Dunno. I based the power on the F5X, with enough added to manage the SIF. It ended up with 36 power, which is 4 more than the Fed XDD (another part of the reason for making it a destroyer, not a frigate). The Fed XDD I have has the same power, though with four photons it hasn't as much excess...pretty much like it should be, IMO.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 10:36 am: Edit

I'm yet to be convinced that X2 needs more power. Specifically I think it should have approximately the same warp, though perhaps in different arrangements.

I think of X1 as putting on an afterburner to meet the demands of war. Fast as hell but super inefficient and costly to maintain only at X-bases. The warp on X2 should be more stable and efficient then X1 as well as being less expensive and easier to maintain. In the Trade Wars its all about the economy. The fleet will have to do more with less and the designs will have to support that.

Since I brought up the fleet, consider, if the fleet needs an enforcer whom do you think they will send in? Their bright and shiny XCA or that beat up old CX with a crew of veteran warriors? Even in Y210 the right answer is to let the CX do the fighting. The GW and X1 ships don’t magically disappear in Y205, let them handle the wet work they were built for.

A well-rounded X2 ship certainly doesn't need more weapons then an X1 ship. The weapons array should have modest improvements and it should be able to hold its own against X1. Where an X1 ship focused on combat and X2 ship should focus on flexibility. Where X1 focused on crunch X2 focuses on finesse.

Personally I think treaty should dictate that an X2 unit be no more powerful then that races X1 equivalent. The advantage of this approach are numerous:

· If the BPVs are roughly equal then we know we won’t break anything.
· X2 ships will have numerous well matched X1 and GW opponents; good for play-balance and scenario generation.
· It gives us somewhere to grow when the Xorks show up. These upgrades can be designed in but left uninstalled due to treaty limitations.
· We avoid XCA = BB syndrome.
· The races simply don’t need any new warships; they have a surplus of warships. A new mission requires a new design.
· Supplement 2 built bigger X2 ships.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 11:17 am: Edit

I agree in general, but I think you have a serious problem on your hands if you add in new systems like SIF's or ANY boxes, without having the power to deal with them. Doing so makes the ship less power efficient than X1, and I don't think many people will go with X2 being less capable than X1. I don't want a whole lot more, either. I went with very modest increases for that reason, and stayed away from 4 or 5 point "andro" batteries. But I do like a little more power for these new systems, and keeping the same basic efficiency of X1. The XCA I posted last week, for example, has 2 more warp and 2 more AWR than the CX...just enough to handle the SIF.

I do disagree, though, that if the fleet needs an enforcer, the old X1 ship will be sent instead of the new X2. For one, those "veteran crews" will be posted to new ships...you don't put newbies on your best ones, you put them on old ones to train, and crew your best ships with your best people. Old ships are relegated to secondary duties, and new ones take their place at the front line. X1, I would think, would be doing convoy escort, pirate patrols, interior duty, or patrols in "green" sectors. X2 would be out leading the fleet, and keeping the borders secure.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 11:47 am: Edit

I find myself somewhere inbetween.

I think that the X1s will be out doing the fighting, GW ships will be doing convoy duty and base sector defense and patroling the quiet sectors.

X2s will be also out fighting, but they are the Romulan/Klingon border patrol ships. They are the new multii-task ships doinng the "5 year mission". Getting StarFleet back to science as well as war.

(PS. I can't remember how many labs are on the proposed XCA, but I wouold like to see tthe number go baack up to 8)

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 12:31 pm: Edit

Tos's concept is one I've always subscribed to in general except for the top of the line.

This is why I have the two cruiser classes call XCC and XCM. This covers all types of players. The XCM would indede be on the level of a CX while the XCC would be the big amazing new ship that one would expect to see from X2. Again, this ONE CLASS is a rare hull.

Also, I really believe that even though ecconomics are at the fore front of the era there will be concern (and possibly paranoia) that war could return. The GW didn't end, it was interrupted. Every one had to fight together to save themselves but don't think for a minute that all the old score are settled. The General War slate is not clean.

So one big ship for fun and the rest fall into the same level as X1. The XCM would be a challenging match for the CX. And so one down the line except for the XFF which is no longer a combat unit. It's just too small to fight in squadrons or fleets in this era. So it takes up all the other duties. This is not to say it is unarmed. It is and can certainly handle policing duties and such.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 12:49 pm: Edit

Chris,

I think most have 8. I know mine did, and I think others did, too.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 01:49 pm: Edit

Like Loren I believe in a big XCC. I believe it is so big and powerful it is SC2, with all of the S8 restrictions therein. Think XDNL.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 02:57 pm: Edit

Why can't we just call that BIG ship a XDN?

Keep cruisers in the CA family, with the XCC being just little better than the XCA.

I honestly feel that the X2 classes will return to the NON war types, so

FF(about DW size),DD(in-between DD/CL),CL(about CW size),CA(maybe CB size),CC(again about CB size) and a DN.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 03:04 pm: Edit

Ditto. I even played with designing a 400 point or so XDN for the Xork period. Rare, of course, and probably not every race would have an official one (leaning towards the Feds and Klingons only for starters).

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 03:29 pm: Edit

Ok, going from that idea, I really like Mike's Klingon XDD up there, but I would like to see

1. Reduce the Forward Hull to 3.
2. Reduce the Impulse power to 2.
3. Reduce the APR to 2.

I think the hull size seems about right, it just has too much power.

Here's my resoning. X1 is the leanest meanest fighting machine on the block. As X1 matures, they will still be the main line combat team.

X2 is rounded. Great in a fight because of the new toys we will give them, but NOT designed to be the heavy hand of the fleet. Y205 X2 ships should be designed with longevity and multi-purpose in mind.

X2 ships shoulld be able too fly at max speed all the time for very long periods (patrols and survey duty). However, I think that when they fight, they will need to slow down aa bit to use all the toys we arre going too give them.

A smaller power curve but mighty toys and the ability to last(strong hulls, thicker shields) should be what X2 is all about.

Also, by cutting their power by a margin is going to be he only way to get X2 ships that are fun, challenging and in the right BPV range.

Further, I think the X2s should be inn about the following ranges...

XFF=100-120
XDD=120-180
XCL=180-250
XCA=250-280
XCC=270-290
XDN=375-400


I know that many X1 ships have a BPV range similar to these. But remeber, X1 is designed for war only.

Also, if we keep them in these raanges they wiill be far easier to balance out than if we put an XFF at 180 and it has to be able to desttroy a BCH half the time.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 03:37 pm: Edit

Also consider that X1 will only be about 25 years old at the Y205 mark. They are still fully functional bad ass ships.

But all those war class hulls tthat were built up over 25 years of warfare are giiving out, having served well past what they werre designed for.

The new ship classes will need to be designed under the fact that everyone is broke, so each new ship is a sizable portion of each races resources. They will want good strong ships that can both fight and last a long time. Since everyone is broke, then a good balance between the two is something that must happen.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 03:49 pm: Edit

Hmmm...okay, I'll bite. How 'bout this, then?

R3.?? Klingon D19 XDD

A bit less hull and power; no other change, save loosing one transporter (it had picked up one in the boom). This will leave more room for refits, if needed.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 03:59 pm: Edit

Awesoome. Now, Klingon have traditionally not had a destroyer till the advent of F5W. The 'D' designattor id for crusiers and better....

So, Perhaps the F9? or F8? F something?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 04:01 pm: Edit

I don't want to call XCC a XDN because I want it to have two engines and such. Additionally, I would like to reserve the XDN name for a unit in the Xork era.

Yes, I'm aware that some DNs have two warp but I'd like to see that change in X2. So ya, the Romulan XDN (fitting for a Hawk class anyway), the ISC would have three engines. I have not found a way to get the gorns into a three engine lay out. Four would be just wacked out.

Could they have three with two under and one over? I suppose but that doesn't tickle me.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 04:04 pm: Edit

Those P1 wing arcs still bother me a whole bunch...but it might just be that itt is unusual aand my mind cant wrap around it.

By Mark Norman (Mnorman) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 04:08 pm: Edit

Loren: Why would all of the races go for the same number of engines in X2, when they haven't up until then.
I would go for a ISC with two (as with every other ISC ship), Gorn with two (ditto), Romulan with either 2 or six (depending whether it is condor or hawk based), and similarly with the other ships.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 04:31 pm: Edit

Because they have been interacting for so long. Observing the others designs. AND the engines get too big. We'd be looking at something like twenty eight point engines.

I just don't like the idea of engines that large. Also, why not. WHY DOES X2 HAVE TO KEEP EVERYTHING THE SAME?

Why would X2 see a return to pre-war a paradigm? X2 is supposed to be about new stuff. Not a more powerful rehash. X2 designs should reflect the lessons learned from thirty years of war and research. Not one of the GOvernments are going to believe that peace is really at hand just a couple years after defeating the Andros. And the Organians declearing an era of peace might please some individuals but it will carry less weight with the Governments. They said there will be no warring before but that didn't stop things. NOt in the least. Yes, every one will expect at least a short period of peace but every one will likely be thinking the other is just catching their breath and that a time will come to settle old score soon enough.

No one is going to build X2 ships for peace. They are going to Talk Softly and Carry a BIg Stick.

And so...

XCC: Big, very powerfull flag carrying stick.
XCA/XCM: Powerful general purpose empire rebuilding ship.
XCL: Empire Mainenance ship.
XDD: Combat Support
XFF: All around logistics support/police/scout etc. All variant, no main combat units (police types come close). Elegant design, inexpensive and easy to build.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 04:35 pm: Edit

Well, we are back to absolutely disagreeing again.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 04:38 pm: Edit

Can we start by saying 'NO' to cookie cutter designs?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 06:29 pm: Edit

CFant: I expected so since we've been down this road before. That's OK.

I don't expect my vision to be the final product. And least you think I wont budge, I have. Many thing have changed and Mike recent post have spurred much thought.

Jeff: I hope you don't think I'm presenting a cookie cutterism design scheme. WHat's above is about very general design and isn't any more cookie cutterism that the situation in Y180.

However, it is important to note that all the races will be facing similar circumstances in Y205.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 08:08 pm: Edit

Actually, the XDN I made for the Feds does have only two engines. Granted, they have 27 points each, but still only two. The forward hull as four points, too, so it has 58 points of warp, and requires the normal 45 to move top speed, for 13 points extra. The Fed CX has 12 extra, so it felt okay to me...if anything that obscene can feel "okay".

Actually, in a lot of ways it's harder to make an XDN than it is the the others, because there isn't any DNX to go from. I had to guess what a DNX would look like, and go from there. Woof, talk about a humongous ship. I never posted it; can't imagine anyone would be happy about it, and I showed what I thought was considerable restraint. If folks think my XCA or XDD is undergunned, they'd think this was, too, I guess. But I sure can't imagine ever seeing such a thing in print.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 08:24 pm: Edit

I think Loren was just defining roles as opposed to setting designs.

Frankly considering the financial realities of the post-"Galactic War" era (didn't know what else to call it, there was more than just the General War) it seems likely to me that generally there will be just a few "generic" hulls (i.e. cruiser, destroyer, frigate, etc.) built by each nation. It's very expensive to operate shipyards that turn out a lot of hull types.

You can (my argument) build a heavy cruiser that fills the role of command cruiser (and build carrier/GSC variants within the hull). You can build a destroyer that fills the role of a light cruiser (and is even cheaper to build since it's based on a smaller size class). Frigates are the cheapest of the major combatants and could be built (as Loren and I suggest) using several combat variants from a common hull.

This will also leave construction gaps for XR Modules when we need war cruisers, battlecruisers, dreadnoughts, fleet carriers, etc. The early-X2 era realistically can not afford highly diversified shipyards, but wartime economies might be able to do so.

Besides right now in this "proposal" phase of X2 we should concentrate on a few common hull types in order to demonstrate the concept.

By Nikolaus Athas (Nycathis) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 08:54 pm: Edit

Hi all,

so far I have to say that this has been a very very interesting thread with some great ideas being thrown about.

Now one thing I want to remind everyone is that some of the roles outlined above for both the Klingons and Federation would be handled by refitted GW vessels in the same way that some of the Pre War roles were handled by refitted EY vessels D6s, E4s, CL etc.

Admittedly the War cruiser attrition hulls would be getting scrapped, but it could be possible to see GW main constructions like D7s and the like with partial X1 or possibly even X2 refits.
ie The Fed CA refitted with say a few ph5s, improved ranged tracs or trnasporters (if this technology has been advanced) and maybe Labs could make a good X2 era CL.

Of course by the time the Xorks come along these ships will go the way of the Old Light cruiser, replaced by newer constructions.

(and some how, some where out in the deep vastness of the Romulan Republic a single X2 refitted KE exists, Celebrating its 180th year of service since its humble beginnings as a WB )

By Nikolaus Athas (Nycathis) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 08:55 pm: Edit

( I meant to add that that KE X2 refit probably still has most of the original crew still serving on her!)

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 08:57 pm: Edit

Just to kinda step back a second an review what a difficult economy for these Empires means.

In no way does it mean that they are flat broak. Some will be more broak than others but there is hundreds entire planetary ecconomies involved here. The planets are self supporting as well as their trade between them. All these planets are not going to be willing to let up on defense. They have had enough with getting attacked. Yes, many resources will have to be re-established and a lot will go to rebuilding colonies and infrastructure but there is a lot less War Production going on too. This has been pointed out before.

Consider the USA, as bad as things get sometimes with the economy we still launch shiney new Super Carriers. We still buy Super Hornets and M1MA Tanks (and a whole lot of other stuff) by the bucket full and still spend huge amounts of dough on R&D.

A lot of R&D is developed by systems and governments not apart of the Navy so the Navy does not incur some of the up front cost.

The XCC I present is part of a moral boosting, enemy detering, Admiral pleasing program to get back on track.