Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board

Archive through February 02, 2004

Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: OLD X2 FOLDER: X2 photons: Archive through February 02, 2004

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, February 01, 2004 - 06:04 pm: Edit

I have a problem with a 24 point warhead in any case.

If one can arm an 8 point in 1 turn and a 12 point in one turn then why not a 10? It doesn't make sense to me. Perhaps one could say that if you arm it to ten over two turns then it is stable enough to be called standard load. If you arm it to ten in one turn (fast load) it is unstable and is handled like an OL.

I don't know, this adds yet another exception to the rule.

I think either make it a Ten Base weapon or not.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Sunday, February 01, 2004 - 07:13 pm: Edit

I would prefer no 24 pointer at all. I included that for the folks that do.

as for the 10 point standard....

I really like that option. It gives the Feds that ability to do some little extra damage at range.

Call it what you like....

8 point fastload
10 point standard
12 point fast overload
20 point overload.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, February 01, 2004 - 09:53 pm: Edit

Quote:
•DF only
•No overload exceeding range 8
•2 turn arming gets a better result in some fashion.

•Photon suite appropriately opposes Klingon X2 Disruptors.

Quote:
Said new photon uses same range tables, rules and all abilities and characteristics of earlier generations except power cost and damage potential.

Quantum Torpedo!?!

Quote:
I don't object to any of this, but I do have one caveat. No starting a game with 24 point photons loaded, not even as WSIII (unless the scenario specifies differently).

Is the WS-III Photon arming no more than 4 points of warp rule in the Tourney rules?
If so I think it should become an X2 official rule...I wouldn't like to 24 Point Photons that weren't built with effort...and I'm pro 24 point Photons.

Quote:
That woould be a quick duel I imagine....sheesh.

It depends on what the Klingons have got.
If the Klingons have got Disruptor Caps then they can elect to not directly arm their photons.
If the Fed Run well then you've got 6 Standard Disruptor shots and 6 Overloads when the Fed comes in to make his attack...however unlike the Fed who must find warp power and a lot of it, the Klingon using those Disruptor CAPs can move at speed 32 ( or there abouts ) on both turns.

It'll be very hard for the Fed to not take a lot of damage before her weapons are ready.

Look at what Four 24 point Photons would do to DX and remember that the Klingon XCA will be tougher than that.
Four 24 point Photons don't just vapourise BCHs...maybe a DW but the BPV of the ship will mean that popping one just lets a bunch of others get up close...typical friagte tactics against cruisers apply.

With built in UIM and Disruptor Caps, the Klingon XCA with 6 Disruptors will generate (4/6 x 6 x 3) 12 damage on the first turn if fired at R15 and (5/6 x 6 x 6) 30 on the second for 42 in total and may well have the power and manouverablility to get two Overload shots. If Phasers are fired at R15 there will be an additional ( 6 x 1 (few phasers placed in arc ) 6 points of damage at R15 and a further ( phaser in perfect oblique ( 10 x 2.166 )) 21.66 points of damage for a grand total of 69.66 points of damage.
With Four 24 point Photons fired on the second turn at R8, the Federation ship is looking at (3/6 x 4 x 24) 48 points of damage in total. With Phasers firing at R15 on the earlier turn ( four bearing Ph-5s ) for 8 damage plus an R8 shot using 6 bearing Ph-5s for 21 points of damage, the Fed total damage is 65 points of damage.

The Feds might have crunch power but the Klingons are generating better damage over the two turns AND if the Klingons get 2 R8 shots thanks to their Caps, the Fed is pretty well screwed.

Quote:
Well, if a 24 point warhead is allowed, then overall power on the ship would need to be reduced.

I wouldn't muck with the Warp Engines.
48 Warp engines boxes pays out 24 points of warp each turn to build those Four 24 point photons so the Fed isn't going to be able to beat an X2 Klingon opponent in speed ( or even an X1 Klingon opponent in speed ). The instability rule I put forward (way back) so you can build 6+6 armed Photons that can be held or 4+8 Photons that can't be held but you can not build 8+4 photons, keeps the Federation battle speed fairly low on key turns.
I would look to the number of saucer warp boxes to "tweak" the battle speed of the Fed XCA, rather than the Engines.

Quote:
I think either make it a Ten Base weapon or not.

I like 12 point standards.

Consider a 6 Disruptors with built in UIM and Defracs XCA against four Fastloaded ( but limited to R15 ) if fastloaded ) Photons.

Weapon	R12	R15	R22	R30
Photon	(4x12x2/6) 16	(4x12x1/6) 8	(4x12x1/6x0.5) 4	(4x12x1/6x0.5) 4
Photon Prox	(4x6x4/6) 16	(4x6x3/6) 12	(4x6x3/6x0.5) 6	(4x6x3/6x0.5) 6
Disruptors	(6x3x4/6) 12	(6x3x4/6) 12	(6x2x4/6) 8	(6x2x3/6) 6

In this way the Klingon can't just dance and use her 6 Disruptors all the time every time to wear the Fed down completely...the Klingon will have to take a little damage it'self here and there.
Indeed even if we go to 12 point Photons the Photon only beats 6 Disruptors at R9-12.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, February 01, 2004 - 10:25 pm: Edit

Well, 12 point standards would go with 24 point OLs. THe added problem of 12 point standards would be the 6 point prox. It's a bit too much.

At ten point standards you get a 5 point prox and that's pretty powerful. To reach out to R40 an touch someone with 5 points with a 50% chance is pretty powerful. It gets worse as you add more. A squadron with 12 photons would hit on average with 36 points to R40.

With 5 point proxes it pretty tough at average 30 which would surely weaken shields of an approaching enemy before they could even hope to touch you back with any thing. But an enemy could mitigate that pretty well. The six point prox would tip the scales.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, February 01, 2004 - 11:21 pm: Edit

Quote:
Well, 12 point standards would go with 24 point OLs. THe added problem of 12 point standards would be the 6 point prox. It's a bit too much.

Okay, so if the Feds have a squadron containing 12 Photons, that would mean the Klingons have 18 Disruptors ( 3 XCAs Vs 3XCAs ).

In a GW battle between 12 Photons and 12 Disruptors the R30 damage would be:-
Photons 12 x 3/6 x 4 ( every second turn ) for 24 damage which just about pulls down one forwards sheild.
Disruptors 12 x 3/6 x 2 ( every turn ) for 12 damage per turn or 24 damage in total.
Against 30 box forward shilds this is about 80% although the Disruptors loos a little against reinforcement ( if any ) because the damage is split over time ( and also possibly over different shields ).

During X2 period.
Photons 12 x 6 x 3/6 will be 36 points of damage in a single wollup on the second turn.
DIsruptors will be 18 x 2 x 3/6 for 18 points of damage each turn or 36 points combined.

Since 36 points of sheild damage will only kill 66% of the 48 sheild boxes on an XCA the ability of the Proxy Photon to do hellish damage on the Klingon fleet is actually reduced with respect to the GW period.

A 50% increase in Disruptor numbers really should be opposed by a 50% better Standard and/or proxi photon.

I just don't see 6 point Proxy warheads as being too powerful...It seems to me to be exactly right.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, February 01, 2004 - 11:49 pm: Edit

Exept the disruptor has to face two separate turns of shield reinforcement.

Also, the Fed X1 photon reaches out to 40 so the GW fleet you speak of wont reach that far unless your fleet consists of DNs and/or HBCs (which can only be one of each so that's 10 disruptors out to R40).

You could have a Monitor in the bunch to add six more. Or you could have a Starbase.

Other than that GW disruptors aren't going to reach to R40 like the Photon can. In general, not even close.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 07:11 am: Edit

It would be silly for the GW battle to be fought at R40 because the Photons are also limited to R30 during the GW period...although Perhaps a B10 and C7 might have 12 R40 Disruptors ( I don't have those SSDs in front of me).

In a lot of ways the Photons are worse off in the X1 and X2 period.
Once the Fed XCAs put up 8 points of BTTY to stop the 18 point volley plus 10 SSReo allocated, that can be done twice ( just less than twice ) and then there's nothing that can be done beyond said 10 points of SSReo every turn.
The Klingons can put up 10 SREo plus 10 BTTY and then recharge the BTTY on the off turn.
Fed's take:- 0+1+8+8+8+8+8+8+8+8
Klink's take:- 0+16+0+16+0+16+0+16+0+16
And the Klingons have 5 points of BTTY up their sleeve and had 10 extra points of power on turn 1 for arming SS, movement and the like.

There's a certain disadvantage to firing every second turn after the advent of 3 point BTTYs.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 08:01 am: Edit

Which is why the Fed caan use less energy for the photon when he needs to recharge his Batt's.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 08:24 am: Edit

Quote:
It would be silly for the GW battle to be fought at R40 because the Photons are also limited to R30 during the GW period...although Perhaps a B10 and C7 might have 12 R40 Disruptors ( I don't have those SSDs in front of me).

You're missing the point. What he's saying is that a photon with a 5 point proxy is dishing out way more damage at ranges 30+ than even the best disruptor ship. At 2X, most ships will likely have HW's that will reach range 40. At that range, a disruptor not only hits for less damage with a max of 1 point, but also hits only on a 1-2. So it is less accurate, does only 1/5 the damage, and no longer has its major advantage of firing twice as fast. 5 or six point range 40 proxi photons would be the ultimate base busting weapon. A small squadron of Feds could sit back and pelt a target at range 40 with impunity. No negative EW shifts; they don't move, do they, so they have plenty of power for EW games. A fleet with a dozen of these photons would dish out 30 points per turn on the average. A few turns of that, and even a starbase starts to look bad.

Best keep proximities at 4 points. Not everything about the photon has to be changed or improved.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 10:13 am: Edit

I'm for an overload prox torp to help against EW. I'm for prox or no prox decision at time of firing (rather than EA). I'm also for 180 degree photon arcs.

There are ways to improve the photon without changing its damage.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 10:48 am: Edit

I was trying to illustrate a five point prox is quite powerful enough and so six or more is over the top.

I still advocate for X2 the base Ten Photon (5 point prox), 12 Point max Fast Load, 16 Point max holdable OL with 17-20 point Critical OL; not holdable. (Fastloads cannot be made larger, they could be held over a turn break and then added to).

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 12:38 pm: Edit

Loren, I'm not sure your response was direct at mine but my overloaded prox would have a short maximum range. Probably 8 but I'd consider 12-15. The reason you would use it is to increase your odds of doing some damage.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 02:34 pm: Edit

I would like to make an observation concerning the 5 point proximity photons.

namely it represents a 25% increase over the 4 point proximity photons.

While it may indeed "be over the top" as loren said...but please note that shield strengths of virtually all races ships and bases inncreased materially thru the various time periods of the game...MY to Pre GW, GW, post GW to X1.

The defenses increased materially but the damage potential of the photon torp did not progress except to increase the number of launchers(tubes).

I would suggest that for ships with 4 photon tubes, a 5 point proximity photon is most definately not over the top. it is those ships with 5+ tubes or fleet/squadron actions with many photons available that the "problem" becomes noticable.

Even then it may not be that much of a problem except when the Fed player goes looking for the biggest enemy ship that he can kill with 1 volley on the first turn of the battle. this is why (if I may be so bold as to remind people) that certain ships disappeared from the Klingon order of battle (ships like E3's and E4's) as they were too small to survive against federation battle lines armed with 4 point proximity photons.

Intuitively, 40 to 50 point BPV ships couldnt survive those battles so in X2 generation fleet battles any thing less that 50 to 62 BPV ships should also be vulnerable to ranged proximity photon fire.

If a "normal" fed battle line in X2 has (I'm guessing here) 10 ships (say a command ship, 3 heavy cruisers, 3 light cruisers and 3 destroyers or frigates) there could be between 34 to 42+ photon tubes in total (depending on the ships involved and how many tubes each ship has)...that means at a 50% accuracy rate (assuming all other things being equal) the potential damage such a fleet volley might put out could vary between 68 damage points and 84 (for 4 point prox's) and 85 to 105) for 5 point prox's.

the question is, is this damage potential truly "over the top" or just "pushing the envelope"?

(especially as the 5 pointer min damages is just 1 point more than the 4 points max damage.)

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 04:58 pm: Edit

Of course the problem with increasing the odds of a photon hit is that a photon will hit more (duh), which means that they are even more powerful than they were before (duh), which means they're REALLY more powerful when we add in our favorite heavier warhead. The scales just crashed into the Fed's favor (okay by me I'm a Fed player).

If we consider increasing warhead yield (over time), we really need to avoid increasing the to-hit odds. If we want to increase to-hit odds, we need to keep warhead yield (over time) the same or very nearly the same.

If we go with the heavier yields then all we're doing is goosing up the photons. The result is spectacular notional explosions and starships that people want to steer shy of (okay that's kind of the point), but nothing really jumps off the page at you.

Loren's got something there with the pulse-fire photons. We can increase the to-hit odds by offering more opportunities to fire (just as with the fast-loads in X1), but we shouldn't allow greater yields over a given period of time under this mode.

John brings up the concern of dishing out overload damage at greater than overload ranges using this pulse-fire mode. This is a very valid balance concern. The logical way to overcome this is to limit the range (e.g. up to 8-12 hexes).

Okay as I suggested before, let the SC3+ ships have the heavier photons and the SC4- ships have the pulse-fire mode. I think the dynamic aspect of pulse-fire will give small boys (destroyers and frigates) new life for X2, while retaining the stand-off crunch power for cruisers and big decks.

If we want to go with a base 10/20 photon for X2, okay fine. How will we incorporate X-fix rules or modify them to fit 10/20 photons? Do we need to? Would taking away the X-fix rules from X2 photons give X1 photons an illogical (and unfair) advantage over X2?

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 05:18 pm: Edit

The basic streangth of the Federation fleet is that allll ships use the same basic weapon with the same basic ranges, damage, power, etc. Changing that is very unFed like.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 05:56 pm: Edit

It already did change. X1 photons can reach range 40. Pre-X ships only reach 30. So long as Feds continue to use photons of some kind, I don't see a problem. I have no objections to Loren's idea, either. A spread of eight smaller photons fired as a shotgun would be kind of neat.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 07:01 pm: Edit

Even if we have a squadron of Fed ships with 12 Photons the Klingons will have a squadron of 3 XCAs with 18 Disruptors.

Hitting on 1-3 for 6 damage every second turn ( fastloads are restricted to R15 ) at range 40, the damage output would be 3/6 x 12 x 6x 0.5 = 18 damage.

The Disruptors will sit back and fire for 1-2 with 1 point of damage. So the damage output will be 2/6 x 1 x 18 = 6 damage per turn.

Against a Base that seems like a fairly powerful ability, 36 damage every other turn...but what rules apply to bases theses days...can the use Special sensors without blinding them with fire?...A Klingon base would be pretty good at firing on the Fed's off turn and generating EW on the off for a +2 shift...a base would also be able to send forwards a few warships and loan EW to them?...and would still have vestages of PF and/of Fighter capabilities.

Furthermore, what is the effective range of the X2 Ph-4 analog???...if the effective range of the Ph-5 is 8 compared to 5, then the effective range of the Ph-8 (?) will be 32 which puts a serious phaser hurt on ships at R40.

With improved shields, ( 48/30 ) 60% over GW levels and huge levels of reserve warp power, the X2 base is probably as good at withstanding Fed Proxy waves as GW bases were GW Proxy waves.

We can always make X2 Disruptors gain from defracs all the way out to R40, as a last resort...

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 07:13 pm: Edit

Sure, that's the answer...just keep beefing up everything.

God, where does it stop?

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 07:17 pm: Edit

Theoretically the last resort would be to restict the heavier proxy torps from firing further than R30.

Although I would say that probably it's that the R40 Disruptors is lousey at those ranges rather than proxy photons too good and those ranges can only be held during base assaults and bases probably won't look anything like GW bases.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 07:29 pm: Edit

Let's give every Fed ship one 64pt photon torpedo with a FH arc. They only have one chance to hit with regular to-hit odds, so they could miss with it. But if they hit . . .

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 07:32 pm: Edit

Seriously...if it's not a base assault then the non federation vessels can move.

If it is a Base Assault then how often is the defender just a base!?!...and not a base plus a couple of POLs and a couple of FFs and a DD ( and a CA if it's a starbase ) and some PFs and Some Fighters, that the base can send forth under EW suport ( 15 hexes puts the ships well within R30 if the Feds are firing proxies from R40 ).

I don't think the JUST A BASE battles are going to occour often enough to make the Federation base busting ability a real concern and I don't think it would be any worse than MY period Proxy Photons against an MY period base even if such battles were frequently played.

And who's to say the Federation Neighbours didn't do away with bases on the Federation boarder in the X2 period as they found Federation base busting to be increadably powwerful.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 07:44 pm: Edit

MJC: I think that would be counter intuitive since proximity fuses are all about long range fire.
==================================
The Medium photon could still fire to R30 and would set the Fed pace at that range. Encouraging them to fight at those ranges instead of conquering the galaxy at R40 is a good balance issue.

It would also lend to making the small units in a Fed fleet really useful. These units would sweep in a mop up, applying fire here and there as needed. A 1/4 or 1/2 turn delay between firing will keep them from using the double shot as an even bigger crunch weapon.

PLUS, each photon system would be two boxes and the firing tube would be destroyed with the last hit. This would make the small units take damage much better. Of course, this system might actually be more expensive than the main line system SC3+ units carry and would be reflected in their BPV.

Also, please remember that I'm talking SC4 units. These would have two or three tubes max...not four.

Light Cruiser might have two plus two, which would make for a very interesting unit.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 07:59 pm: Edit

If two box photons are too robust then here is an interesting option.

OPTIONAL MEDIUM PHOTON DAMAGE PROCEDURE:

When one of a pair of photon boxes is hit the ENEMY rolls one die. If the result is 1-3 the tube is damaged thus disabling the undamaged box.

The tube can be repaired by repairing the damaged photon box at which point both photon boxes would be opperational (given the second remains undamaged.)

A disabled photon box can still absorb a damage point as any other system.

This procedure is NOT used in the case of a succesfull H&R (and it is not possible to beam into a photon tube).

It is not possible to damage the Tube only by any means and disable both photon boxes.

In the case where the tube survives the first damage point it is destroyed with the second. It then is repaired with the first box.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 08:34 pm: Edit

I dislike the 5-point prox precisely because it strengthens the long-distance hit-and-run game so I tend to want to keep standard photons at 8-pointers.

The standard photon rules already limit the energy a photon can start the game with (it works out to 6 points per tube). Does X1 change that? If X1 doesn't we don't have to either.

We can write rules that say that all photon-using ships start assuming turn 0 was the second turn of arming unless specified by a scenario. Even if (and I say if) we go for 3rd-turn arming photons that means the XCA has to dump 24 points of WARP into his photons to get all 4 photons to 24 pointers.

I also like the idea of 21+ photons not being holdable in addition to the critical overload restrictions put to 17-20 point overloads (photons don't fire next turn or whatever).

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 11:18 pm: Edit

I would rather have 12 point standard Photons that were limited to R30 and thus Proxy 6 point warheads were also limited to R30 with 8 point standards limited to whatever range the X2 Disruptor is limited to ( R50 anyone!?!) , than keeping the standard at 8 because Disruptors are such poor weapons in the R31-40 range braket.

One big question...what is in X1 that stops a Klingon BTX from being busted by R40 shots from a Fed CX and FFX combined???

If the answer is that the Feds have a big advantage that is not offset by something and there will just be SOME situations where a thing has a BAD BPV based on the situation, then the same will be true of X2 bases and Fed Photon arming.
..... If the answer is that the Other Klingon ships at the base and the Fighters & PFs provide a PSUEDO-MOBILITY to the base that allows the base to fight dispite the weapon disparity then that will also be true of X2 bases or at least X2 bases if we are careful to provide those Psuedo-Mobility systems.

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