade shape, though. Got the idea that combining the spade shaped hull from a CF and the aft hull layout of the BC might make a good start and look cool to boot. With that in mind, I made up this ship: Federation X2CC

For a quick comparison between the XCC and the CX:

CX and XCC Comparison Chart

Points of ComparisonCXXCC% Difference
Total Internal Count1131217%
Battery Power151820%
Warp Power424610%
Impulse Power440%
Reactor Power24100%
Total Power17619310%
Shield Total16820421%
Phaser Caps24240%
Max Phaser Damage1081102%
Max Photon Damage64640%
Total Tracks24240%


Not that different, when you get down to it, at least in terms of pure numbers. These X2 ships have no SIF, and no distinctive heavy cruiser/command cruiser class; it’s just one ship, the theory being that a new super-ship is going to be a command ship by default; no way you’d make one without the command facilities to lead a fleet.

One thing that really frustrated me with the Feds was how to improve or change the photon for X2 without unbalancing it or messing it up. See, more damage just didn't wave my flag; it has enough crunch damage as is, at least for the X2 ships I'm working up. Messing about with the to-hit numbers isn't a good idea, either, because EW effects are so drastic on single-die weapons. Consider; the XCC has a very good chance of always maintaining a positive die shift. In that case, the photon is going to be pretty deadly accurate as is; changing the numbers in some way just makes it worse. In the end, two dice would make the photon more stable, lessening the impact of die modifiers. I didn’t want that, because it has been and should remain a kind of a crap shoot weapon, one that a positive shift or legendary officer can have a significant effect on. Back to the drawing board again. So, I finally decided to ask myself why do we want to change it? Well, the obvious answer is to make the Fed X2 better at combat. Then, it hit me that being better at combat doesn't mean you have to make the photon better. I pondered this a bit, and decided to try a different tack.

I started looking at the mega-phaser. The Feds created it for the sims. What if they tried to really make them, but didn't completely succeed? I took this idea and ran with it, and used Excel to whip up a 3/4 strength table for a mega-phaser. To make it interesting, and give it that “not quite” feel, I changed it a bit from the normal phaser and mega-phaser both. It doesn't sit on a wing, nor does it get a battery and APR. No mauler arcs, either. However, it is restricted to a 90 degree arc, and can’t engage targets smaller than SC5. It costs 3 points to fire and only uses warp energy. Like a fusion beam, it must cool down for 32 impulses after firing. To facilitate power flow, they are mounted right on the pylons between the ship and the engines; this also keeps the beam away from the hull. They are not part of the ships capacitor grid, either, as they require pure warp power to achieve their high damage potential. I’ll draft a real rule with some techno-babble later.

This will give the Feds a neat paradigm; they still use the photon for crunch, but are now a bit better equipped for the knife fight. By alternating fire between photons and phaser H’s, they also don’t have a “weak” turn when they try to fully overload their photons. In ways, they’re the same old Fed, but with a new kick.

This vision for X2 is significantly scaled back from what I first thought of lo these many moons ago. I don’t really see there being any X2 ships over 400 points, even an XDN.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, July 26, 2003 - 10:21 pm: Edit

Just before you go down the 3/4 Mega Phaser route, just check the Ph-5 table...it'll be nearly the same, just with R10 and R9 being different.


Plus I don't like the idea of 6 disruptors being switched to high energy warp only Ph-4Jrs to offset that 1 in 46,656 chance of missing with them all at R1.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, July 27, 2003 - 07:37 am: Edit

What the hell are you talking about? The P-5 isn't anything near 3/4 of the strength of a mega phaser; more like 1/2. Further, it isn't anything like "six disruptors" with sole exception that at point blank range, two of these will generate the same damage as six disruptors if the rolls are there. By that argument the P5 is just two disruptors, then, isn't it? In fact, they'd be MORE like the disruptor, because they don't have the limitations a PH does. The differences between a PH and disruptor are pretty significant:



There's more, but why go on?

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Sunday, July 27, 2003 - 09:16 am: Edit

I don’t know what MJC is talking about either, but, I agree in principle. The PH has the same damage curve as the P5, just 50% greater. Presuming the PH would require 2 energy to arm the damage ratio would be nearly identical at all points. If concerned about maximum damage I would always prefer to have 3P5 then 2PH. If concerned about throughput a single P5 actually does significantly more sustainable damage than a PH. There is nothing the PH adds as presented to make it worth the added rules complexity, R&D or maintenance when the designers can get the desired effect by adding some number of P5.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, July 27, 2003 - 09:32 am: Edit

Actually, it takes three to arm it. It also can only fire on alternate turns, so it's not as good in the long run as a P5. What it is, though, is different, and represents an attempt to make the PM a reality without it being exactly the same.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, July 27, 2003 - 09:07 pm: Edit

Only thing I see is that if more of the firepower comes from the phasers than the heavy weapons, it'll be going down the same road as old X1's overloaded phaser problems.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, July 27, 2003 - 09:34 pm: Edit

I should have written a longer post.

Just before you go down the 3/4 Mega Phaser route, just check the Ph-5 table...it'll be nearly the same, just with R10 and R9 being different.
If I understand correctly there are two forms of Mega Phaser, big and little, and the Ph-5 is already a little megaphaser at 3/4 damage with R9 & 10 messed around with to make the ships NEED to come into overload range.


Plus I don't like the idea of 6 disruptors being switched to high energy warp only Ph-4Jrs to offset that 1 in 46,656 chance of missing with them all at R1.
Perhaps the Sarcasm was missed by all.
What do the Klingons get with the uber heavy support phaser being brought to bear from the Feds, and even as a two turn weapon it sure as heck ain't gunna be used to provide offensive fire in the OFF turn.

The Klingons will want something and they have some descent things to bitch about...least of them being the fact that at R1 they're missing with 16.66% of their dirsuptor fire.
The Klingons will want something too, and since it hasn't be thought through by anyone, I'm saying, half damage phaser-4 phasers shots...as a disruptor firing mode...in a lot of ways it'ld be a lot less devstating than when the Fed XCA launched her Photons AND Phaser and Uber Phasers.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, July 27, 2003 - 10:00 pm: Edit

The Ph-5 is a half Mega-phaser and was tweaked for playability. I evened out the damage output over range to a more predictable amount per bracket.

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