Well, here are some quotes from the article:

---

Quote:

"Perhaps the only detail that seems certain is that phasers will be grouped into a small number of larger groups with broader firing arcs. For example, a Federation X2-CA might have six FX phasers in the saucer rather than 2 FH, 2 LS, and 2 RS."

"...the concept of making X2 technology different instead of just better than X1 technology is my central theme." SVC's emphasis, not mine

"If I have come to any single conclusion regarding the ships of module X2, it is that just taking every ship and adding a few phasers and some power (as was done in module X1) is not going to get the job done. We need to think in terms of entirely new generation of warships."

---

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 03:12 pm: Edit

I think the P-5 is OK, but I see what you mean.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 03:14 pm: Edit

Oh, I like it too, and plan to keep using it.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 08:37 pm: Edit

Okay I'm more or less with Loren here:

X2-Photons will still use X1-fix rules and then go from there. Standard loads are still 8 pts. Standards and prox can be fast loaded. Fast overloads are limited to 12 points. I want to see the "critical" overload able to reach 24 pts but must be done over the classic two-turn period of course. I think the limiting factors for the "crits" are the inherent to-hit numbers. I'm not sure if it's necessary to change the range brackets.

I'm not trying to go for uber-Fed here but I do want some extra kick. I think the 24 point photon does the trick and is balanced by the to-hit numbers. The alternative is to allow the 12 point photon to act as a standard load (which is nothing more than recycling the light/standard/heavy photon idea).

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 09:45 pm: Edit

Brodie,

The big problem with the 24 point photon as proposed is that nothing stops you from firing them on impulse 32 of one turn, then fast loading 12 pointers and firing on impulse eight of the next. I agree the tables need no tweaking, but there should be a forced delay for any overload over 16 points preventing just what I described. For my part, the photon I was working on was limited to 20 points, and there was a 32 impulse delay in firing any tube that had loaded more than a 16 point torpedo in it. So, you could get the big 20 point torpedo, but you had to wait a full turn to fire again.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 10:13 pm: Edit

Would 24 with the 32 delay be overkill?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 10:23 pm: Edit

Have to try it, I guess. With some of the possibilities opened by what Steve wrote in P6, I'm more open to it than I was. It'll be hell on GW ships, though; can't think of many that can take that kind of punishment and survive to be effective.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 11:02 pm: Edit

I still think 24 is way too big. 20 point Critical Overloads still sit good with me. I'm still keeping my current Photon Proposal, even given the P6 article. In fact, I'm still going for my main appraoch. Different style of play is what I've always wanted so P6 doesn't detract from my ideas so far.

BTW, got a few more. Stay tuned!

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 11:56 am: Edit

Good point. I could see a 32-impulse delay after firing "crits." I could also see a 16-impulse delay. Really the only way to "improve" the photon without completely unbalancing it is to allow bigger warheads or change the power curve. Although I have a sneaking admiration for the 2D6 idea to "smooth the edges" on EW effects.

I'd suggest playtesting the following variants:

(1) Loren's 20-pt "crit" (with cool-down?)
(2) 24-pt "crit" with 32-impulse cool-down
(3) 24-pt "crit" with 16-impulse cool-down
(4) X1 photons with 2D6 rolls

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 12:39 pm: Edit

You need to check the archives.

Mike has done a lot of groundwork on 2d6 photons.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 02:22 pm: Edit

What about this:

A photon fired as a standard (8 warhead / 4 power), or a normal overload (9-16 warhead / 4.5-8 power) allows the tube to be used the next turn as a fast-load.

A photon tube that fires a critical overload (17-24 warhead / 8.5-12 power) and then fires a fast load on the next turn suffers shock. The number of SEPs is equal to the power applied to the fast-load (round up).

That way, if you fire 4 critical OLs, then 4 12-pointers, you take 24 SEPs. Or 4 fast-load standards is 16 SEPs.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 02:30 pm: Edit

I'd stay away from shock, Jeff, however I could see a next-turn fastload suffering from EW effects caused by the "crit" fire. For example, add 2 to each die roll for EW effects.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 03:28 pm: Edit

Not enough of a penalty. An X2 ship has more than enough power to overcome that shift and still blast the crap out of the target. A forced delay is the only reasonable option, IMHO. Just how long the delay is is up for debate and can be resolved by playtesting. Personally, I'd go with a 20 point limit and a 32 impulse delay for starters, and work up or down from there.

2D6 photon. Did lots of work on this. It certainly works, but it does sort of take away the photon "crap shoot" flavor. And, while it does minimize the effects of EW, it also minimizes the bonuses of legendary weapons officers and freindly EW support. I did work up a table that gives the same to hit percentages as the normal table, but uses a 2d6 number. Not bad, but it does sort of alter the flavor. I don't object to it, though.

One thought I had was to change the photon in some fundamental way. Something like this. Each tube is armed in four point "steps". Each four points gets you eight points of photon in one turn; so, in one turn you get an eight pointer. In two, you get a sixteen pointer. In three, you get a 24 pointer, and the max you can arm. Hold costs for steps 1 and 2 would be the same, and the big 3 step one can't be held. That gives you the normal photon flavor in terms of damage and such, but gives you a three-turn arming option. The table would combing standards and proxies into one, and overloads would use their normal table. Step one torps would be standards, steps two and three would be overloads.

Benefits: Great big overload, combined standard/proxies for better long range bombardment capabilities.

Costs: No more flexible arming.

Not sure if the benefits outweigh the costs, but it's an option to consider.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Saturday, August 09, 2003 - 11:16 pm: Edit

On the SSDs I have posted, I used the following options on the photons:

16 point warhead (Same as GW)
12 point fastload (Same as X1)
"-1" bonus with ECCM advantage (Same as X1)
Range 10 OL (new)
Slightly improved accuracy (new)

Range	0-1	2-3	4-6	7-8	9-10	11-15	16-40
Std	x	1-5	1-4	1-3	1-3	1-2	1
Prox	x	x	x	x	1-4	1-4	1-3
OL	1-6	1-5	1-4	1-3	1-3	x	x

Does this still "play nice" with GW ships?
Or does the Range 10 OL make it impossible for GW to fight against it?

Then again, the ph-5 doesn't get into effective range until range 8.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, August 09, 2003 - 11:29 pm: Edit

Yeah the old Ph-5 had an effective range at R10 so it was toned down.
No one has playtested R10 overloads so we're not really sure if it's a broken concept or not but most people have discided it would be better to get X-Full Aegis, S-Bridge and ASIF all on the same ship with the same BPV ( from a FUN point of veiw ) than to have R10 overloads.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, August 10, 2003 - 02:17 am: Edit

I for one am very leery of R10 overloads because of the ability to inflict unanswered damage on GW tech.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, August 10, 2003 - 09:51 am: Edit

R10 overloads were one of the key things that broke Supplement 2. I'd be very, very careful about those.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Sunday, August 10, 2003 - 11:16 am: Edit

I gotta go with MJC, John, and Mike on this one. There's more BPV for the buck like MJC says and two hexes is a lot of space for GW ships. I'm not saying it would be impossible, Jeff (and Lord knows I've argued for all kinds of improvements to the Photon in the past), just that it might make the game "unfun" for GW players against X2 players.

Still, we need to keep in mind that (at least at first) X2 units will likely be leading a compsosite force of X1 and GW units, with maybe an X2 scout or escort.

Mike, from above, no fast-load 12-pt torpedo for your concept?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, August 10, 2003 - 11:20 am: Edit

No. The trade would be the combined proxy/standard table, which would give a very good long range heavy weapon. This is one of many spur-of-the-moment ideas I posted, mostly to just facilitate brainstorming.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, August 10, 2003 - 01:28 pm: Edit

I keep running into Supplement 2 ideas. I think it's time to post a new thread.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, August 10, 2003 - 02:06 pm: Edit

Actually Supplement 2 has 12-hex overloads, but that is a minor quibble.

It's all in the archives, which are way past too large to read.

One of the reasons I built my webpage. I'd like to establish a central clearinghouse for X2 ideas. A single smorgasbord for SVC to look at. he can then refer to our talk here for depth analysis.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Sunday, August 10, 2003 - 02:44 pm: Edit

MMMMMM, smorgasbord . . .

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, August 10, 2003 - 02:46 pm: Edit

Back to the drawing board.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Sunday, August 10, 2003 - 05:47 pm: Edit

Here's the problem: fast-load 12 pointers.

They turn the photon into a one-turn weapon. If you can fire 12 each turn or 16 every two turns, then there's no reason to wait, unless you don't have a target this turn.

At range 8, the fast load is 1-3 for 12, while the disruptor is 1-5 for 6. The photon has more firepower each turn than the disruptor does.

Just about every proposal to bring the disruptor back in line with the photon has its problems:

• Two disruptor shots a turn (the particle disruptor)
• Increased firepower (the cannon)

Then, there are the proposals to bring the two-turn aspect back to the photon

• Eliminate the fast-load
• Bigger warhead.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Sunday, August 10, 2003 - 07:16 pm: Edit

Jeff,

One reason for the fast load was the extra pair of disruptors they planted on the DX. The Feds needed something new to give them parity, and fastloads were it. In X1, this wasn't a big issue, because to take advantage of fastloads meant sucking up a bunch of your power (24 points to arm them all to full fast-load status). In X2, you may very well be right; the extra power available may make fast loads very easy to manage.

Above, I mentioned a proposal to alter the arming pattern of the photon to make fast loads eight points, overloads 16 points in two turns, and super-overloads 24 points in three turns. This sort of thing may encourage two turn arming, and will also give the Fed an incentive to arm for three turns when he can.