This is Draft 0.1 of the X1R ship list.

Some things to note:
1) The Ship Name needs to be perfect so counters can be made correctly. If you see something you prefer formatted differently please let me know.

2) Priority is from 1 (should be included) to 6 (should be excluded). If you don’t like the priority of something let me know.

3) YIS is only estimated for a few ships.

Since the LDR are destroyed in Y195 and they tend to upgrade every hull they have to the fullest it is my intention to have them build X-ships beginning Y189 and XP ships (for the LDR an interim step on the way to X) 2-3 years prior.

4) Module represents the module the SSD was or could be published in. Many PFTX class ships and RTN hunters could potentially be published in K2.

5) DNX, BCHX and other hometown favorites didn’t make the cut. We have 79 SSDs available and this list is currently at 91 (83 priority 1-3) without including these disputed classes.

6) One conjectural Mauler was included. Three old-Romulan XP ships were included as their XP refit includes a warp upgrade similar to the King Eagle (SSDs available upon request).

7) The Hydrans and Feds have a single large X-carrier. The Hydrans would like a St-TX fighter.

8) Room for X-Tug Pods isn’t usually included. We will have to work something out but I’m thinking that an XP pod is made to be compatible with X, XP and GW era tugs.

9) This list is neither complete nor final. Please send me your suggestions.

Race	Ship	Priority	YIS	Module	Notes
Fed	DGX	1		CL16
Fed	GVX	1		CL26
Fed	Tug-X	1
Fed	DBX	2	186		Drone Scout Destroyer
Fed	FFSX	2
Fed	NCLX	2
Fed	CVHX	3	196	K2	Assault Carrier Scout	6xFB-111M
Fed	DXG	3
General	Aux-FCVA	1			Fast Aux or X-Aux
General	Aux-FCVL	1			Fast Aux or X-Aux
General	Aux-FPFT	1			Fast Aux or X-Aux
General	Aux-FSCS	1			Fast Aux or X-Aux
General	F-N	1			Fast Freighter
General	F-N Pods	1
General	F-NQX	1			X-ship
General	F-NX	1			X-ship
General	FRDX	1			X-ship
General	L-QX	1			X-ship
General	MonX	1			X-ship
General	S-QX	1			X-ship
Gorn	Tug-X	1
Gorn	BDPX	2		K2	PFT
Gorn	CMPX	2	196	K2	Strike PFT
Gorn	HDPX	3		K2	Strike PFT
Hydran	MTGX	1			Tug
Hydran	PFTX	2		K2	PFT
Hydran	TARX	2
Hydran	DCSX	3	196	K2	DCS
Hydran	LEX	3			Aegis or X-escorts	Needs St-TMX
ISC	FFX	1
ISC	Tug-X	1
ISC	CAX	2			1xPPD	2xPL-M
ISC	PFTX	2	196	K2	Strike PFT
ISC	CAPX	3			No PPD	3xPL-M
Klingon	D5XD	1		CL16
Klingon	DXDA	1	186		Statis DXD
Klingon	T7X	1			Tug
Klingon	D5PX	2		K2	PFT
Klingon	D5XDA	2	187		Statis D5XD
Klingon	D5XS	2	188		Heavy Scout
Klingon	E3X	2		SFT33	Make identical to E4X?
Klingon	FDBX	2	186		DB Scout
Klingon	DWUX	3	196	K2	DCS
Kzinti	CDX	1		CL26
Kzinti	Tug-X	1
Kzinti	MPFX	2		K2	PFT
Kzinti	CMSX	3			DB
Kzinti	NDCX	3	196	K2	DCS
Kzinti	CCX	6		R3
LDR	CWSX	1	192
LDR	CWX	1	191
LDR	MPSX	1	190
LDR	MPX	1	189
LDR	CVLX	2	193
LDR	MPVX	2	191
LDR	PFWX	2	193
LDR	NCCX	4	196		Ended career as XP	could be published conjectural
LDR	NCVX	4	196		Ended career as XP	could be published conjectural
Lyran	SRPX	1	196	K2	Survey Tug PFT Dual Flotilla Double Weight Pallet
Lyran	SRX	1	195		Survey Tug PFT
Lyran	Tug-X	1
Lyran	BCX	2
Lyran	FX	2
Lyran	PFTX	2		K2	PFT
Neo-Tholian	NCLX	1
Neo-Tholian	Rear Hull	5
Orion	DBRX	2
Orion	PFTX	2		K2	PFT
Orion	CRX	6		R3
Rom	NHX	1
Rom	SPHX	1			LTTX
Rom	SUPX	1			CV
Rom	BHXP	2	184		Engines from a WE	not X-tech
Rom	SNXP	2	185		Engines from a BH	not X-tech
Rom	SPEX	2	196	K2	Strike PFT
Rom	SPFX	3	186		Conjectural Mauler
Rom	THX	3	196	K2	Strike DCS
Rom	WEXP	3	183		Engines from a KE	not X-tech
Selt	CLX	3
Selt	CX	3
Selt	DDS	3
Selt	DDX	3
Selt	FFX	3
Tholian	CSCX	2			Scout
Tholian	PFTX	2		K2	PFT	PCX based
WYN	DSX	1			Scout
WYN	FX	1
WYN	PFTX	2		K2	PFT	FFX based
WYN	CAX	6		R3
WYN	DDX	6		R3
WYN	OCRX	6		R3

By Orman J. Hoffman II (Ojh2) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 09:43 pm: Edit

Tos,

For the Feds you have a DGX and a DXG, is one suposed to be a DLX (Plasma-L version of DDX)?

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 10:40 pm: Edit

We will have to work on the name.

The DGX is 2 Phot + 4 Drones and is published in CL16.

The DXG is supposed to be a DB ship with 6 drones and 2 special sensors. Lets change DXG to DXD to align with the CLD and CAD.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 11:39 pm: Edit

Robert Cole had some questions to which I will respond here (having already done so by e-mail). He also had an X1R proposal in a highly developed state. I failed to integrate these lists and will begin to do so now.

> Fed CVHX 3 196 K2 Assault Carrier Scout 6xFB-111M
>
> Uhm... isn't the FB-111 a bomber? So it can't be carried on a ship? Besides,
> with the GVX do the Feds need another X-Scout Carrier?

You are quick. The FB-111 is indeed the stretched version of the F-111. “(R2.F16) Efforts to refit NVHs to handle these larger fighters (which were, technically, bombers rather than large fighters) never really worked.” Having this type of fighter/bomber on an X-ships isn’t really necessary, I just thought I’d throw it in as color. As far as I know it is the only 2-space bomber in the game making it somewhat of a bridge unit between fighters and bombers. They obviously tried to field these on ships, perhaps they worked out the technical details by moving to different hull.

Your next question deserves more attention. Why do the Feds need another Scout Carrier? Each race got a big attrition unit designed to hunt Andro bases. The FB-111 was designed to make this unit sufficiently different enough from the GVX. It also carries twice the phasers and photons of a GVX allowing it to take on a larger base or accept fewer attrition losses.

> These really shouldn't be put in an X-module. Label them as fast only and
> put suggest them for R8.

This isn’t an X-module, this is an Andro War module, at least in my mind. That’s why they fit here. If they move to some other module that’s OK with me too. Perhaps we can use the same SSD and just shade 4 warp boxes and some shields.

> General F-NQX 1 X-ship
> General F-NX 1 X-ship
> What are these?

Q ships designed to look like the new freighter type.

> Please oh please say "NO" to DCS X-ships. Or, at least make them based on a
> CX. The NCA - DCS ships are some of the worst examples of ship making I've
> seen in SFB.

The point is to create units similar to the Kzinti SSCS and Fed GVX in that they can find a base and kill it without waiting for reinforcements. The first Andro base was found in Y195. By Y198 the RTN had been thoroughly disrupted. The races had to field a ship that could do this. I’m open to other solutions but the examples we have from SFB include special sensors and attrition units. I presume that the Andros were not sanguine about losing their network and began to heavily defend their bases from the initial assault.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 11:58 pm: Edit

"The DXG is supposed to be a DB ship with 6 drones and 2 special sensors. Lets change DXG to DXD to align with the CLD and CAD."

Which makes the DBX redundant. I'll drop the DBX line.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 12:06 am: Edit

Tos:

You list a Kzinti CCX but they already have this from X1. Also the Orions have a CRX from X1. I note that you show both these ships as priority-6, but I'm not sure why you have them included in the first place. Is it just because you think we need more counters then are included in X1, or am I missing something?

PFTXs should probably be CWP-based rather than FF/PC based. Even with X-tech, the Frigate/Patrol Corvette-based PFTs would be awfully fragile by this time.

What sort of engines do you see the Mon-X having? I believe these ships need to remain fairly slow or it will ruin the flavor of Monitors. My personal preference would be to increase the Warp engines to no more than 4 points each, giving an absolute maximum speed of 17. To compensate, Monitors might uniquely get expanded APR in the X-conversion. I just don't find the idea of a fast monitor at all interesting, though I suppose 6 box engines/25 max possible speed might be acceptable in the X-era.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 12:29 am: Edit

Priority 6 means it is an X-ship not published in X1 or CL. In this case CCX, CRX, WYN CAX, DDX, OCRX were all published in C3. I don't see any reason to reprint them. They may need a counter as might other popular X1 ships.

"PFTXs should probably be CWP-based rather than FF/PC based. Even with X-tech, the Frigate/Patrol Corvette-based PFTs would be awfully fragile by this time."

They all are except for the Tholians and WYN, which don't need the same legs.

MONX will be slow. I don't have an SSD for 10% of what's proposed, just place holders for SSDs and counters. Put together an SSD, post it, gather feedback and let me know.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 12:44 am: Edit

Tos:

Kzinti CCX at least is in X1. I've got my X1 SSD book open right now to page 37 - and there it is.

Regarding the Tholian and Wynn PFTXs - I don't think the issue is legs so much as survivability. They will both still have X-tech Special Sensors and support facilities for a PF flotilla. This will make them expensive even based on a small hull. Using an FF or PC for this purpose seems to be penny-wise and pound-foolish.

I wish I could put together an SSD, but my computer is somewhat old and gets very squirrely when I try to download executable files. I don't know why. Any suggestions about how I might fix this so I can use one of the SSD-making programs would be welcome.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 12:54 am: Edit

How would a Fed NCLX work? the DDX has the NCL layout.

You just be taking the DDX' engines to 30 and a MC of 2/3, right?

Wouldn't the WYNs ahve AUXCAXs and AUXBCXs?

the PB already has a X-ship power curve...

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 01:10 am: Edit

Kzinti CCX: My information was incorrect. Fixed.

Fed NCLX: Beats me, but your idea seems plausable.

X1 has the WYN ACX, Auxilary X-Cruiser. Not sure if the Aux-CAX is different. I added the AxBCX to the list.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 01:59 am: Edit

This is Draft 0.2 of the X1R ship list.

Race	Ship	Priority	YIS	Module	Notes
Fed	DGX	1	182	CL16	2 Phot; 4 Drone
Fed	GVX	1	182	CL26	F-111 Scout Carrier
Fed	Tug-X	1	-	-
Fed	NCLX	2	-	-
Fed	CVHX	3	196	K2	Assault Carrier Scout; 6xFB-111M
Fed	DXD	3	-	-	DB Scout
Fed	FFSX	3	-	-
General	Aux-CVAX	1	-	-	Fast Aux or X-Aux
General	Aux-CVLX	1	-	-	Fast Aux or X-Aux
General	Aux-PFTX	1	-	-	Fast Aux or X-Aux
General	Aux-SCSX	1	-	-	Fast Aux or X-Aux
General	F-N	1	-	-	Fast Freighter; could share SSD
General	F-N Pods	1	-	-	Pods
General	F-NQX	1	-	-	Q-ship
General	F-NX	1	-	-	X-Freighter
General	FRDX	1	-	-	FRD
General	L-QX	1	-	-	Q-ship
General	MonX	1	-	-	Monitor
General	S-QX	1	-	-	Q-ship
Gorn	Tug-X	1	-	-
Gorn	BDPX	2	-	K2	PFT
Gorn	CMPX	2	196	K2	Strike PFT RTN Hunter
Gorn	HDPX	3	-	K2	Strike PFT
Hydran	MTGX	1	-	-	Tug
Hydran	PFTX	2	-	K2	PFT
Hydran	TARX	2	-	-
Hydran	DCSX	3	196	K2	DCS RTN Hunter
Hydran	LEX	3	-	-	Aegis or X-escorts; Needs St-TX
ISC	FFX	1	-	-
ISC	Tug-X	1	-	-
ISC	CAX	2	-	-	1xPPD; 2xPL-M; built to be cheaper
ISC	LTX	2	-	-	LTT
ISC	PFTX	2	196	K2	Strike PFT RTN Hunter
ISC	CAPX	3	-	-	No PPD; 3xPL-M
ISC	NCAX	3	-	-	X-Engines speed up this overgrown MC=1 ships
ISC	NCSX	3	-	-	X-Engines speed up this overgrown MC=1 ships
Klingon	D5XD	1	-	CL16	DB Scout
Klingon	DXDA	1	186	-	Statis DXD
Klingon	T7X	1	-	-	Tug
Klingon	D5PX	2	-	K2	PFT
Klingon	D5XDA	2	187	-	Stasis D5XD
Klingon	D5XS	2	188	-	Heavy Scout
Klingon	FXD	2	186	-	DB Scout
Klingon	DWUX	3	196	K2	DCS RTN Hunter
Klingon	E3X	3	-	SFT33	Unique and retired by Y186; needs counter
Kzinti	CDX	1	-	CL26	DB Scout; CMX hull
Kzinti	Tug-X	1	-	-
Kzinti	MPFX	2	-	K2	PFT
Kzinti	CMSX	3	-	-	DB
Kzinti	NDCX	3	196	K2	DCS RTN Hunter
LDR	CWSX	1	192	-
LDR	CWX	1	191	-
LDR	MPSX	1	190	-
LDR	MPX	1	189	-
LDR	CVLX	2	193	-
LDR	MPVX	2	191	-
LDR	PFWX	2	193	-
LDR	NCCX	4	196	-	Ended career as XP; could be published conjectural
LDR	NCVX	4	196	-	Ended career as XP; could be published conjectural
Lyran	SRPX	1	196	K2	Survey Tug like CL26:PAL-PTT; double weight PFT-12
Lyran	SRX	1	188	-	Survey Tug pre-Y195; PFT RTN Hunter post-Y195
Lyran	Tug-X	1	186	-
Lyran	BCX	2	-	-
Lyran	FX	2	-	-	Cheap new construction; quickly converted to a DWX
Lyran	PFTX	2	-	K2	DW Based PFT
Lyran	CWPX	3	-	K2	CW Based PFT
Neo-Tholian	NCLX	1	-	-
Neo-Tholian	NDX	4	-	-	Could the Tholians ever build a NDD-RH?
Neo-Tholian	NFX	4	-	-	Could the Tholians ever build a NFF-RH?
Neo-Tholian	Rear Hull	5	-	-
Orion	PFTX	2	-	K2	PFT
Orion	DBRX	3	-	-
Orion	CRX	6	-	R3
Rom	NHX	1	-	-
Rom	SPHX	1	-	-	LTT
Rom	SUPX	1	-	-	CV; no special sensors
Rom	BHXP	2	184	-	Engines from a WE; not X-tech
Rom	SNXP	2	185	-	Engines from a BH; not X-tech
Rom	SPEX	2	196	K2	Strike PFT RTN Hunter
Rom	SPFX	3	186	-	Conjectural Mauler
Rom	THX	3	196	K2	Strike DCS RTN Hunter
Rom	WEXP	3	183	-	Engines from a KE; not X-tech
Selt	CLX	3	-	-
Selt	CX	3	-	-
Selt	DDX	3	-	-
Selt	FFX	3	-	-
Selt	SCX	3	-	-	DD Based
Tholian	PFTX	2	-	K2	PFT; PCX based
Tholian	CANX	3	-	-	X-Engines speed up this overgrown MC=1 ships
Tholian	CSCX	3	-	-	CCX based Scout
WYN	DSX	1	-	-	Scout
WYN	FX	1	-	-
WYN	AxBCX	2	-	-
WYN	PFTX	2	-	K2	PFT; FFX based
WYN	LDX	4	-	-	Conjectural DWX for the WYN instead of the PBB
WYN	CAX	6	-	R3
WYN	DDX	6	-	R3
WYN	OCRX	6	-	R3

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 08:30 am: Edit

I would also give the Fed NCLX one additional phaser in the FH array, bringing the total to 10 Ph-1s. This would be the same phaser array as the saucer-section of the CX.

Dump the Neo-Tholian NDD and NFF. You ask whether the Tholians could ever build a rear hull for the NDD and NFF. My question is why would they bother to try? The NFFX would do nothing that the DDX they can already build wouldn't do better. The Tholians in this galaxy can not build enough webcasters quickly enough to justify trying to resurrect the NDD. Both of these ships should be allowed to die.

Also, you refer to the Tholian CSCX as a CCX-based Scout. CCX-based? Do you perhaps mean CWX based or PCX based? If the latter, it's less capable than the DDX-based X-Scout they already have, but a CW-based X-Scout makes some sense even if the Tholians don't have a CWX. They already have 3 X-Cruisers with the CCX, CPX, and NCX and you're proposing a CANX (though I'm not wild about the CAN itself) so there's no real need for the Tholians to have a CWX. They still might have X-variants of CW based ships if not of the CW itself.

I would still like to see the Klingons get a real X-Destroyer, but this might have to be a completely new design.

By Jeremy Gray (Gray) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 08:45 am: Edit

I'd also like to see a Fed DLX, even if it is simply combined with the DGX SSD.

Thank you for the SFG ships!

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 10:08 am: Edit

"Also, you refer to the Tholian CSCX as a CCX-based Scout. CCX-based? Do you perhaps mean CWX based or PCX based? If the latter, it's less capable than the DDX-based X-Scout they already have, but a CW-based X-Scout makes some sense even if the Tholians don't have a CWX. They already have 3 X-Cruisers with the CCX, CPX, and NCX and you're proposing a CANX (though I'm not wild about the CAN itself) so there's no real need for the Tholians to have a CWX. They still might have X-variants of CW based ships if not of the CW itself."

I'm not finding that the Tholians ever put X tech on their CW. If they did it would create a ship nearly identical to the CCX so there would be little reason to do so. When I wanted to build a heavy scout the only production SC3 unit was the CCX. Is there a reason you don't think the CCX would make an appropriate scout?

Fed DLX added to the list.

Klingon FXL added as FWL version of FX.

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 10:21 am: Edit

Perhaps the Tholians would consider an NCLX-Scout? I doubt it when they only have 4? NCLs by this point, but who knows...⁴²

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 10:25 am: Edit

The WExp, this would be conjectural no? There are few WE left and don't they all get full-X?

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 10:41 am: Edit

The Roms had a civil war. One side made X-ships out of their King Eagles. The WExp is what would have happened if you put both the XP refit and the GW engines from the King Eagle that had been converted. At one point I think the Roms were uploaded to someone's web site. Let me look.

Found them:
http://www.geocities.com/raperm2002/R-WEXP.gif
http://www.geocities.com/raperm2002/R-BHXP.gif
http://www.geocities.com/raperm2002/R-SNXP.gif

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 10:49 am: Edit

Tos:

I'm not arguing for a CWX, only commenting that it would be a good base hull for X-variants like an X-tech Heavy Scout. The reason not to use the CC-hull for that mission is that there are not enough of them for that purpose. And a CWX would be very different from a CCX since the CC can mount a webcaster and the CW cannot. But a Heavy X-Scout based on a CW would in fact be quite similar to one based on a CA/CC hull.

The basic breakdown is that a CCX is much better than a CWX because the former has a webcaster and the latter would not. But a CWSX would have almost the same tactical utility as one based on a CA/CC hull. So use the CC hull for the "pure combat" X-conversions and the CW hull for heavy X-variants. The one exception might be a CCX-based Strike PFTX. Webcaster support for a PF flotilla is extremely useful. But that assumes that Strike PFTs themselves will be accepted as a general class and that the Tholians would produce an X-version of one. I'm in favor of both those developments, but for the moment they are hypothetical.

Any further thoughts on a new-design Klingon X-Destroyer?

(edit) OOOPS! I didn't notice your comment about the FXL initially when I asked the preceeding question about a new Klingon Destroyer. Sorry about that. Basing it off the F5W or FWL might obviate the need for a new design.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 10:56 am: Edit

Robert Cole:

As with the CC versus CW as a base hull for a Heavy X-Scout, why would it make sense for the Tholians to base a specialty ship on that extremely limited hull when they have a perfectly servicable CW (or CWH) that they can build in (comparative) quantity and can do the job without running into problems of a webcaster interfering with the Special Sensors? More than any other race the Tholians have a very limited assortment of basic hull types. It is imperative that they choose the right hull type for each respective task.

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 11:14 am: Edit

Alan: I don't think the Tholian CW should get X-tech. Be it full blown X or just XP, I don't think it should. So a CWS-X is not an option in my "world view" (J). Tos wants a large X-Scout for many races and I offered the NCL-X as another option. Of course, since the Tholians don't have a C-based scout yet, I don't think they should get a large scout either.⁴²

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 11:28 am: Edit

Robert Cole:

The Tholians already have a non-X CW based Heavy Scout. I don't remember which module it's in but when I get home tonight I'll look it up. But I assure you that the ship exists and is not conjectural.

I'm not sure why the Tholians couldn't apply X-tech to the CW design as reinforced new construction since many races already have X-versions of their War Cruisers on just these terms. Why would the Tholians be uniquely limited here? (Note again that I am not proposing a CWX since the CW can't carry a webcaster. I'm proposing that that hull type serve as a basis for Heavy X-variants.) Or if not the CW, base it on the CWH from Module R5. R5 already says that it has improved structural integrity over the basic CW, so it would seem to be well suited to X-conversion.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 11:30 am: Edit

Is there a need for the entire large scout class? I understand the X-DB ships and X-PFT but if a race could build those why would it make a heavy scout? Unless it later converts the heavy scout to a X-PFT or X-DB ship.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 11:43 am: Edit

Tos:

Maybe there isn't a need for the large scout class anymore. But note that most Heavy (i.e. war cruiser-based) PFTs still only have two Special Sensors, so the argument against an X-tech large scout is not dispositive.

If an X-tech war cruiser-based PFT were upgraded to four Special Sensors as part of the conversion, that would kill several birds with one stone.

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 11:48 am: Edit

Alan: I know the Tholians have a CWS (printed in Module R4). My statement was that they don't have a C-based (as in "C"-class) scout.

Yes, other races have CWs reinforced to become CLXs. I seriously doubt the Tholians could do the same because their CW hull is already stressing things (in my mind) since it is two PCs welded together.

You yourself stated that a Tholian CWX is not necessary, so why would they go through the trouble of designing and implementing a new construction program just for a few scouts?
Again, I don't think the Tholians need a large X-scout. Give them a PFT-X based on their DDX instead.⁴²

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 12:46 pm: Edit

Robert Cole:

Sorry, I had misunderstood you to be saying the Tholians didn't have a cruiser-based scout: my mistake.

Regarding whether the Tholians could apply X-tech to the CW hull, I would point out that the CWH should still be satisfactory for conversions, based on the Module R5 text. Whether it is necessary is another matter. The only problem with a DDX based PFT-X is that it would be under powered, even relative to other races' DDXs. Note the Tholian DDX only generates 27 points of power when average for a DDX is about 30. Still, maybe that's the price they pay for being Tholians.

Actally, my "wish list" for the Tholians for X1R would probably have the NCLX (assuming it's done right) as top priority and a new-design Tholian DDX as the second priority. I have an idea for the new-design DDX (call it a DWX?) but have so far been unable to download any of the SSD-making software. Assuming a DWX were approved for the Tholians, that might be the appropriate hull for their X-variants.