Archive through August 02, 2003
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: OLD X2 FOLDER: X2 ph-3 and other small defensive weapons: Archive through August 02, 2003
By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, July 29, 2003 - 10:45 pm: Edit

And you're the only one standing at that position.


If we make sure the rule clearly defines a weapon and not a shot as being the thing that can be rapid-pulsed then no one will make the Ph-5 fire off 4Ph-3 shots on account of the Ph-6 rapid pulse mode.


If I take an assault rifle and set the fire slector switch to three round burst and then set the bullest to fire in full auto, would I tripple the Rate of Fire???
No...because bullets can not be set to full auto!?!

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 10:13 am: Edit

Quote:

And you're the only one standing at that position.



Not necessarily. John's position is that a P6 is a P6 is a P6; if it costs .75 to fire in downfire mode from a P5, then it should cost .75 in standalone mode, too. I personally think downfiring a P6 as 2 P3's is a bad idea. That's making a P3 a less than 1/2 a point weapon, when all our other X2 phasers are going the other way by being more expensive to fire. Anyone with a pair of P6's would be crazy NOT to use them as P3's; you get more damage potential, and more shots, too. If a P6 is added for defensive fire, then let it just be a P6.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 01:43 pm: Edit

Amen, bro.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 11:14 pm: Edit

Quote:

That's making a P3 a less than 1/2 a point weapon, when all our other X2 phasers are going the other way by being more expensive to fire.


I'm not sure I follow this, are you saying that if I couple 0.5 power froma Ph-6 shot with rapid pulsing as Ph-3, that those two Ph-3 shots won't cost 0.5+0.5 power!?!

Quote:

Anyone with a pair of P6's would be crazy NOT to use them as P3's; you get more damage potential, and more shots, too. If a P6 is added for defensive fire, then let it just be a P6.


Maybe not.
Firing on an R2 speed 40 Plasma ( or worse speed 40 drone ) with 2 Ph-3s is far less depenable than 1Ph-6.

In a lot of ways it depends if speed 40 drones come to pass ( even if as booster drones ) but is still valid option for those that tend to roll badly.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 06:32 am: Edit

Quote:

I'm not sure I follow this, are you saying that if I couple 0.5 power froma Ph-6 shot with rapid pulsing as Ph-3, that those two Ph-3 shots won't cost 0.5+0.5 power!?!



That's what it looks like he was saying. "But give it the ability to rapid pulse as two P3s."
It's either that, or you start getting into all sorts of problems with keeping track of your capacitors. A P6 has a nominal capacitor of 1.5. Fire two P3's out of it, and you only have .5 left; not enough to do anything with without "borrowing" from other capacitors. Who wants to keep up with that?

Quote:

Maybe not.
Firing on an R2 speed 40 Plasma ( or worse speed 40 drone ) with 2 Ph-3s is far less depenable than 1Ph-6.



Nope, not true. A single P6 at range 2 will average 3.833 points of damage, with a max of 5. Two P3's, though, will average 6 points of damage with a max of 8.

Not every phaser has to be able to downfire, you know. A P6 is defensive phaser, and should be the smallest X2 phaser you get.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 09:12 am: Edit

"It's either that, or you start getting into all sorts of problems with keeping track of your capacitors. A P6 has a nominal capacitor of 1.5. Fire two P3's out of it, and you only have .5 left; not enough to do anything with without "borrowing" from other capacitors. Who wants to keep up with that?"

Now I don't follow what Mike is talking about. A Phaser Capacitor is an integrated system, not like an ESG where cap is stored separately for each device. If I have a 30 cap and fire a P6 as 2P3 at a cost of 1 I now have 29 in the caps. No sophisticated record keeping involved.

"Nope, not true. A single P6 at range 2 will average 3.833 points of damage, with a max of 5. Two P3's, though, will average 6 points of damage with a max of 8."

Mike is comparing average damage, MJC is comparing minimum damage. If you really have to kill that drone average damage isn't good enough and the P6 offers better minimum damage at range 2.

That said I agree with Mike, if a P6 can be fired as 2P3 then it would be very rare that I would opt to fire it in native P6 mode. Leave 2P3 rapid pulse the purview of the XP1.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 09:25 am: Edit

I'll concede the minimum damage thing; I don't think in terms of minimums, I think in terms of averages...unless you're totally unlucky, two P3's will almost always be better than a single P6. Put it this way; I'd almost never use a single P6 if I could use 2 P3's instead. I'll stand by my statement; there is no reason that every single phaser in X2 has to be able to downfire.

The other issue on capacitors I was talking about is that the pattern for downfiring has always been that the two downfired shots were equal to the cost of a single shot from the phaser in question; i.e., two P3's cost the same as 1 P1, 2 P6's cost the same as 1 P5. Two P3's fired from a P6 doesn't fit this pattern...you have power left over.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 10:33 am: Edit

Quote:

unless you're totally unlucky, two P3's will almost always be better than a single P6.


There's also the X-Aegis restriction aspect, which means Ph-6 will be fired as Ph-6 instead of 2Ph-3 from time to time.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 01:52 pm: Edit

negligable under most circumstances.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 09:57 pm: Edit

Not really.

Which is better at firing at a PF that gets no closer than R8 ( say you're fighting a Lyran with your Orion ), 1Ph-5 that can rapid pulse 2Ph-6 shots or 2Ph-6s that can rapid pulse as 2Ph-3 shots each?

Net result you'll use the Ph-6 as a Ph-6 quite often even if you allow it to rapid pulse as 2Ph-3 shots.

Mind you I think the we should be looking at watering down a Ph-2 table ( say maxing out at 5 points of damage ) rather than trying to beef up the Ph-3 table for the Ph-6 design.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 10:18 pm: Edit

Neither the P-6 or a P-3 is very good at shooting out past range 3 or 4. If I'm shooting at P-5 at a PF that isn't getting any closer, I'll use the P-5.

P-6 vs. P-3 is negligable because I won't use either the P-6 or P-3.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 10:34 pm: Edit

Quote:

P-6 vs. P-3 is negligable because I won't use either the P-6 or P-3.


But the point being that by having a stand alone Ph-6 weapon we can reintroduce racial flavour.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 10:50 pm: Edit

but we're discussing double-firing that P-6 as 2x P-3. Something I'm against and you're for.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 11:13 pm: Edit

Actually were not...where disussing a larger issue...that of trading in a single Ph-5 for a pair of Ph-6s and from there what the Ph-6 should be capable of.


Now I for one would like the Ph-5 to be able to rapid pulse as 3Ph-3 shots or 2Ph-6 shots.
This is so that 8Ph-5s on a cruiser can fire off as many Ph-3 shots as a 12Ph-1 cruisers.

Now 1Ph-5 that can give you 3Ph-3 shots is weaker in direct point defense ( even at range two ) than 2Ph-6s which will fire off a massive four Ph-3 shots to generate damage ( say against an incomming sabotted plasma ).
So the pair of Ph-6s will be better at point defense but the Ph-5 will be better at long range attacking.

Whattaya-no...a dynamic is set up.


Just because a rapid twice as many rapid pulsed Ph-3 shots from a stand-alone Ph-6 is pretty good at ripping the warhead strength off a sabotted plasma and thus the Ph-6 will oft fire as pairs of Ph-3 does not in and of itself justify restricting the Ph-6 to Ph-6 fire and only Ph-6 fire.
The magnatude of how much more effective 2Ph-3 shots are over 1Ph-6 shot is easily covered by BPV.

A Range 2 fire table assuming fire against an incomming sabotted plasma torp.
2Ph-6 RP 2Ph-6 1Ph-5 RP-2Ph-6 1Ph-5 RP-3Ph-3
4x4 2x5 2x5 3x4
4x4 2x4 2x4 3x4
4x4 2x4 2x4 3x4
4x3 2x3 2x3 3x3
4x2 2x2 2x3 3x2
4x1 2x1 2x1 3x1


So a pair of Ph-6s might have a 33% increase in the ablity to reduce the warhead strength over a Ph-5, that's nothing compaired to the loses they suffer when being used to attack ships at standard combat range.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 08:11 am: Edit

Quote:

Actually were not...where disussing a larger issue...that of trading in a single Ph-5 for a pair of Ph-6s and from there what the Ph-6 should be capable of.



Who's "we"? 'Cause I was discussing the proposed ability of a P6 to downfire as a pair of P3's.
I have no problems with some ships carrying a set of P6's for extra point defense. Hell, that's why we came up with them in the first place. I can see several races mounting them right away, specifically the Gorn, the Kzinti, the ISC, and the Roms.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 08:38 am: Edit

I was using the royal we.

And the term is rapid pulse not down-fire. You down fire a Ph-6 as one Ph-3 shot.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 03:48 pm: Edit

My preference has been for months:

P5 costs 1.5 to fire.
P5 may be rapid-pulsed for 2x P-6 against targets that may be targetted by x-aegis. Each shot costs .75
P6 costs .75 to fire.

That's it.

I have seen no reason to alter this perspective.

I have no desire to see a P-6 rapid-pulse as P-3's.
I have no desire to see P-5's pulse as P-3's either. The phaser-matrix is as far as I'd care to go.
I certainy wouldn't care for P-5's pulsing as P-6's pulsing as P-3's.

Everyone else's milage may vary.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 03:57 pm: Edit

I agree completely.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 05:16 pm: Edit

Let's talk about something more interesting.

A tightly pulsed defense phaser. For 2 point of power you get 8 pulses and it only shoots one per round. Kind of a ADD-phaser with a little better range. Semi-inspired by the plasma carronade

range1-56-8
hit1-41-3
damage22


The targeting computer interfaces with X-aegis to improve its firing solution so that the system gets a +1 to hit after the the third pulse at the same target.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 08:31 pm: Edit

Quote:

Semi-inspired by the plasma carronade


Althought the Clan use in Battletech a laser anti-missile system.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 08:49 pm: Edit

John that's similar to an idea I had. My idea had it as a "drone" load in a VLS-style launcher. What would happen is the "phaser"-ADD would fire a short-ranged (1-3 hexes) phaser bolt from the launcher. It's a one-shot weapon that requires no power allocation because the power supply is in the Ph-ADD itself and is used up when the weapon fires. What makes it different from an ADD? I'd say better to-hit probability and kill-on-hit, and perhaps the opportunity to fire at and damage fighters and plasmas.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 09:22 pm: Edit

Quote:

I have no desire to see a P-6 rapid-pulse as P-3's.
I have no desire to see P-5's pulse as P-3's either. The phaser-matrix is as far as I'd care to go.
I certainy wouldn't care for P-5's pulsing as P-6's pulsing as P-3's.


Okay so lets talk about R1 and X1 ships.

A Klingon DXD will be cheaper than a Fed XCA ( which shoulkd be 300-330 BPB to be able to tackle the ISC CCX ).

If it only has 2 G-racks and bridge as special sensor that works at R6...it can have 2 turn's worth of drone chucked at it and bring down 6 of them ( 4 with drones and 2 with S-Bridge ) leaving 6 still to be delt with at R1 with Phasers and Tractors.


6 Type VIII drone are destroyed by 8 points of damage.
If the Ph-3 table and Ph-6 table @ R1 look like the below.
Ph-3 Ph-6
4 5
4 5
4 4
4 4
3 3
3 3


The the chances that any one Type VIII drone will slip past 2Ph-6 shots is 1 in 3...so six type VIII drones will take 14Ph-6 shots to destroy which would come from 7 bearing Ph-5s...and the poor ship only has 8Ph-5s and thus we'll assume that it can only get 6 to bear.

Have a ship quite a bit weaker than your be able to get past you defenses so easily is going to cost the XCA a lot of battles.

Going to Ph-5s having the option of fire 3Ph-3 shots is much easier.
The 6 bearing Ph-5 fire off 2Ph-3 shots each in the first Aegis step ( destroying 4/9 of the incomming drones ) and then follow up Ph-3 shots kill the remaining 3.33 surving drones.


It gets worse when you consider the GW ships.
How many Type IVF-a drones can be hurled at you by a Kzinti BC & MCD...easily 12 and it's not much more BPV than the X2 cruiser, certainly falls under budget if the the FORCE DYNAMICS factor is added in, so 12 Type IVF-a and 12 Type IVF drones all arriving in the same turn would murder an XCA...if it can fire 3Ph-3 shots as well as 2Ph-6 shots it has a much better chance of survivability over being restricted to 2Ph-6 shots only.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 09:39 pm: Edit

What makes it different from an ADD is that it is NOT an auto-kill. That sets it apart from both the ADD and the clan laser-AMS.

It would take 3-4 pulses to kill a VII drone.

Hmm. I might make it 2x damage against SC 6 and 7, normal damage vs. SC5 and 1/2 against SC2-4

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 11:52 am: Edit

How about improving X2-Aegis to a "Track-Lock system. All X2 Aegis fire in one impulse gets a -1 die shift per shot fired after the first when fired at the same target.

John mentioned this in a post above but I though maybe it could be a general X2-Aegis improvement. Where this would really be useful is at longer ranges to Aegis targets. Likely in situations where one ship is defending anotherfrom drone attack. I would also allow plasmas to be lagit aegis targets. Why? With this improvement it makes a difference. Whith out "Track-Lock" then you just fire all you think you need in the normal fire step. But track lock would improve your total damage output.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 11:53 am: Edit

A way to improve the Hydran Ph-G would be to give it full Aegis to utilize all four shots.

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