Is there a more detailed history of the Andro invasion anywhere other then C2? Does anyone know the date that the LDR was overrun?

Based on (R14.1A) it would appear the LDR was overrun around Y195, certainly late enough that a few more ship classes might see X development. I would prefer not to see conjectural X development of conjectural ships if we can avoid it. They have such a small fleet and such a small shipyard I can see them creating X1 versions of anything they can get their hands on.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 10:19 am: Edit

The Andro war and Operation Unity a ripe for developement. There is no doubt hundreds of possibly noteworthy events during that period.

I have asked SVC about what was going on in the Galaxy during the Operation Unity years. He told me every one was working towards the supporting the OpU effort. Still, there certainly was more than that going on.

The races atill have huge swaths of their territory unsettled. Pirates are opperating. Monsters are monstering. The races perhaps are also restructuring. There could be inner termoil due to dislike of dealing with other races. Do anyone try to take advantage of the situation? Perhaps a little spying? What new ships?

There is a lot of history to fill in. X1R isn't going to write it but the era is an almost empty room.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 11:37 am: Edit

All the X-ships in Module X1 are refits of existing designs, with the arguable exception of the Fed DDX. Though some were built as new construction, they were still based on the GW-pattern CC/CL/DD/etc. For X1R I would like to see at least a few X-ships that are still X1 technology but completely new designs initiated after X-tech proved itself. Since the time span between the introduction of X1 and the introduction of X2 is a bit more than two decades, there would seem to be ample time for this. Some possible candidates would include:

Romulans: A CCX - The FHX and KRX both have CR9, being based on a CA rather than a CC. The only CR10 X-ship the Romulans currently possess is the KEX, which is a very old design and is weaker in terms of its own firepower than is the FHX. One possibility would be an X-conversion of the Novahawk. But it might be more interesting to give the Romulans a new design CCX.

Klingons and Tholians: A "new design DDX" - The Klingon FX has Destroyer movement costs but is undergunned relative to most true DDXs. The Tholian DDX has even less firepower than the Klingon. The Klingons might conceivably base a DDX on the F5W but it's not clear this would be enough of an improvement over the FX. And the Tholians have no suitable GW hull for a more powerful DDX. Either of these races might benefit from a new design DDX.

Everyone: BCHX and DNX - Most people on this thread seem to want one or both of these ships. Basing them on GW designs is fine if they are only conjectural. But if these are to be "real" ships I think it makes more sense for them to be new designs built to utilize X-tech. The current SFU history implies that the BCHs and DNs can not be converted to X-tech. And while it also says that the BCH-class ship that can support X-tech is where X2 comes from, I believe it does less overall damage to SFU history/continuity to violate the latter than the former. Thus, I believe that a non-conjectural BCHX or DNX should be a new, post-GW design.

I think most of the X1R ships should be based on already existing designs. But a small number of new designs would add more flavor. I see ships like the new Klingon or Tholian DDXs appearing relatively early in the X1 era, say around Y190. Real BCHXs or DNXs should appear later, in the Y200-Y210 time frame (assuming Y205 for the first appearance of X2). They would be developed as a backup, in case X2 were to prove unviable. And they would hardly be weak ships even in the X2 world. A true DNX would probably be the most powerful ship in most races' fleets until the Xork era Super-Cruisers arrive. (This assumes the first X2-Cruisers are designed as multi-role ships like the MY Fed CA; X2 ships optimized for pure combat not appearing until the Xorks make them a necessity. The X1-tech BCHXs and DNXs basically hold the line, along with the early multi-role X2 ships, until the Super-Cruisers arrive.)

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 11:38 am: Edit

OpUnity wasn't even a pipe dream until they found the RTN network in Y195. They were hunting local bases until Y198. By Y199 they could have started assembling Op Unity and didn't launch it until Y201. Lots of time for interesting scenarios between Y188 and Y199.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 12:19 pm: Edit

Tos: Apparently you had you coffee before writing that considerably more concise and informative post.

I was trying so hard to say just that but my brain had no gas.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 04:55 pm: Edit

Alan,

I think a DNX is unaviodable.

I think a BCX is massively unwise.

For X1R, I would want diversity than combat power.

By Orman J. Hoffman II (Ojh2) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 06:18 pm: Edit

I think a DNX is unaviodable.

I think a BCX is massively unwise.

For X1R, I would want diversity than combat power.

I can see your point John. However, IMHO, for X1R to be a well rounded product it will have to include X-Dreadnoughts and X-Heavy-Battlecruisers for races that produced DNs and BCHs. For most races this will leave three to five SSDs for things that were not included in X1.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 06:30 pm: Edit

No it doesn't.

There is plenty of diversity to be had without creating a BCX monster.

I support DNXs only reluctantly, primarily because I can't find a reason other than "I don't like them" to counter the argument that says "DNs have been a fact of like from the start of MY though the general war and after. What exempts X-ships?"

Otherwise, I'd be against XDNs, too.

By Orman J. Hoffman II (Ojh2) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 06:41 pm: Edit

In a different vein, does anyone feel that X1R should provide some sort of cruise drone for X-ships or should they continue to utilize type-III and type-III-XX drones?

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 07:05 pm: Edit

Maybe a VII or VIII-XX, but these drones already seem to encompass normal type III drone technology.

X1R would need to include DB ships to make use of them...

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 07:31 pm: Edit

I'm not sure a 1.5 space 6 points to kill drone is needed to have a DBX.

Admittedly DBX is less needed than other ships, as the Star Base or planet is not going anywhere in a hurry, but still there are those who would like the ability to keep up with say an FFX ( or F-LX ) and kill it with out engaging it with any risk to the DB vessel.


That being said X ships can launch type III and type III-XX drones.

Alternately you could introduce a new rule saying type VII-XX (2 space) has those type III-XX capabilities.

I don't think a new type of drone with X-ified type III qualities is automatically needed to have DBXs.

By Orman J. Hoffman II (Ojh2) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 07:54 pm: Edit

Maybe a VII or VIII-XX, but these drones already seem to encompass normal type III drone technology.

I double checked to make sure I wasn't mistaken, but Type-VII and Type-VIII with extended range would have an endurance of ten turns and standard ATG (not Type-III ATG which is needed for DB missions).

X1R would need to include DB ships to make use of them...

I would like DB x-ships for the Feds and the Klingons. The Kzinti already have a scout drone frigate in X1 and there was a CDX published in a CL (hopefully it will be reprinted in X1R).

By Orman J. Hoffman II (Ojh2) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 08:09 pm: Edit

MJC,

I was thinking of packaging the 'cruise' function into a warhead module. Something like a 1/2 space module grants Type-III ATG and 25 turns of endurance; a 1 space module grants Type-III ATG and 100 turns of endurance. That way there would not be a need for a new drone type. I realize that the drone's durabilty would be greater, but it might still be manageable.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 08:42 pm: Edit

"I think a DNX is unaviodable. I think a BCX is massively unwise."

These seem like conflicting statements. Can you clarify this for me? If we give them DNH-XP and BCH-XP do they really need a conjectural DNX and BCX?

By this time most races have converted their DN to DNH, CVA or SCS. A full X-refit on a DNH is, well, scary.

What we don't have the space for is a DNX, CVAX and a SCSX for each race. So where do we stop?

Another problem is the ISC. They fielded their first DNH in Y192. This is one of the last GW era hulls produced by any race, but that fact does box us in a bit. Why did the ISC build a DNH in Y192 instead of creating a DN-XP? For some reason they couldn't and that has implications for XP.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 08:54 pm: Edit

Can someone write up a rule brief that will upgrade the targetting module on a VII-XX or a VIII-XX? I'd like all the features of a III-XX drone plus the ability to lock onto a moving target from somewhere between 35-100 hexes out, check the tac-intel section to see when an X-probe drone first gets level A info on a target. In this way the X drone will be superior at performing a bombardment operation against a moving target like a convoy. This new technology then gives us a reason to create more DBX ships. We will need an approximate BPV for this type of drone, endurance and if the warhead space is reduced to store more fuel.

Anyone who would like to discuss this further please do so in the X2 Drone thread.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 09:29 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

I was thinking of packaging the 'cruise' function into a warhead module. Something like a 1/2 space module grants Type-III ATG and 25 turns of endurance; a 1 space module grants Type-III ATG and 100 turns of endurance. That way there would not be a need for a new drone type. I realize that the drone's durabilty would be greater, but it might still be manageable.

---

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 09:53 pm: Edit

I seriously doubt that Steve is going to go for a DNX and a BCHX. And if conjectural these would be a waste to me. If X1R is going to be a bunch of conjectuaral stuff the I will be oh so disappointed. Battleships! was disappointing to me because so much of it was conjectural but I had to buy it to make my collection complete. I don't play those ships save the B-11 (an that was only a couple times for the joy of playing the B-10 being all it can be!)

If there just isn't enough new real X-ships to fill the bill then I suppose a few conjecturals could be tollerated.

DNX and BCHX are last on the list IMO. These are not needed to make a well rounded product.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 11:44 pm: Edit

XX-Conversions

VII and VIII drones function in all respects like III XX drones. the advanced X-ATG system is sassumed to be up to the task of guiding the drone.

All XX conversions retain their full warhead capacity.


VII-XX
Becomes a 2-space drone. BPV cost to upgrade: identical to the cost of going from a III-F to a III-XXF (Don't have it in front of me, sorry)

VIII-XX
Becomes a 3 space drone only launchable from drogues. BPV upgrade cost: 2x VII upgrade cost.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 12:54 am: Edit

John, I don't like it.

I'd rather trade warhead size for fuel then increase the size as was done with the III-XX.

Please move all further drone discussion to the drone topic.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 01:13 am: Edit

I have completed a draft list of the LDR ships that were still in service by X1R and that did not already have an X1 conversion path.

BC A super-heavy BCH - Unique

CW A ship when specially reinforced that the Lyrans were able to upgrade to X1 tech.
CWL Leader
CWS Scout
CVL Carrier
PFW PFT

NCC Combat - Unique
NCV Carrier - Unique

CMP DW Troop

MP Heavy Police
MPM Minesweeper
MPS Scout

MPA Escort
MPV Carrier
PV Carrier

From this list I would consider:

BCX or BCXP

CWX or CWXP
CWSX or CWSXP
CVLX or CVLXP
PFWX or PFWXP

NCCX or NCCXP
NCVX or NCVXP

MPX and MPXP
MPSX or MPSXP
MPVX or MPVXP

In LDR fashion (upgrade happy on a budget) they would probably upgrade these ships to XP as a stepping-stone to X1R. Since the LDR are overrun in Y195 if we are to have an upgrade process that includes both XP and X1 we will need to start well before Y191.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 04:05 am: Edit

Just an observation concerning the DNX and BCX...

(or if you prefer, the DNXP and BCXP!)

there is more than hardware concerns...there is the strategic considerations of taking an already valuable and needed units out of service during a national emergency (just finished General war and the ISC/Andromedan "invasions")...and while it may only be for a 6 month refit cycle to upgrade the full to XP status...the High Command at Star Fleet may not be willing to take the risk of having the hulls out of service...and bear in mind the economic situation! Just recovering from the economic effects of the war is going to require and extended time...a time period where the military budget is going tobe (at a guess) 50% of the war time budget (or less, depending on what pork barrel spending the Civilian government has in mind to fund.)

If you need a third rationale for no DNXP of BCXP refits...how about the fear that "Hostile" governments might react negatively? and bear in mind no one is ready for a restart of the General war yet...so political reasons may interfere with the possibility of the DNXP or BCXP refits...

Not saying that this is what happened...just submiting some items for your consideration!

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 07:59 am: Edit

Just having a quick flyby here.

If Galactic powers are to have DNXs in the 190s, what chance do the Andros have? Already, I am wondering how the Andromedan invasion could have been any kind of threat - 2 Doms and maxed out sattelites get slaughterd by any decent late-war fleet. (say, SCS group, two or three X-ships, a PFT + escort, 2-4 other ships).

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 10:07 am: Edit

David Slatter, can you stick around for a few days? I want to hear more of your views on Andro vulnerability during this period, and Andros are a significant weak spot in my SFB knowledge.

"Already, I am wondering how the Andromedan invasion could have been any kind of threat"

I have been presuming that the Andros were a threat because they could attack where the defenses were not sufficient to threaten them and then run away too fast for us to scramble sufficient reinforcements. It is only when the galactic forces went on the offensive and the Andros were forced into a defensive role that their weakness could be exploited.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 10:19 am: Edit

Besides, even though I am opposed to DNX's, how many could there be? Most of the fleets were trashed after the combined GW and ISC wars, and the initial strikes from the Andros were pretty fierce. Seems like I remember reading that what, 75% of the ISC occupation forces were wiped out by the Andros? One or maybe two DNX's per power shouldn't be that bad, though I'm still opposed.

By Jeremy Gray (Gray) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 11:16 am: Edit

I'm all for DNXPs or BCHXPs, but I'm equally against any DNX or BCHX.