Archive through February 05, 2004
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: OLD X2 FOLDER: X2 photons: Archive through February 05, 2004
By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 06:49 am: Edit

Quote:

You can arm as 3+2 or 2+3 or you could use fractional accounting...I think most people use fractional accounting and those that don't can arm with full points if (s)he chooses.



You can only do that with overloads. (E4.21) states quite clearly that standards are armed as 2+2...no other combination. Assuming we keep the rules for arming the same, standards will have to be armed as 2 1/2 + 2 1/Not a big problem, but something to be aware of. While there are those who use fractional accounting, there are others who don't like it.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 07:53 am: Edit

Quote:

IMHO chrunch power is not the be all and end all of Federation arming...the first 18-36 internals count...then next 36-18 ( actually 36-48 on an X2 cruiser ) don't so cruch power ain't so crash hot.



Gee, I'll have to remember that next time I take 90 or so internals. Only the first 18-36 matter. Whew, and here I was thinking I'd been hit badly...

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 08:50 am: Edit

Don't try to argue about definitions. Believe me the most important thing is to track a weapon through 6 turns. Heavy weapons like Photons/Disruptors are fired in groups of four.

This is how I've built/designed all of my SG weapons.

Normal loads: POWER/DAMAGE=ratio of power to damage.
Photon
R0-1: NA
R2: 1.66
r3-4: 1.33
R5-8: 1-1
STD, R9-12: 0.66
PROX,R9-12: 0.66
STD, R13-40: 0.33
PROX, R13-30: 0.5

disruptor std (Derfacs included):
r0: NA
r1: 2.08
r2: 1.66
r3-4: 1.33
r5-15: 1.25
r16-22: 0.5
r23-30: 0.33

So any DF weapons should fall withing these guide lines. the Fast loading photon still falls into the same power/damage ratio except that its been compressed.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 09:31 am: Edit

One more idea for the "pot"...

Since Photons are an old and established weapons system dating back to the beginning of SFB, is it "possible" that an early improvement that was determined to be unneeded at the time could be "rediscovered"?

For example, early opponents of the federation would have armor and relatively weak sheilds. a standard photon could drop a 5 box shield and do 3 points of internal damage (though granted against armor). an armor piercing or HEAT round wouldnt be needed or desirable since 2 photon hits would do a much better job of damaging the target.

move ahead decades to after the General War. The situation changed dramatically. An armor (or sheild piercing) round would have definite advantages.

just to "float" another quick idea, what if federation scientists could improve the photon torpedo so that instead of a massive photonic explosion that inflicts 8 points of (for lack of a better term to use) 'general damage' that affects shields, armor, and internal systems boxes (in that order) and resolving 100% of each "layer" before moving on to the next, this new round pierces the shield do a little damage but other wise leave much of the shields intact.

This would bring back the "leaky shield" rule that seems to have been forgotten, but was part of the original game system.

to give an example, what if this new round (call it a Shield Piercing Photon Torpedo - SPPT) were designed to target a thin and extremely powerful stream of energy at the target in such a way that (out of the total explosive force of the detonation)

- 25% would be applicable to the targets General Shield reinforcement, (and no other damage if the targets General Reinforcement is not present, or was previously resolved as damage in the current impulse)
- 25% would be applicable to Specific Sheild Reinforcement, (and no other damage if the targets Specific Reinforcement is not present, or was previously resolved as damage in the current impulse).
- 25% would be applicable to the facing shield, (and no other damage if the shield is not present, raised or previously destroyed by damage in the current impulse.)
- 25% would be applicable to resolve as damage ti interior boxes as per the Damage allocation chart (DAC).

So, for a standard photon (SPPT) 2 points against any General Shield Reinforcement, 2 points resolved against Specific Shield Reinforcement, 2 points against the facing shield and 2 points interior damage.

no overload or proximity functions.

edit

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 09:41 am: Edit

Sounds alot like the Quari kinetic cannon. Resolved a bit differently, but similar.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 10:09 am: Edit

just looking to give the X2 photons another 'perk' without killing the game in the process.

the problem is fractional accounting. might have to limit this to "traditional photons" or those that are divisible by 4 (assuming standard war heads, no overloads) if a standard 12 point war head were ever introduced into the game.

edit

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 11:14 am: Edit

Mike: Since X rules are typically addendums to existing rule the X2 rule for arming standards above 8 could be written as:

To arm a photon to as a standard load simply add the require extra energy on the second turn. Thus to arm a 9 point standard would be 2+2.5 and a 10 point standard would be 2+3. Any energy added beyond 2 points on the first turn would go towards overloading but could be dropped (ignored)during the second turns EA.

==================

I had another thought regarding 9-10 point standards. If you Fast Load them they are unstable and treated as Overloads. This would be a way to further tone them back if needed after playtesting. I like this option too because it goes back to encuraging the use two turn arming and prevents the every turn, R40, 5 point proxi barrage.

You could still have a every turn, R40, 4 point proxi barrage. Same as X1.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 02:20 pm: Edit

Agreed there.

I'm still not fond of 10-point standards but if you are going to go that route, there should be no problem doing 2+3 or 3+2. (2+2?)

With the standard-tech photon, SVC didn't want people doing 3+1 areming sequences 3+1 becomes headache as to whether it's a standard or overload...

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 02:31 pm: Edit

John, oh yes, the 8 point load would STILL be a legal loading option. To be clear, I propose that warheads of 8, 9, or 10 be stable and handled as Standard load.

Yes, the minimum first turn loading is 2 points. The maximum first turn loading for ANY standard is 2 points. Any energy beyond 2 points makes the warhead an OL, unless that energy is ignored (dropped and not counted towards warhead strength).

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 02:40 pm: Edit

Why can I not do 2.5 or 3 for the first turn of my 10 point standard?

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 02:45 pm: Edit

I don't see a reason myself.

Loren was talking about first-turn minimums, not maximums.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 03:16 pm: Edit

No I was talking maximums. The reason is I felt that a 10 point standard is a powerful thing and requiring the larger portion of power on the second turn would balance that some. It also removes some of the confusion about what goes to OL and what defines standard.

Before there was only one standard. Now there is three.

When loading a GW photon if you load 3 points the first turn you are loading a OL since the second cannot be one point.

I didn't want to see X2 ships loading 3 on the off turn and 2 on the attack turn. With the output being 10/5p I think this is handing too much to a power rich X2 vessel.

If we were talking a refit for GW ships I would propose it differently but since this is for X2 ships I think that it should be required to spend the extra energy on the final turn. X2 should be able to handle it fairly well anyway. But why should such a ship get an energy break?

I do see the logic of an even loading and could be convinced that 2.5 could be allocated the first turn if no one agrees with my reasoning for 2+3. I really think that 3+2 is the wrong way to go, however.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 03:39 pm: Edit

we are talkiing about aa difference of 4 power...is meaningless on an overpoowered ship like the X2s you guys have created.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 03:57 pm: Edit

The same would apply for X1 ships. But since X2 will have plenty of power (even if it was the same as X1) why should there be a power savings break? Add it keeps it simple, IMO.

X1 and X2 don't need power savings breaks.

IMO, if you want to hit the enemy for 10 points past R8 (or with a 5 point proxi) you should have to arm it over two turns AND pay the extra cost on the second turn.

The option of the 8 point standard also remains viable in that you can fast load an 8 point standard or proxi.

=====================

Hmm, that brings up a question. If you fast load an 8 point photon and don't fire it you normally can hold it. At this point you should be able to upgrade it to a 10 point standard by allocating holding power (1 point) and then adding the additional power required (1 point). In this way you could get a ten point photon for 2 energy on the second turn. This seems fair since you had to waste a point (effectively) the previous turn. However, by spending that point you get an able photon thorough out the arming process.

Heh, a pre-proposal term paper!

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 04:13 pm: Edit

There has never really been a limitt on thee power cycle fr the photon....why do advanced ships have one?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 04:31 pm: Edit

Sure there has. A GW ship can only load a standard photon by 2+2.

Adding an additional warhead level within standard complicates things. I want to allow the photon to have increased power/flexability but not for free. Call it a design limitation that in order to get a stable 10 point warhead you have to follow certain proceedures.

Of course, all the old loading options are still available. Loading 8 points, and 11-16 points are all done the same way.

You can fast load a 9-10 point but it is handled as an OL.

The short answer is that the limitations are only on the added capabilities over X1 photons.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 08:48 pm: Edit

Okay, X2 Advanced Photon Torpedoes (APHOT):

Fast load a standard (8pt) or proximity (4pt) for 4 warp in one turn. Can be held. No die roll bonus. All Size Classes (SC). Limit range to 12 hexes.

Standard load a standard (8pt) or proximity (4pt) for 2+2 warp over two turns. Can be held. X2-photons get an automatic die roll bonus (-1) when fired as GW-photons. All SC. Standard range limits.

Standard load a heavy standard (10pt) or heavy proximity (5pt) for 2+3 or 3+2 over two turns. Can be held. No die roll bonus. SC3+ only? Standard range limits.

Fast overload up to 12pts over one turn. Can be held. No die roll bonus. All SC. Limit range to 12 hexes.

Standard overload up to 16pts over two turns. Can be held. X2-photons get an automatic die roll bonus (-1) when fired as GW-photons. All SC. Overload range limits.

Heavy overload up to 20pts over two turns. Can be held? No die roll bonus. SC3+ only? Overload range limits.

(Optional) Critical overload up to 24pts over three turns. Arming power must exceed 20pt yield on turn #2 but can't be fired until turn #3. Can't be held. Die roll bonus or is the 24pts enough benefit? SC3+ only. Overload range limits.

How does "pulse-fire" or "shotgun" or what-have-you work? The multiple die rolls would constitute a die-roll bonus. SC4- only? Limit range to 12 hexes.

"Slowton" mode? "Shield cracker" mode?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 09:06 pm: Edit

Quote:

Standard load a standard (8pt) or proximity (4pt) for 2+2 warp over two turns. Can be held. X2-photons get an automatic die roll bonus (-1) when fired as GW-photons. All SC. Standard range limits.



I have a real problem with there being any modifications to the to hit. X2 ships, like X1 will get the ECCM modifier where if they can gain a -1 ECCM then they get a -1 to hit.

Hmmm, that gives me an idea. Post in X2 EW.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 09:15 pm: Edit

Quote:

You can only do that with overloads. (E4.21) states quite clearly that standards are armed as 2+2...no other combination. Assuming we keep the rules for arming the same, standards will have to be armed as 2 1/2 + 2 1/Not a big problem, but something to be aware of. While there are those who use fractional accounting, there are others who don't like it.


4+Holding already violates the requirement for 2+2...I'ld say we can allow standards to be loaded without perfectly bal;anced arming...just require a minimum of 2 on each turn ( when armed as a two turn weapon ) and explain E4.21 as meaning that in the X2 period.


Quote:

Gee, I'll have to remember that next time I take 90 or so internals. Only the first 18-36 matter. Whew, and here I was thinking I'd been hit badly...


Beleive me...with an XBB and a running ASIF, 90 internals won't be much worse than 36.

I think we both can be facetious all day, but I think it'll be easier when SVC reviews these threads if we don't.


Quote:

the problem is fractional accounting. might have to limit this to "traditional photons" or those that are divisible by 4 (assuming standard war heads, no overloads) if a standard 12 point war head were ever introduced into the game.


Just write in the X2 rules that there are standard photons and heavy standard photons and E4.21 only apllies to standards and that heavy standards simply have a minium of 2, so 2+3, 2.5+2.5 & 3+2 all become elligable ( of 2.75+2.25 or 2.75+2.25 ) for arming heavy standards.


Quote:

I had another thought regarding 9-10 point standards. If you Fast Load them they are unstable and treated as Overloads. This would be a way to further tone them back if needed after playtesting.


Probably not unstable, probably just unable to be hold as a standard but can be held as an oberload ( you can hold 12 point overloads under the new X2 rules ) and can be added to in the second turn.


Quote:

You could still have a every turn, R40, 4 point proxi barrage. Same as X1.


XE4.5, XE10.2 in the new X1 rules.


Quote:

When loading a GW photon if you load 3 points the first turn you are loading a OL since the second cannot be one point.

I didn't want to see X2 ships loading 3 on the off turn and 2 on the attack turn. With the output being 10/5p I think this is handing too much to a power rich X2 vessel.


[Sarcasm mode on] Yeah, those two extra points of warp power on the turn of attack ( 2 per tube instead of 2.5 ) are really going to counter balance the fact that the might be able to get overload shots at you. [Sarcasm mode off]
Four R16 10 point Proxies yealds (3/6 x 4 x 5) 10 points of damage.
The Klingon who doesn't need warp to arm get to R15 and fires (6 x 4/6 x 3) 12.
The Klingon under X1 can hold the standards for one power and do the above damage.
The Fed arming is 4 x 2.5+2.5
The Klingon arming could be 6 x 0+2 but could just as easily be 6 x 2+1.

We're not talking about 2 points of power at ranges where these ships are going to do anything other than plink eachothers shields.

Quote:

IMO, if you want to hit the enemy for 10 points past R8 (or with a 5 point proxi) you should have to arm it over two turns AND pay the extra cost on the second turn.


IMO the damage of the 10 pointer is so weak when compaired to shields (48/40/40/40) and the BTTY ( 15 points from 5 boxes ) that the extra four ( or 2 ) points of save warp aren't going to be meaningful so there's no point in putting another highly restrictive rule on the photon just to stop it over powering the Disruptor.
Four Fastload 5 point Proxy Photons at R15 are costing 20 points of warp ( total ) per turn and generating 10 points of damage every turn.
Six Disruptors at R15 will cost 12 points of power per turn and generate 12 points of damage.
1) Over Restricting the two turn Photon arming isn't going to be constructive.
2) Since neither strike does more damage than either ship will have in BTTY power, combat at these ranges are something of a mute point.


Quote:

You can fast load a 9-10 point but it is handled as an OL.


I would say that the R15 fastload limit stops the 9-10 pointers from killing Bases with fire every turn.
So give the player the option of firing a 9-10 pointer fastload as a fastload standard ( R15 limit ) or overload at the owning player's discreassion.
If the Klingon stick with 6 Disruptors on their ships then the Fed will really nead something to compete in the R9-15 range braket.
Sure 13.33 points of damage from fastload R9-12 fire of 10 point photons is more than the 12 points of damage one can expect from 6 Disruptors at that range, but since it drops to 10 at R13+ ( if using proxies and 8.33 if not ) and the Disruptors don't I would say that the weapons are pretty much balanced in that situation so 10 point Fastloads are okay at firing as standard fastloads.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 11:36 pm: Edit

Loren, good point. Well then the automatic die roll bonus is semi-automatic. It is not cumulative with the EW bonus, which I did state in my older post. You get the EW bonus, but not the photon bonus. If you want to get really fancy you can state that if you use the photon bonus it is not available during the next standard firing (i.e. photon bonus every other standard firing).

Basically the only die rolls that get the bonus are torpedoes fired like GW-photons. This is further incentive to use the standard two-turn photons.

Also on the second turn you're going to have to note on the Allocation Form if you are arming a heavy standard (10pt) or an overload. I recommend requiring 2 warp on Turn #1 then 3 warp on Turn #2 for heavy standards/proximities. I think it'll keep with convention.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, February 05, 2004 - 01:38 am: Edit

I don't think you need to mark the EAF with heavy standard ( H ? ), you could just give the firer of a 9-10 point Photon to option of declaring it to be a Heavy STandard or an Overload.

It's been so long that people load Standards during the GW and then Jam 0.5 points of reserve warp power into them to build 9 point overloads if they REALLY NEED to shoot at R0-1 that we probably don't need to make the restriction coninue.
With five 3 Point BTTYs on an XCA, you need 2 points of reserve warp to turn Four 10 point Photons into four 11 point Overloaded Photons and 4 points of reserve warp to turn four 9 point heavy standard Photons into 11 point Overloaded Photons ( and the same can be said of 13s if there is a 12 point standard ) which is so easy to organise that you just might as well give the Photon a break and allow the firer to choose if a 9-10 point Photon is a heavy standard or an overload at the point of fire.

Disruptors get to choose if they are UIM, Defracs or not atr the point of fire, why not give the Photon a similar ability.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Thursday, February 05, 2004 - 07:08 am: Edit

Quote:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
Gee, I'll have to remember that next time I take 90 or so internals. Only the first 18-36 matter. Whew, and here I was thinking I'd been hit badly...


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


Beleive me...with an XBB and a running ASIF, 90 internals won't be much worse than 36.

I think we both can be facetious all day, but I think it'll be easier when SVC reviews these threads if we don't



Lets not even mention XBBs.

The photon needs to be a simple and straight forward weapon without a lot of perculiar rules behind it. So if a 10pt is std. then the arming needs to be 2.5 a turn. Simple and straight forward.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, February 05, 2004 - 08:22 am: Edit

No kidding. All these extra rules just make it too hard to use. Keep it simple; leave the things at their normal 8 point standard, and allow fast loading of any size warhead you want. Add in the 17-20 point 3-turn heavy overload, and that ought to be enough to satisfy anyone.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, February 05, 2004 - 10:27 am: Edit

The over all rule aren't that complicated. It just appears so, I think, because there's been so many questions and refinements (all good).

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, February 05, 2004 - 11:51 am: Edit

So what exactly is the current proposal?

I'm beginning to lose the thread here...

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