Archive through January 23, 2004
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: OLD X2 FOLDER: X2 disruptors: Archive through January 23, 2004
By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Monday, August 25, 2003 - 09:28 pm: Edit

OK, so the only thing new about it was the arming cycle. I just wanted to see if anyone had an opinion on it.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, August 25, 2003 - 10:18 pm: Edit

Well, I love the DC since I proposed it and Mike went for it and came up with a respectable version. So I suppose there are now three of us who like it!

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, August 25, 2003 - 10:20 pm: Edit

Four.

It's on my Kzinti design also

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Monday, August 25, 2003 - 10:49 pm: Edit

Is that a consensus?

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 - 02:20 am: Edit

There's a couple of things to note.

1) It should have an R15 Fastload stanard shot...it is afterall an X2 weapons.
2) It probably should have either X1 or GW Defracs and UIM...to stop it falling too far behind the Klingons in a high EW enviroment...8EW+ECM-Drone & 6 UIM O/L Disruptors @ R 8 will mean that only half the DCs are hitting for 6 points of damage each ( 24 damage ) whilst the Disruptors are doing 30 ( assuming the Kzinit doesn't have an ECM drone in which case it's just 24 ) and the Disruptors don't need a turn to recycle ( this assumes a 6 disruptor ship and the drones arn't so powerful as to throw these numbers into the round filing cabinet.
3) I'm not sure if it should have a Disruptor Cap like the X2 Disruptor or not...it probably doesn't need it since the primary heavy of the Kzin ti is the drone racks and they don't require any power to run.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 - 09:59 pm: Edit

MJC, I'll answer to your comments one-by-one:

1)My version of the DC makes no distinction on the firing chart between a one-turn or two-turn standard shot. The only thing stopping this from being a true one-turn weapon is the power cost (which isn't that big on an X2 ship) and the cooldown from a one-turn overload shot.

2) Racial flavor means everybody is different. Two XCAs from different races may have similar BPV, but if you break it down system by system, you won't see similar performance. Indeed, you are going out of your way to ignore the Kzintis primary weapon, to say the Kzintis do less damage, in order to argue the DC should be upgraded from its rough-draft proposal.

3) I agree, the Kzintis would be willing to trade holdable bolts for non-holdable cannons. The Klingons might not. But then those differences are where racial flavor is made.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - 09:54 pm: Edit

2) I'm still; not so sure.
If I have a Klingon DXD and you have a Kzinti XCM of about the same BPV.

I can escort my self with a type VIII ECM drone and generate 6 ECM & 2 ECCM.

The Best you can do is generate either generate 8 ECCM + use an ECM drone making it +3 all or generate 1 ECCM and 6 ECCM ( using an ECM drone as part of that ) making a +2 all result...but you could possibly just choose to use your drones offensively and "blindly" throw 8 ECCM into effect for a +1 protecting me and +0 protecting you effect.

Let's assume you've boiled it down to +2 all and are saving a few points of power.

My 6 G-racks can pretty much eliminate your 2 C-racks + 2 B-racks worth of drones.

So it comes down to DF.
If I fire 6R22 Disruptors for 2 hits ( using UIM ) of 2 points of damage each:- total 4 damage.
You fire half your DCs for no hits, total zero damage.

We're not breaking even.


If we are firing ar R8.
I fire 6R8 O/L Disruptors for 3 hits of 6 points of damage:- total 18 points of damage.
You fire 4R8 O/L DCs for 1.33 hits of 12 points of damage:- total 16 points of damage. But if you went for either fastloads or alternating pairs that would be 8 points of damage.

We're still not breaking even.


Net result you can't do much about making the EW enviroment better but it does get worse so UIM and Defracs probably should be thrown in...I'm not saying it's a must but I think some kind of lower tech ( say GW UIM ) touch up to the DC may be in order.

3) No actually the DC is a pretty deadly weapon, partuclarly because it has cruch power...4 O/L DCs at R0 is still doing 10 points of damage more than 6R0 O/L Disruptors...and 10 points of damage is more than enough to be the difference between internals or not. It just has some EW problems after the invention of the ECM drones ( and the Plasmas that work like them ) so I would say that it never got to be the full X2 DC version of the Disruptor ( that is to say it never got all of the optional extras of the X2 Disruptor ).
Having some GW or maybe even X1 Disruptor Optional Extras is a Different matter.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - 11:02 pm: Edit

Back to the DXD. Sure 6 GX racks can handle 2 C's and 2 B's, but you haven't seen any rough drafts for the Kzinti ship, nor have you considered scatterpacks.

---------------

Also, you explicitly assume that the XCA will fight against a 2-shift, due to ECM drones. That's not true.

In your example, your DXD powers 6/2 EW, and the ECM drone makes it 9/2.

If I power 0/8 and use the drone too, I have 3/8, or a one-shift for both sides. At this point, EW is become a guessing game.

------------

Plus, will the phasers be breaking even?

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 12:30 am: Edit

There is a rough drafe kzinti and it's drones for days.

http://www.vorlonagent.com/sfb/x2/vorlonagent/kz-bc2x.gif

Eliminate 2 of the G-racks. It only has 2, not 4. Mike R and I had a talk about that awhile ago and I never changed the SSD. The drone array fires one drone per rack per 20 impulses...and from any rack in the array you want.

This boat would run 6x Gx racks dry, but it would take a few turns. My Kzinti is designed for sustained high volume drone fire.

If a DXD has the full DX disruptor complement and 6x drone racks, it's got to be scrimping on phasers. Kzinti closes and kills.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 06:39 am: Edit

Quote:

Sure 6 GX racks can handle 2 C's and 2 B's, but you haven't seen any rough drafts for the Kzinti ship, nor have you considered scatterpacks.


Okay and we also haven't talked about WWs ( Or Type VII-MWs for that matter ).

Let me tell you what I think the Kzinti XCA will look like.
One ( 360, LS, RS ) Phaser Matrix that becomes three with the refit although the LS & RS firing arcs have a Pair of Ph-6s in their place.
Four Ph-5s and a pair of Ph-6s that become a pair of Ph-5s after the refit.
Four Disruptor cannon.
2 X2 C-racks, 2 X2 B-racks and after the refit 2 X2 G-racks.

Now from this one would assume that the XCM has no central Phaser matrix, no central Ph-6s that become Ph-5s and no refit of G-racks after the treaty breacks down...am I very wrong?


Quote:

Also, you explicitly assume that the XCA will fight against a 2-shift, due to ECM drones. That's not true.


Yes, yes I did...to explain ( ah, the route word of explicitly ) that the lousey EW enviroments the DC falls down.

As always, playtesting be the Judge!

Quote:

Plus, will the phasers be breaking even?


That is something we've tried to do...the whole 12Ph-1 Vs 8Ph-5 situation is built around all races have an equal phaser stance...that partly what the treaty gives us.


Quote:

If a DXD has the full DX disruptor complement and 6x drone racks, it's got to be scrimping on phasers. Kzinti closes and kills.


Yeah, it is, the two pairs of waist phaser are each replaced by trios of GX-racks.
But then the DXD is only 250 BPV and I suspect the Kzinti XCM is aiming 275.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 06:45 am: Edit

Say what? A DXD that has six drones, six disruptors, and no waist phasers. Haven't seen that one yet...and not sure I want too. That sounds like a bit too much. Sometimes I think you create this stuff out of thin air just to find a way to prove your point. I haven't seen or heard one single proposal that would make such drastic changes to the DXD...bringing it up to debunk Jeff's proposed DC tables is unfair at best. Go look at some of the DXD's that have been proposed on John's page...Jeffs is there, and if any ought to be compared to his Kzinti, it's that one because he worked out the concepts for both.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 06:57 am: Edit

Go grab your copy of X1 and look in the SSD book at page 18.
Or even check out R3.203

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 07:06 am: Edit

I was talking about a battle with a ship that already exists.

Admittedly a Medium X2 cruiser is going to be a little bit better than the best Klingon Heavy Cruiser in X1 ( Oh, Lord, let there be BCH-Xs in X1R ) but the point was to make it known that there will come a time when there will be a need for the DF heavies of the Kzinti to hold their own against the DF of the Klingons and not merely be dependant on drone superiority...fighting in nebulae and asteroid feilds will be likewise, the Kzintis will need to have much closer to DF parity than one might at first think one can get away with in a lot of situations....I'm not saying the DC must have UIM and Defracs, I'm saying we should keep an open mind because I have a sneaking suspicion that it will need UIM & Defracs.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 08:34 am: Edit

Ah, I see...thought we were talking about a 2X DXD. My apologies.

However, I disagree that X2 will demonstrate a need for the Kzintis to equal the Klingons in DF capability. They never have before, since they have maintained drone superiorority. If they continue to keep this edge in X2, they don't need to equal the Klingons (who are arguably one of the best DF races in the game) in DF ability. Let's wait and see what X2 drones look like before adding more upgrades to the DC.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 08:50 am: Edit

Mike Raper, MJC pulled out a published ship. The Klingon DXD is an X1 version of the D7D (drone heavy cruiser). 3 ph-1 in the boom, 2 ph-1 in each wing, 6 Gx racks where the waist phasers should be, and 6 disruptors (it's an X1 ship).

MR, I don't yet have a Kzinti ship published on John's page. I worked up several different classes of Kzinti ships, but that was before we all re-read SVC's quote from P6.

MJC, why is it that just about every time you make a comparison, or a tactic, or try to prove a point about anything, it's based against the D7D? I think all you've managed to prove with the repeated examples is that you think the D7D is underpointed.

And then "nebula and asteroid fields"? Not every ship is going to handle every type of terrain as effectively. If a CVA group finds itself in a nebula against an equal number of points of GW ships, will it have a chance?

BPV has always been a rough guide.
There are always RPS matchups.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 08:55 am: Edit

Jeff, I know. I figured that out from MJC's post. And I know you haven't got a Kzinti 2X CA up yet...I was referring to matching up the DC against your Klingon XBC, instead of the DXD.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 10:03 am: Edit

Yeah, can I sujest that we say Klingon and then XDD or perhaps XD7D, if we are talking about the X2 analog of the D7D.

Even X7D would avoid the confussion to some extent.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 10:19 am: Edit

Quote:

However, I disagree that X2 will demonstrate a need for the Kzintis to equal the Klingons in DF capability. They never have before, since they have maintained drone superiorority.


Yeah...I sort of agree.

But four DCs is about equal to four Disruptors...crunch power being the big differentiator.
But is four DCs about equal to 6 Disruptors...no way.

So how do we give the Kzinti weapon a little push, the same way the Disruptors got a little push over the photon...with UIM & Defracs.


I would say that the Klingon XD7 ( not X7D ) would have, before the Refit;-
• 2 X2 A-racks ( read six space X1 and X2 chucking drone racks ).
• 4 Disruptors.
• 12Ph-1s

And after the Refit would have.
• 2 X2 B-racks ( read 8 space X1 & X2 chucking drone racks ).
• 1 X2 E-rack.
• 6 Disruptors.
• 12Ph-5s.


Now assuming the Kzinti XCA has before the refit...
• 4 Disruptor Cannon.
• 2 X2 B-racks.
• 2 X2 C-racks.
• Some kind of phaser array that has parity with 12Ph-1s or 8Ph-5s.

And after the Refit has...
• 4 DCs.
• 2 X2 B-racks.
• 2 X2 C-racks.
• 2 X2 G-racks.
• Some kind of phaser array that has parrity with 12Ph-5s.


I'ld say the combination of two fewer DF heavies and no UIM/Defracs was too great a difference to be overcome by the ( 3 shot down with E rack, 1 each with others ) 4 (pre-refit) and 3( post refit ) drones that make their way to meet the phaser and tractors of the Klingon...but it's just a hunch...actually on second thought that's a lot of Phaser fire being drawn out, so maybe the DCs won't need UIM/Defracs.

PLAYTEST BE THE JUDGE.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 10:30 am: Edit

Quote:

MJC, why is it that just about every time you make a comparison, or a tactic, or try to prove a point about anything, it's based against the D7D? I think all you've managed to prove with the repeated examples is that you think the D7D is underpointed.


I hadn't thought about it being the wrong BPV...although against an NCA it does seem to have a heavy weapon advantage although it also has a phaser disadvantage.
At GW 3Ph-1s and 2Ph-2 in an oblique and X1 5Ph-1s it kinda comes up short in the "Swing" weapon department so maybe it's not the hell weapon it sometimes gets the title of.

I'ld love to throw around D7Y from time to time but I'm not sure if people would instantly recognise the term.


I think I refer to it more in X2 talk, because it is one of the better ships that would pass into general service after the TREATY begins.
Unlike say, the D5W which is likely to get farmed out to anyone who'll buy it before something irrepairable breaks down...even though it's Phaser suite is truely superb and defensive drone capasity is excellent.
Total war construction and peace time stratgic planning are two very different animals!

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 07:41 pm: Edit

My Kzinti is fine with 4x DC. The reason is it has the drone racks to make up for the not-present 2 DC's.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 09:10 pm: Edit

Quote:

My Kzinti is fine with 4x DC. The reason is it has the drone racks to make up for the not-present 2 DC's.


That's...ummm...nice.


I'm not talking about having 6 DCs...I'm talking about giving the DCs, X1 era or GW era UIM/Defracs in-order to offset the effects of really lousey EW enviroments that can and will pop up ever since Y150 came around...Something that the Original DC didn't have to deal with.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 09:52 pm: Edit

You weren't talkig about 6x DC.

Others were.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, August 29, 2003 - 01:39 am: Edit

Sorry.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, January 23, 2004 - 11:39 am: Edit

First post in six months. We have reached an impass in the photon thread and I'm of the opinion that balancing the photon will become easier once we have a formal disruptor proposal.

If we have a formal disruptor concensus then I haven't heard it (or forgot it). Can someone summarize what the X2 disruptor looks like?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, January 23, 2004 - 11:41 am: Edit

Last I remember, there were a variety of ideas, with one of them being that different races developed different disruptors. IIRC, we had something like:

  1. Klingons with built in UIM/DERFACS, six point base damage
  2. Lyrans with disruptor capacitors
  3. Kzintis with overloadable disruptor cannons
  4. Tholians with disruptors that shoot through webs


Some stuff like that, anyway.

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