Archive through February 07, 2004
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board:
The "X" Files:
Integrated Proposals:
Archive through February 07, 2004
I got it
Me, too. I'll put a link to it on my page and email it to you so that you can post it where you like.
I got a stupid and gradiose idea of setting up a central clearing house for X2 so I'm sorting stuff both by creator and ship. I'll eventually have a "Fed XCA comparison page" up so everybody can look at everybody's ideas side by side.
...and do the same for other prominent rules and ships.
A link to the page as a whole...
http://www.vorlonagent.com/sfb/x2.htm
And to Jeff's stuff
http://www.vorlonagent.com/sfb/x2/jefftonglet/jeffs-x2-ships.htm
Started some work on a new proposal for the Feds based on the stuff written in P6. Here's a quick rundown:
Federation X2 DD
Started with a DD as it's a good medium sized ship. Where noted, a particlar new system or rule is credited to the originator (apologies in advance if I missed anything).
Weapons
- The P5 is used exclusively, covering FX and RX arcs, per SVC's description in P6. Cost is 1.5, may rapid-pulse with X-Aegis as 2 P6's. May be hastily repaired as a P1 (Everyone for the chart really, but J. Trauger for the specific abilities described).
- The Photon uses a base damage of 10 instead of 8. The chart is the same as X1. Fastloads are limited to 12, normal overloads to 16. "Hot Loads" of up to 20 points may be used, but any tube that fires such a torpedo must wait a period of time before firing again. For hot loads of up to 18 points, the time is 16 impulses. Over 18 points is 32 impulses.(Mike R.)
- X2 Drone Racks use two magazines for faster reload times. (Tos Crawford) No data yet on the actual drone frames.
- X2 ADD's use a modified to-hit chart with a slightly longer range.
X2 Shields
X2 Shields are modestly more powerful than X1, but have a self-repair capacity. Each damaged shield can repair a number of points per turn for free, exclusive of CDR repair. A shield cannot be repaired if undamaged, nor can it repair above it's normal maximum. Amount of repair is based on size class:
- SC 4: 3 points per shield per turn
- SC 3: 5 points per shield per turn
- SC 2: 8 points per shield per turn*
*This assumes any SC 2 ships appear in X2
X2 New Systems
- X2 Ships use the S-Bridge (Loren Knight).
- X2 Ships can use double-power reactors signified by a "2" in the notation. These produce twice the power of a normal reactor, but take up the same space. They cost twice as much to repair.
- X2 Ships have a Multi Function System (MFS) option. These are boxes on the SSD that can be used in any turn as a number of systems of the players choice. Some rules apply:
- The system used must be applied to all contigous boxes on the SSD; they cannot be split.
- The system used must be one the ship already possesses.
- The system used must be an internal system; shuttles or probes cannot be duplicated because they leave the ship.
- The sytem used cannot be power, or weapons. If used as cargo at the start of a scenario and this cargo is full, it must remain cargo until the space is destroyed and repaired, or the cargo is used up or removed.
- The system chosen is noted on the EA form; time of change from a previous system is on impulse one of the new turn in the allocate energy step.
- X2 Labs have a +1 bonus on seeking weapon identification and on information gathering.
- X2 Batteries are unchanged from X1.
That's about it for now. Still exploring other options like special movement rules and such, but this is a start, at least for me.
Federation XCM (XCM+, XCMC, XCMC+):
This Medium Cruiser is the Fed mainline cruiser assuming the role of the pre-war CA. In XCM form it has a command rating of 8. The flag upgrade in the XCMC gives it a command rating of 9. The + refit converts four lab into four AWR. The center warp is attached to the saucer; when detached the saucer has a 0.5 MC. The aft hull is a fully capable starship when detached and has a 1.0 MC. This ship has X-Aegis and double drone control.
Photons:
The standard photon is base 10. Overloads can be dialed up to 20 damage. The range brackets are modified slightly to improve mid-range performance. The most significant change to battlefield tactics was the expanded FH photon arc.
The proximity fuse was significantly enhanced. It still does half warhead damage (round down) but now functions at ranges from 4-40. The proximity fuse can now be used with overloads from range 4-8 to combat difficult EW situations. All X2 torpedoes come installed with both the standard fuse and the proximity fuse; the decision on which fuse to use is made at time of launch, not during EA.
With all of the improvement to the photon the Feds felt that three forward photons was the equivalent of four standard photons allowing the fourth photon allowed by treaty to be targeted aft. With unusual forethought the Fed designers placed the hard points used by the drone racks in a location where they could be swapped out for additional photons, should an increase in direct firepower ever become necessary.
Phasers:
The Feds didn’t bother with the P6 as the X-P1 was already in production and considered more flexible given its offensive and rapid pulse defensive abilities. The P5s will function as defined by the committee.
SIF:
The structural integrity field is a new function of DAMCON. The SIF is powered during EA up to a maximum of the current DAMCON rating or to the amount of remaining hull boxes, whichever is less. When powered internal damage that would normally destroy hull, cargo or command facilities would instead be counted against the SIF on a 1 damage for 1 power ratio. Once the SIF has absorbed the allotted damage for the turn it stops absorbing damage and cannot be recharged until the following EA.
NWO:
Factory new these ships had the NWO configured as Cargo, and this is assumed in their BPV. The NWO have external access and can be converted into G2X drone racks, fighter bays or fighter mech-tractors for heavy fighters, but not without violating the treaty.
SSD:
http://www.vorlonagent.com/sfb/x2/Fed-XCA.htm
http://www.geocities.com/raperm2002/XCM2.gif
John,
I just sent you four reworked SSDs.
Fed XCA, Klingon XCA, Kzinti XCA, Hydran XCA.
Please put them up on your site.
If you want to remove the previous versions to save space, go ahead.
That X2 DD is way underpointed. I can see it easily outclassing a C8. The combination of excess power, better batteries, extra HETs, significantly better phasers, EW bonusus, ASIF, shield repair, etc. Its 4 X2-photons are way better than 6 old-style DSR.
It's at least 300.
Okay, based on some discussion in the photon/disruptor thread, I went ahead and worked up what I personally would like for X2, at least the first “set” of X2 ships prior to any Xork induced refits; say, those appearing around Y205. None of this is meant to represent anyone else's plans or wishes...just my own. Forgive the length of the post, but it’s best to be thorough.
Federation X2 proposal
In a nutshell, this is what I envisioned for X2. The X2 fleet is going to be small, but of high-quality ships. This bears a great deal on how they would be designed. Going back to pre-general war designs, you find that they are much more general purpose. I wanted to bring that feel back to the ships for X2. They will have a great deal of work to do, and not all of that will be combat. Yes, they need to be combat effective. But they aren’t warships, not in the sense that the 1st generation X-ships were. They also should show the effects of “lessons learned” from years of conflict; both in changes made to older systems and designs and in new innovations that are greatly different. All of these changes should enhance the basic feel and flavor of the race in question. That is, a Fed should be like a Fed; a Klingon, like a Klingon. With that in mind, this ship is what I came up with as my own personal vision for the Federation X2CA.
Federation X2CA, Y205
Now, a few notes.
- Phaser arcs are greatly enhanced, both per SVC’s comments in P6 and my own opinion that the Fed ship suffered from a poor oblique stance in previous generations. By expanding the arcs of the phasers, you can mount less but still get the same coverage. The P5 is an expensive system, even for a smaller fleet; so, it stands to reason that wider arcs would be the favored approach in phaser layout. Also, note that the P5 on my ships does not cost 1.5 power to fire…it costs one, and the P6 costs ½. The reason behind this is that in my vision, the P5 is simply the P1 but with much better fire control systems, just as the P2 is a P1 with less accurate ones. Repair cost is higher, and they do have a three-point capacitor system. I’ll get to the reason for this shortly.
- The ship has modest increases in shielding, but no more than a few points in each. Added protection is the ASIF system, marked on the SSD. On low levels, for 2 points of power, it will protect against the first 4 hull or cargo hits each turn a ship takes. On high, for 4 points of power, it will defend against the first six. It will also add one to the breakdown rating of a ship when operational. The system itself is literally built into the ship, and so cannot be targeted for H&R raids. But, damage over time can reduce it’s usefulness. In this case, any FLAG hit on the DAC will destroy one box of the ASIF. That makes it a very resistant system, but does allow for it to be damaged. A damaged ASIF cannot be repaired during a scenario. As it is damaged, mark of boxes from the right end; that is, the first point it takes means it’s high power setting now only protects against five hits, not six. Smaller ships have smaller ASIF systems in place. This one, on the XCA, is the largest.
- The XCA carries no Flag bridge. NO ship in X2 carries one, in fact. There are two reasons. For one, as I said before, fleets will be very small. For another, the XCA has a command rating of 10. These two factors combined essentially remove the need for a Flag bridge.
- All X2 ships carry at least a box of cargo. They will have need of longer “legs” to cover territory once patrolled by sizeable fleets, and this is reflective of that need.
- Power. The X2CA here has only four more produced power than the CX, and one more battery. Doesn’t sound like much. However, this number was carefully picked. As I said before about the P5, the reduced power cost leaves a bit more excess energy for X2CA than the CX would have. This excess power is there for a reason. The primary failing of X1 ships was that when their batteries were gone or depleted, they turned into over-gunned GW ships. The X2 ship has more generated power to work with, to keep those batteries charged more effectively. It also allows the X2 ship to move more quickly, using speed and mobility as a major part of its defense. The CX could arm all phasers, standard photons, and pay housekeeping and move at a speed of around 18-20. The X2CA can do the same job, and move at a speed of 24. This, then, was a major goal in the design; remove the dependence on batteries while not drastically increasing engine or reactor size. 3 point capacitors, a bit more power, and a standard 1 point energy cost for the P5 accomplishes this nicely. Where the CX has to recharge his many but less efficient phasers after 2 turns, the XCA only has to do it after three, and has 50% less phasers to deal with. It can maintain a higher battle speed, but without added power. The trade off, of course, is that with less phasers, it hurts more when you loose one.
- The photon torpedo is both greatly changed, and not. It does not increase warhead strength past 16. Not yet, anyway…that may come later. In Y205, the photon still does a base damage of 8, with 4 point proximities. The major changes involve flexibility. Proximities no longer have to be designated on turn two of firing; any standard load can be designated as a standard or proximity at the owning player’s choice the instant of firing. Standards can now also be fired at range 0-1, albeit not as accurately as overloads. Further, fast loads can now be held and are now limited to a range of 20. This means that you could fast load proxies every turn, if you liked, and right before firing change to a closer target and fire as a standard. Fast load “overloads” are still limited to 12 point warheads and a range of 8, just as any overload. So, while much more flexible, the raw damage potential of the photon isn’t changed. But, with ships designed like this, there really isn’t any need for more.
- The S-bridge remains in this design; it’s just too cool not to use. Note, though, that the S-bridge functions I picked do NOT include drone control or breaking lock-ons.
- X2 Labs gain a positive bonus of one for seeking weapon identification rolls and information gathering.
- X2 drones are basically X1 drones; the changes are in the racks, which have two magazines for faster loading and firing.
- X2 EW is unchanged from X1.
- Movement is unchanged from X1, with the exception that X2 ships have priority of movement over any other ship. There are no special movement options for X2.
That’s about it. This, then, is my personal choice for X2, uninfluenced by anyone else. I have given no thought to Xork-era X2 other than the possibility of refits if needed, to include a 3-turn photon that will load up to 20 points. I will continue to help others with their proposals, and make SSD’s of what might please the majority. Just thought that posting this might help define where I’m coming from. The BPV may not be perfect, and some of this will, of course, need to be tested. But it should help define what I’m shooting for, and what I’m not.
Well done Mike. It, of course, is different from my proposal but is a good one. If that were to come to be I'd be happy with it.
You've acheived a good level of "different" while staying Fed.
Good Lord, Mike! Excellent work. Good design philosophy. Wow! I'm with Loren. Obviously there's some disagreements but then I have disagreements over the original CA and CC. I still love playing them and SFB though. That's inspiring.
Actually, I could be captivated by two small things.
I'm really attached to the idea of the Drogue Bay. Drogues are basically old tech by Y205 that a Captain must sacrafic the utility of an Admin for. Clearly Drogues have many tactical advantages as they typically do their one job better. In the physical space of one shuttle the drogue bay can fit two drogues. Simply not buying any drogues adds durability to the shuttle bay. The logic of a small bay specifically designed to give Captains drogues to use instead of wasting Admins is conclusive IMO. It saves money, adds tactical flexability, and durability AND doesn't take away the vital Shuttles from the ship. Don't forget that a shuttle MAIN purpose is to Shuttle people and things. The drogue bay would be something Captains would want and Star Fleet would see as a cost saving messure.
Second, Mikes version of the ASIF should have one small rule added, IMO. "So long as there is a working ASIF no Excess Damage boxes can be damaged. For each Excess Damage box that IS damaged also destroy one ASIF box."
I also have to disagree about the lack of Flag Bridge. Admirals in command of large missions (not nessasarilly combat missions) will want a place to command from. The X2CA will the the premere unit and they will want to command from there.
Note: I don't see anything else that needs changing in the design. My only concern is that it might be too simple. If this were the model of X2, Module X2 would be prety small. Or rather would be more like an R Module. I personally wanted a bit more. This doesn't take away from my earlier comments that Mike has a very good propsal. The first really thought provoking one in a while.
Beautiful work mike!
And a nice presentation on the notes section.
Mike:
Question on the shields - after the + refit was initiated, most Fed cruisers had shields 2-6 at the same strength and all the Fed cruisers had shields 3-5 at the same strength. Your ship has (unless I miscounted) shield-2 and shield-6 at 37, shield-3 and shield-5 at 36, and shield-4 at 33. This seems contrary to Federation practice and I'm curious about the reason behind it.
Alan,
Because these aren't refitted ships. As you noted, the pre-refit ships had weaker aft shields. These X2 ships, which are not designed as combat vessels, go back to that approach. For later X2 ships (Xork era ones, that is) I would have the shields beefed up to be the same.
To everyone else; glad you like what you see. If it helps stimulate the discussion, it was worth posting. I have "my" Klingon ready, too, and will post it later. Similar concept, at least insofar as it is a more general purpose ship, and not maxed out like X1. I'll get it up later today.
Can't wait to see it.
Klingon X2 Proposal
As with the above Federation X2 proposal, this one is all me…it is my personal vision for the first generation of X2 Klingon ships. As with the Federation, I took the approach that the Klingon navy would be comprised of a lesser number of very high-quality ships that are more like their pre-general war designs than those seen in the later war years. More multi-purpose, but still very combat effective due to the advanced systems used on the ships. The same basic approach was taken; make it act like a Klingon, but better, and make the ship less dependent on battery power, and apply some lessons learned from the years of conflict the Klingons went through. Unless otherwise stated, the systems used here are exactly the same as those used on the Federation ship; EW is the same, for example, as are drone racks, labs, etc. So, here’s the SSD:
Klingon XBC
Now, things to note:
- The Klingon Empire, unlike the Federation, cannot afford to have a “mono phaser” hull…they just can’t put all P5’s on their ships, at least not yet. So, they treat the P5 the same way they did the P1 in early war years; as the ships heavy phaser, with P1’s taking the roll of the offensive/defensive phaser like the old P2 was. The only difference here is that the P1, like the P5, has a triple capacitor. With the energy cost of the P1 and P5 the same, this doesn’t present much of a book-keeping problem. Note that with a mix of phasers, the Klingon has more than the Federation XCA, but can dish out around the same damage due to the different arcs and the amount of phasers it carries. (There may be some question about the expanded wing phaser arcs; this is because the boom section, and the command “pod” specifically are now mounted a bit higher and out of the path of the wing phasers, clearing the way for them to fire across the bow of the ship, further enhancing the Klingon oblique firing preference.
- The Klingons, IMHO, are the disruptor-using race. Others use it, but the Klingons just seem to use it most effectively. The tricky part with improving the disruptor is that it doesn’t take too much more damage before it starts to look a whole lot like a photon. That, in my opinion, must be avoided to retain racial flavor. To achieve that, I took a similar approach that I took with the photon…I didn’t try to make it bigger, I made it better. Specifically, it has better targeting systems. The Klingon X2 disruptor has integrated UIM and DERFACS systems; they cannot be hit by H&R parties, and cannot be destroyed. Further, the new disruptor’s targeting system is accurate enough that it increases its base damage from 5 to 6, with no increase in arming costs. As with X1 disruptors, any disruptor can be held. Standards are now able to fire at range zero, though with somewhat less accuracy than at range 1. A secondary but still major improvement for the main-line BC is the improvement of the firing arcs. Like the D5, the XBC has those amazing 270-degree firing arcs. With the small improvement in damage, integrated firing systems and wider firing arcs, the X2 disruptor is the best knife fighting weapon around. However, it is also expensive, so the Y205 XBC has only four. This doesn’t bother me; the DX was made purely for combat, and mounted six disruptors to meet that end. Even the mighty C7 has only four (and anyone that says the C7 is under-gunned when compared to any BC of the same era isn’t playing the same game I am
); this X2 Klingon returns to that layout, albeit with a much improved system. Note, too, that at close ranges, four overloaded disruptors equal the damage of four 12 point fast-load photons…something the Klingon can be happy about, as it gives them parity with the Feds once again in one-turn volleys, and allows them to keep their traditional two-turn damage lead. They still do not have the single-volley crunch of the full power photon, however, and still need to be wary of closing to point blank range with an angry Fed. As in the GW, the best ranges for the Klingon are those middle ranges. - The ADD has an extended range and is a bit more accurate, mostly to compensate for the increased speed of drones seen in the later parts of the GW.
- Security stations are no longer included on Klingon ships. As with X1 ships, the new generation of Klingon vessels do not mutiny. This risk is even more greatly reduced because the size of the Klingon fleet is small enough that a much, much larger percentage of the crew are Klingon nationals, rather than subject races. The ESS felt no need to watch the crew on these ships, and had other things to worry about, since a smaller fleet meant that the ESS would have to have more men available for planetary duty.
All of this basically makes the X2 Klingon much like it always was; just better, which was the approach I wanted to take. It combines new technology with some of the same trends seen in late war Klingon ships, like the superb firing arcs of the D5, and the warp-powered boom of the C7. The X2 Klingon should be an outstanding knife-fighter, and is still a very good, solid, all-purpose ship, but with room for refit and improvement when (and if) needed to combat the Xorks when they show up. As with the Federation proposal I put forward, this is uniquely mine…it is not meant to represent anyone else’s, and not meant as a move to discredit anyone else’s proposal.
Man, is that ever ready for refitting! (late X2 era).
Quote:the XBC has those amazing 270-degree firing arcs.
FH+L 3 x 60 + 0.5 x 60
I think you'll find those to be 210° arcs.
Unless you mean FH+LS firing arcs!?!
I wonder if there would be any playability problems with having FH+L & FH+R firing arcs and then saying that the redesigned Disruptor Suite with six Disruptors was limited to FA+L & FA+R.
It would seem reasonable that it would be hard for more disruptors to swing through the same arc...the DX only has FA arcs is my basis...it wouldn't really matter if the XCA moved to SC2.
I really llike both of Mike's X2 ideas. They are far better than anything ellse posted too date.
Fly with em yet Mike?
Something that I would like to reiterate about the era of Y205: Nobody knows there will be peace. The races didn't gang up on the ISC but fought individually but they did to defeat the Andromedans. But since that was over no one knows if the GW is settled.
So, building ships knowing there will be peace wouldn't happen, IMO.
I beleave the races would build at least one class of ship that would say, from each races perspective of not being ready to go back to war, "Don't even think about starting up old feuds again, least you will have to deal with THIS."
Nobody will be ready to start fighting again but absolutly no one will want the others to know it. That's why I designed my XCC the way it is (each race). It's a do all ship, capable of retaking lost systems (there is lots of retaking to do), showing the flag, and enforcing the borders and peace while a long way from support (due to the shattered nature of the devestated zones; it's primary opperating area).
I have to say I like that disruptor proposal. 
Loren, I think you're talking about Carriers (which could be the first major variant of XCA).
Mike, again stellar work! I'm not quite sanguine about the phasers but I understand your thinking. It may just be the mix. Even so I think it's a great design with excellent philosophy. I also like the disruptor. To emphasize something you said, the Klingons define disruptor combat.
X1 squadrons are more than capable of retaking lost systems, showiing the Flag and everything else Loren notes.
The X2 CA should be the sector patrol and anti-pirate ship, and the groundwork of an entirely new fleet.
Mike:
"At close ranges, four overloaded disruptors equal the damage of four 12 point fast-load photons . . . [giving] them parity with the Feds once again in one-turn volleys, and allows them to keep their traditional two-turn damage lead. They still do not have the single-volley crunch of the full power photon, however, and still need to be wary of closing to point blank range with an angry Fed. As in the GW, the best ranges for the Klingon are those middle ranges."
In other words, the Klingons fight like Klingons, the Feds fight like Feds, and they fight each other like they should.
