Seems to me like this is a shopping list for races. For example:

#1 - everyone
#2 - Fed and ISC
#3 - ISC, Rom, Gorn, Fed
#4 - steer away from
#5 - everyone
#6 - steer away from
#7 - probably everyone; but stronger for Tholian and Klink
#8 - Hydran, Lyran, Kzin

That's mostly just reaction rather than in-depth analysis.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, November 09, 2003 - 11:45 am: Edit

#8 (I think) was my proposal for an Energized Armor on the X2 Romulan Imperial Eagle.

I acts as normal armor but if damaged during a turn in which the armor is Energized that box can be repaired via the shield repair rules.

Damage during unpowered turns is marked with a slash while damage during powered turns is marked with a dot. These boxes can be repaired. Power cost is 1 or 2 points; any source.

My intention was that the R-IE was built by a separate contract (House) and did not include a ASIF, making the ship even more unique.

#7 is the primary X2 ship protection scheme to be implemented by all races, IMO.

#5 is a natural progression but a realatively minor improvement reflecting the naturally larger size of each class. Something like GW=30, X1=40, X2=46. So, around half the improvement that X1 gained over GW. Not a lot but enough to fulfill the expected improvement.

#3 Shunting: Its OK but is too much to add to the above and I prefer the above.

#2 Weapons Tuning: I would like to see this implemented as a prototype experement that could be added to a ship with a BPV cost like a Super Computer is added. Perhaps generate a rule that can have so random effects when used. I suppose Shunting could be handled the same way and you could buy one or the other. In this fasion players would be up against each other with different systems and wouldn't know what system they were up against until they started fighting it out. (A vanilla X2 ship, a shield shunter of a Shield Tuner?)

This would reflect the continuing experemental nature of the X2 era. Not all ships would have these items but some with prototypes. Perhaps there should be some weapons prototypes too. Ships would be limited to one prototype each. All having a cost ascosiated both in BPV and rules. This would really create a new playing field where one might think they know what their up against but have to dig in to find out. Something like that would really make X2 different from previous play.

By George M. Ebersole (George) on Sunday, November 09, 2003 - 02:55 pm: Edit

9) Swing shield that moves or rotates to cover other shields.

10) Ability to move shield boxes around on a ship.

Both 9) and 10) are derivations on previous themes, but are unique enough to be distinguished by themselves.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Sunday, November 09, 2003 - 04:30 pm: Edit

#9 sounds like a common proposal; I know I suggested it last year or some time before. I think I called it Reserve Shielding or some such. The idea was a "bank" of shield boxes that could be raised and set to cover either 1, 2, or 3 adjacent hex faces. I think SVC suggested this several years ago too. I'm sure we're not the only to suggest it. I don't know why it hasn't picked up more momentum. It seems simple enough.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, November 09, 2003 - 08:08 pm: Edit

11) Raise EW levels to 9 EW points.
Admittedly it makes the internals harder to hit as well and it doesn't work in X2 Vs X2 but it's a heck of a lot smaller on the SSD and requires much fewer rules than any other system.

Maybe Orion Style stealth materials for a +1 natural ECM would work ( even for X2 Vs X2 battles ).


Personnally I'm finding the "Sheilds are easy to pop but the internals ( coupled with the ASIF Effects ) hold out for a long time" quite a change from the usual stuff.
MY and Y both already have ships lasting longer in battle than the GW period, why shouldn't X2 ships die faster than GW ( faster than X1 even ) for a different flavour!?!

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, November 09, 2003 - 08:21 pm: Edit

1) Hard outer shield or layered shielding, where a "permanent" row of five to ten boxes would screen out that much damage prior to the ablative shielding being hit. Perhaps such a device has a generator of somekind that can be destroyed. Maybe it only covers one arc at a time?

Define "hard". Omnipresent for every attack? I believe rotating shields are on the auto-reject list.


2) Weapons' tuned shields; shields that more robust against one type of weapon than another. Perhaps they stop damage ona 2 to 1 ratio for whatever weapon they're tuned for, but take hits one a 1:1 or 1:2 for all other weaponary.

The devil is in the details. I tend to think it fails the KISS test.

3) Shunting; allowing the owning player of the attacked ship to divert a percentage (40%?) of a volley to the two immediately adjoining shields. Example; a ship takes 10 points of damage, but shunts 4 of those points to two other shields, broken up as two 2-point volleys on the adjacent shields. Perhaps this ability would cost energy. Perhaps said energy can only come from reserve power.

Popular when first suggested. Not much has been done with it for a while. Might still be popular.


4) Combination Shield-PA panel tech. Damage breaching the shield would get absorbed before damage was allocated on a breached shield.

An auto-reject based on using andro tech.


5) Strengthen current ships' shielding by adding boxes.

A common addition. The question is how many? Using just shield boxes to make ships tougher leads to the phenomina where the ships are buff until a sheild is breached then fold. Saw this in Commander's X2. Not a fun way to play SFB.


6) Allow phaser capacitors to act as reserve warp, and allow their energy to be allocated to the shields.

Just say no.


7) Ship integrity fields; acts like component shielding from New Galaxy races.

Two good proposals exist. I tend to favor some form of ASIF.


8) Energized Hull Armor, essentially a unidirectional shield layered underneath the ships normal outter shielding.

Nixed as too close to Franchise Trek backstory. could get the ADB sued. To a large extent both ASIF proposals cover this ground.


9) Swing shield that moves or rotates to cover other shields.

A generalized rotating shield is on the auto-reject list. Swing shields as porposed here protect one of two adjacent shields and that's it.


10) Ability to move shield boxes around on a ship.

I haven't seen a proposal for this here. It's kind of an inverse to the damage shunt. How would it work?

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, November 09, 2003 - 08:24 pm: Edit

MJC,

Not a "shield" proposal.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, November 09, 2003 - 08:41 pm: Edit

John, personally I don't think the Tuned shields idea is too complicated and while the KISS test is a good one to observe it shouldn't be the criteria that kills a proposal. Having just grazed over the cloak rules I would say that Cloak definitely fails the KISS test yet is a very important part of the game.

Web and Web Casters also fail the KISS test, IMO. (But I love 'em)

Also, we've gone over the Energized armor thing before so I'll just mention that I disagree about its copy right problems. Paramount stole the idea from others and there was never a mention of armor on the BoP so my proposal is unique.
But I know you disagree so I'll leave it at that. Whether the proposal is good or not is, of course, another matter. Also, as a matter of safety I would note your concern with any such proposal should I send it in and let SVC decide.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, November 09, 2003 - 08:46 pm: Edit

SAME DIFF'


Inate ECM through the use of stealth materials gives X2 ships an ability to withstand more damage...just like a powerful sheild.
If we want to make it not have a follow on effect that it affects internals as well we tie the bonus ( which would be +1 for all but Orion ships ( although I've got a theory for the Feds ) to the destruction of the Last Hull box ( we might even bump up the CDR for all X2 Hull boxes to 2 because of a combination of the ASIF stuff and the Stealth Stuff ) such that although the ECM protects the ship a little bit after the Sheild is gone, it's not too long after the loss of the shield that the bonus ECM is lost.

The ability to withstand more damage through the bonus ECM would also be applicable to X2 Vs X2 battles ( unlike just upping the EW availible ) so the X2 ships would be resistant to damage through the entire gammet of possible opponents ( although an X1 ships with a Leg W.O. would be pretty good at dishing up damage but still doing less than if the ship had not had the ECM bonus ).


We're looking for SOMETHING to make the shields last longer because the immence damage boost to the weapons ( particularly the Photon ) far outstrips the shield improovement.

Actually going from ( for a cruiser ) 40/32/32/32 to 48/40/40/40 isn't as pafetic as one might at first assume and +1 natural inate ECM that lasts until the last Hull box is destroyed will come awefully close to making the sheilds equal to the weapon improvement bringing the game back to an X1 elevel of balance.
Indeed 5 point BTTYs coupled with 48/40/40/40 is probably a greater defensive bonus than the oft proposed simple 16 point fastload is an offensive increase...my calaculation would be that all extra power would go to SSReo and thus we are looking at 58/40 Vs 16/12 and a 45% increase beats a 33% increase.

By George M. Ebersole (George) on Sunday, November 09, 2003 - 09:19 pm: Edit

John, R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) mentions he believes SVC made a similar proposal years back. Myself, I don't recall whether he did or not, but I do recall the concept being around for nearly as long as the game's first expansions. Someone mentioned the Juggernaut used it, I also saw a similar concept on a homebrew vessel back in '84 or '85 (which was not the Juggernaut, now that I come to think of it). I used a derivation of that concept on a robot vessel that I've always wanted to submit, but never have. I think the idea was rejected for supplement 2, but I can't recall offhand.


General thoughts; I'm not a big fan of the Shield-PA combo, and I'm sure it'll get tossed (or is already considered tossed, has been tossed, or some combination thereof).

Tuned shields don't bother me, nor do they excite me much. I think they're kind of unique and interesting, and may see the light of day when all is said and done.

The Hard Shield concept was something I wanted to submit for a proposal of my own many years back, but it was during a time when I had lost interest in the game. I still happen to like it, but perhaps not for X2.

The other stuff is neat, but doesn't interest me too much, though I do like shunting.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, November 09, 2003 - 09:40 pm: Edit

What do you all think of my idea of Prototyping some of these ideas as a component add-on that players can buy?

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 02:18 am: Edit

Loren,

Better ask SVC.

He gets real ticked at 3rd-party SFB products and their designers.

George,

At this point, SVC isn't the issue. Paramount is. Right or wrong, the merest whiff of a lawsuit will kill an idea. because Paramount is big enough to bankrupt the ADB even if it (Paramount) is in the wrong.

You want to dance with the devil, go ahead and propose energized armor. I'll even toss in meaningful critiques.

The series finale of Voyager and the advent of Enterprise has changed things. Paramount could/would hold that such a system would be violation of their Franchise Trek copyrght. It doesn't matter what SVC may have proposed or when. If it will cost him $100,000 to defend the product, there's no point in producing it.

By George M. Ebersole (George) on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 02:40 am: Edit

John; if I understand Enterprise rightly I think they have polarized armor, or somesuch, and not a rotating shield. The rotating shield was the topic in question, and I don't recall the Trek folks creating that. Energized armor is a different story.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 09:29 am: Edit

John...sorry but not talking about a product to buy with money. I'm talking a sort of Commanders option that players can buy for their ships with BPV. In the way that you buy a Leg. Officer of Super Computer.

By Mike Dowd (Mike_Dowd) on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 04:19 pm: Edit

The best I understand the idea of 'Hard' Shielding is that it would function alot like Damage Reduction (DR) in d20. The DR value is subtracted from each and every volley that strikes the shield. It doesn't have to be a large value. Even a DR 3 would make a ship immune to Phaser-3 shots, most fighters, all shuttles and long-range sniping by Fusion units.

Personally, I don't like it, unles the value is set *very* low, like 1.

By Mike Fannin (Daelin) on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 04:29 pm: Edit

The number wouldn't have to be that low if it's every volley (as opposed to every weapon hit).

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 04:36 pm: Edit

George,

A rotating shield is on the auto-reject list.

By Mike Dowd (Mike_Dowd) on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 04:52 pm: Edit

It should be, considering that it has the potential to destroy the Mizia tactic... (unless that is the intent of X2)

By George M. Ebersole (George) on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 04:52 pm: Edit

Fighters and PFs were supposed to be obsolete and outlawed by the time X2 rolled around. Assuming that's true I don't see a problem with a hard shield.

John; really? Oh well.

Mike; not to get too off topic, but Mizia is an exploitation of the rules, though a tactic, it's akin to charging a $50 suplus shipping charge for a package whose contents are valued no more than five bucks. If it gets rid of Mizia, then that's all the better.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 05:10 pm: Edit

George: Some concepts for X2 are typically auto reject but might be acceptable for X2 as X2 is supposed to be the big new thing. While a rotating shield is definatly on the auto reject list for GW and probably X1 it is not nessasarilly DOA for X2 (though I'd bet it carries less weight).

In short, I'm not so sure the ARL automatically applies 100% to X2 developement, though it has value to note it's there.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 07:36 pm: Edit

To be fair, I can't actually recall where I think I heard SVC mention the "shield bank" (my name for it) concept. I like the idea though. I'll give it some more thought and re-propose it.

George, I don't think the "rotating shield" is auto-reject. In any event SVC will let us know. Also I think X2 spelling doom for attrition units is a legacy of Supp#2 not to be found in X2.

I definitely like the ASIF (or whatever it's eventually called). I think some races (Klingons keep coming to mind) will build stronger versions, or build versions capable of reinforcement. Comments?

As to X2 eliminating Mizia. I'm not opposed to the idea, but instead of destroying Mizia perhaps X2 should reduce Mizia (which ASIF does). That would be a distinct advantage X2 has over pre-X2. It'll make the ISC mad until they come up with a PPD improvement.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 08:11 pm: Edit

Actually ASIF makes mizia worse.
Coupled with the reduced number of weapons, mizia gets worse.

Personnally I like it that way...on account of the fact that it's different to X1 ships.
Although it's not all that dis-similar to MY ships.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 08:11 pm: Edit

Hard shields would kill the PPD. Forget hard shields as far as I'mconcerned.

I checked the auto-reject list and rotating shields are NOT on it. My error. Sorry, George.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 09:31 pm: Edit

How does the ASIF make Mizia worse?

My version certainly doesn't, Johns doesn't (heck, it compleatly eliminates the first volley of something like 8 hits.)

There is a couple others but...

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 09:44 pm: Edit

My ASIF damps the Mizia concept by not letting A-row hits pass to the B-row without marking off the B-row ASIF shield boxes.

it doesn't destroy the mizia concept but does damp it out to some degree.