Archive through April 17, 2004
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: OLD X2 FOLDER: X2 plasma: Archive through April 17, 2004
By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 12:53 pm: Edit

Loren:

I think that a super-torpedo makes a lot more sense in that case than an R-torp. The M-torp is capable enough that trading two for one R-torp can't be justified unless the latter version is much cheaper, and the cost of other X2 systems would seem to make that an unrealistic option.

I think the analogy would be a Regalhawk vs. Firehawk. (Or is it Royalhawk? I can never remember which is which.) At GW tech levels the Firehawk vs. Regalhawk makes sense since each version has advantages. The two S-torps have better close/medium range firepower, more flexibility, and better weapon arcs. But the R-torp has better long range firepower and is more energy-efficient. (50 point warhead for 9 total points arming cost gives a damage/energy ratio of 5.56 while two 30 point warheads for 16 points arming costs yields a ratio of only 3.75) But two M-torps out-gun one R-torp at all ranges and retain the flexibility and firing arc advantages. The R-torp is still more energy efficient but the advantage is reduced since the M-torps have a 4.44 ratio. The Firehawk-X outperforms a conjectural Regalhawk-X (or is it Royalhawk-X?) by a large margin and so it probably doesn't make sense to build the latter, unless it would be much cheaper than the Firehawk-X. And the cost of the other X-systems probably preclude that.

For the same reasons, I believe something "like" an X2 War Eagle (or for that matter "like" an X2 Regalhawk) needs to have a super-heavy torpedo rather than an R-torp.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 01:27 pm: Edit

Alright. Here's what I was thinking for the Roms as part of my personal stuff. I'll share, though, to explain what I had in mind for the uber-torp.

After the GW, ISC, Andro, and civil wars the Roms went through, they had to be having a racial confidence crisis. The were on the loosing end of the GW and had a capital world devestated. The were one of the first to fall to the ISC, and took their share of a beating from the Andros. Now that they have a Constitutional Monarchy as a government, they have to rebuild not only a fleet but also some national pride and spirit. One way to do this is to sort of combine new and old, with ships that are up to date in every way but are similar in form and function to the old ships that built the empire. That gives them some nostalgic pride and re-affirms their identity somewhat, but also gives them a top of the line ship. A ship that is similar to the War Eagle in size but armed with this uber-torpedo was what I had in mind. I did do a VERY preliminary SSD, which I can post later if anyone is actually curious to see it. So the new Rom fleet I was working toward would be a mix of new eagle and modular hawk classes. No kestels, though. I figure the Roms would be pretty damned mad at the Klingons for letting them get bashed like they were, and without an imperial government in control they are probably less likely to feel cooperative with the Klingons, anyway. Besides...the Tholians are still alive and kicking, making any kind of contact that much more difficult for them.

The core of these new ships is a better cloak and a bigger torpedo. A very Rom flavor, and with a 75 point plasma, even the biggest X2 ship is going to worry over getting hit, just like the old style CA worried about getting hit with an R torp. Make sense, at all?

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 01:43 pm: Edit

I would like to see the Roms advance to a 4th generation so to speak.

I like your idea of the uber torpedo Mike, but I think the General war taught the Roms that attrition units are as dangerous as ships of the line.

So, I think a new SSD would be in order for them, unlike the other races who have a tried and true design to expand on. But, I think that X2 Roms should have 1 big torp, type Z or whatever, plus two L torps and 2 D racks, along with their standard low phaser suite.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 01:52 pm: Edit

That's almost exactly what the one ship I did has, Chris. I'll get around to posting it later for kicks; can't now, 'cause I'm at work and don't have it.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 05:10 pm: Edit

This is review for the old-timers.

You want a big torp, I made one last year. it's an 80-pointer not 75, bu the same thing. I call it the Type-Z plasma

here it is, on a X2 King-Eagle to boot.

http://www.vorlonagent.com/sfb/x2/vorlonagent/Rom_XKE.gif

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 05:41 pm: Edit

Allan: The idea was that this House didn't have access to all the government data that would go into new X2 designs. This Grand Eagle would not have been built were it not for the particular House that created it. As it turns out this design was implemented because the other Romulan designs were not ready yet. The history I wrote had this ship holding the Empire together for several years until the the new "Real" X2 series started to reach viable numbers.

Here is the point of the two M-Torps. This combo is FAR more dangerous than any single torp. Back in the day the R-Torp was dangerous because of who it was fighting (a slower less well equiped unit). These days (Y205+) it is not difficult to deal with a single seeking weapon. As I stated with a torpedo proposal the Gorns have many shuttle from which they can launch many WW and they have the power to create them and hold them easilly enough. X-ships recover easier too. Lets add drogues that allow a ship to move speed 12 under WW.

Sobot R-Torps won't cut it. Fast load won't either. But two M-Torps are suddenly make the Grand Eagle much more dangerous and damage resistant. Additionally, with the Kestral and Hawk series Romulan tactical doctrine has turned to the multiple heavy design. This design, Grand Eagle (or what ever name) fits that newer doctrine.

YES, I believe there should be a Super-Torp of some sort but this should go on the big new X2 designs.

Anyway, that's the direction I took. I could see a practical use for the Eagle class in X2 otherwise. Sure no matter what it's cool to have one but to fit in the stratigic realm of things a big Torp Eagle don't make sense any more, IMO.

BTW: Like the King Eagle it has small torps on the engines; Type-L.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 05:46 pm: Edit

John: Shouldn't the X-Torp damage at R40 be 1 point?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 06:29 pm: Edit

Okay, as promised, this was my first X2 Rom using the new stuff I'm working on. No armor, but like I said earlier, it looks alot like the old Eagle series.

R4.?? Romulan Imperial Eagle X2 Cruiser

Here are the costs and such for the two X2 torps on the chart:

Turn 1Turn 2Turn 3EPT/SGHold Cost# of F's ProducedSabot Cost
Type X33612565
Type Z44815878


That's it. Thoughts?

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 07:24 pm: Edit

Mike:

I'm not sure the monster X- and Z-torps should necessarily have damage breaks at the same ranges, 10, 15, 20 as the S- through R-torps. What if the Z-torp did 75 points out to 12, 55 points out to 18, 40 points to 24, 30 points to 30, and then fell of a cliff - dropping from strength 30 all the way down to 1 within 10 hexes (or 10 impulses with sabot). Since warhead degradation is measured by impulses rather than hexes for sabot torps, that would actually mean it would hit for 75 damage points out to fifteen hexes from launch hex, since it would only take 12 impulses at sabot speeds to get there. THAT'S a torpedo you might not want to take for granted if it were heading your way.

I also think that by this point the engine pod torps should at least be upgraded to G-torps. Same basic damage as an L-torp, but can be enveloping, or shotgun, which L-torps cannot. Downside is that L-torps are held for zero energy in designated L-launchers. But since holding cost for a G-torp is only one point, upside for this change is larger than downside, IMHO.

Third point - BPV of 260? Probably too low. Under the latest errata, the basic KEX is 240. The KEX has better shields and armor, and more phasers. But this thing has better phaser arcs and the phasers are type-x. It generates more power (45 vs. 43) than the KEX as well as having the warp power capacitor system, and has the other X2 improvements (ASIF, Special Bridge, etc.) and even without my suggestions has a lot more torpedo firepower. My guess (should be taken with salt since it isn't playtested) is that 260 is too low.

Loren:

I'm not sure what your point is regarding 2 M-torps being better than an R-torp. I agree completely. Maybe I misunderstod your initial post, which I thought was advocating two versions - one with a pair of M-torps and one with something bigger. I was trying to argue that the something bigger needs to in fact be bigger than an R-torp since two M-torps outclass an R-torp at all ranges, unlike the case with two S-torps. If in fact you were arguing that the ship should come only in a two M-torp version, that's fine. In that case I misunderstood what you were saying. But I think we are in complete agreement about the relative merits of the currently existing torps.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 07:28 pm: Edit

Mike:

Also, I've already stated in my earlier message why I would rather see the ship have a different outline and be called something other than "Eagle". But I readily admit this is a minor point and that lots of SFBers probably disagree.

As a general concept for a Romulan X2, I think it's fine, as long as it's not the "top of the line" X2. And I don't think you were suggesting that it should be.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 07:39 pm: Edit

Alan,

The outline is what it is because it's just very rough at the moment...ditto the BPV. I had focused quite a bit on the Feds and Klingons (finally getting a decent Klingon XDD) and not much on these. The "real" one I do will have a somewhat different outline; something more like a cross between the eagle and the falcon.

I had thought about the damage breaks, and started to do them differently. The only problem (albeit a minor one, I suppose) is that that would mean the standard torpedos and X-torpedoes could not share the same chart. I know it's a minor point, but for now, until we see some playtesting, I figured these were a good start. Oh, and no...it isn't the top of the line! Thinking about a "step up", perhaps something like a miniature Condor in profile. I'm way far away from that, though! Unless anyone wants to partner up with me, that is, and try developing some Roms using the systems I've started with (phaser x, regenerative shields, WPC's, etc.)

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 07:50 pm: Edit

Mike:

I just noticed one other (minor) problem I have with your Imperial Eagle. The ship still has Flag Bridge - no Emer or Aux Con. Flag Bridge is fine on a KEX since it is the advanced tech version of a CC, and since the Firehawk-X is based on a straight CA and therefor still only has CR-9. But if the Romulans are still designing ships to the Eagle pattern in the X2 era, I don't think they will be the command ships of that era. I think the more modern designs based on the Hawk-series ships will supply the CCs and therefor the Imperial Eagle would probably have conventional Emer and Aux Con rather than Flag Bridge.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 08:41 pm: Edit

Loren,

X-torp design credit goes to Mike Raper and it uses his suggested chart.

My version of the Z has a 3-3-8 arming cycle.

All the details are here:

http://www.vorlonagent.com/sfb/x2/sect-f/heavy-plasma-torps.htm

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 09:42 pm: Edit

R4.?? Romulan Imperial Falcon

A sort of "new" Falcon type design that isn't a mauler, but a somewhat bigger/better CA. I fixed the XIE above, as well...man, can't beleive I left the darn Aux off.

Loren has a very nifty design to post, as well.

The X and Z torp have two range bands past 30 now, John. I think that's what he meant. At one point, it was as you have it, but I changed it at Loren's suggestion. Just haven't posted it or talked about it since.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 09:51 pm: Edit

Considering the way your phaser-Xs work, the Flacon could be interesting with a block of 4-6 phasers in one spot.

Mike,

Makes sense. I will adjust my version (eventually).

I would be intrested in everyone's opinion of the "heavy Plasma" rules.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 09:53 pm: Edit

For a top of the line Rom ship, I would use at least one four phaser-x array. Four is the most any one array can have, anyway. For this type, I figured three two phaser arrays would work okay, though I obviously haven't played the ship at all.

I'm posting a short PDF in the Phaser-3 and other defensive systems thread. It's a plasma based point defense toy I made up for my Tycosian race, but I think it might work for X2, with some modifications.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 10:12 pm: Edit

Quote:

Imagine the Rom X2 WE, with a 75 point super-torp. Be afraid...be very afraid!


Techincally the KEX already has one in that it chucks out 50 pointers every second turn instead of every third.


Quote:

It's primary armorment is two M-Torps. This is way mor eflexable than a single R-Torp or even a super torp. A later design could have a super torp when the Romulan X2 fleet is in full swing.


It really depends one whether we want a realistic ship or a fun ship that makes players poop their pants.
That's why we need to provide both an XKE ( or XWE ) and an XKR.


Quote:

For the same reasons, I believe something "like" an X2 War Eagle (or for that matter "like" an X2 Regalhawk) needs to have a super-heavy torpedo rather than an R-torp.


I'm not convinved we need a whole new warhead type for X2, it partly diverts from the fewer but better design paradymn of what we have developed for X2 ( Asside from 24 point Photons...built in UIM Disruptors is exactly the kind of design philosophy X2 has ) and we already have a 50% increase in firepower over GW levels with Fastloading coupled with the 33% increase of upgrading the Plasma-Ss to Ms.

For a truely poop in your pants weapon, I'ld say give the Plasma R ( and the Plasma-R only ) the ability to load an uberenvelope that inflicts tripple the standard R warhead in enveloping damage.
This way we follow the deign Philosophy, the Warhead isn't bigger it's just able to be used in a better way.

What with 5 extra hexes of Glory Zone and speed 48 sabot, the X2 Plasma-R generating a single 150 point point warhead for 2+17 instead of the 160 points of enveloping power of 2 Plasma-Ms for 4+20 isn't going to be too weak with rspect to other X2 ships and will still thrash the pants off of X1 vessels ( save the fact that X1 vessels use S torps as their defensive torps whilst the cost saving oriented X2 vessel will likely be using Plasma Ls or even have no defensive plasma tubes.

A speed 48 Sabot and 5 extra hexes of glory zone will give the X2 plasma users a nice little weapon systems without resorting to uberwarheads.
Giving the Plasma-R something to "keep it in the running" doesn't need to be all that great an advantage as it'll already be superior to all X1 weapons.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 10:16 pm: Edit

Quote:

Techincally the KEX already has one in that it chucks out 50 pointers every second turn instead of every third.



So who said X2 can't fastload plasmas? Anybody?

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 10:35 pm: Edit

Making the X2 PL-R the only speed 48 plasma in the game might be a way of improving the fear factor without requiring a larger warhead.

If all X2 plasma was immune to WW it wouldn't need much improvement.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 11:08 pm: Edit

Tos,

Ignoring weasels is TOO good.

I also wouldn't want to open the speed-48 door even a crack or all plasma will be running at speed-48 eventually.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 11:15 pm: Edit

Is it? What would the BPV of a Romulan SPX if the only change is it's plasma isn't distracted?

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 11:33 pm: Edit

I would like to see all X2 plasma being speed 48.
Coupled with a longer Glory zone and you don't need bigger warheads which is an outworking of the ideal that X2 shouldn't be bigger, it should be better...with a small number of very notable exceptions.

Speed 48 Sabot and 5 extra hexes of glory zone work to offset exactly the two things that X2 ships will gain, higher battle speeds from X2 Engines and longer range fire from Ph-5s....I think it works nicely to oppose ythose forces.


As to plasma not being distracted...what about a middle ground option???

When X2 Plasma is launched at a GW or X1 WW then the target ship can only crawl away at a speed of 2 or else the WW will be voided.
When an X2 Plasma is launched at an X2 WW then the ship can crawl away with a top speed of 4.
And if an X1 or GW Plasma is launched at an X2 WW then the ship can crawl away at a top speed of 6.

In this way the ships that try to weasel against an X2 plasma will have a harder time trying to get back up to speed but we won't fall for the problem that fairly slow units ( like BASES ) will be both unable to weasel their way out of trouble and unable to outfly the plasma.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 11:49 pm: Edit

Quote:

So who said X2 can't fastload plasmas? Anybody?


I wasn't saying that the X2 Plasma X or Z or whatever should be restricted from firing fastloads, just that the X1 Plasma-R was already a hellish weapon by GW standards.

This is one of the problems, it's all well and good to say that an X2 Plasma-R should make an X2 Cruiser captain poop his pants...but a far more common battle in the X2 period will be the X2 cruiser firing on a trio of obsolete GW cruisers and war destroyers that are defending some neutral planet that gained neutrality during the ISC passification and now the Empire wants to "reinstitute" control.

A 75 point warhead doesn't just toast a D5Ws best shield; it crushes a huge part of the ship as well.
But a 50 point straight warhead does toast the shield and with a 150 point envelop can leave the D5W shieldless.
And that then becomes a dynamic which would be fun to play:- do you use your X2 Plasma-R to put a hole in the enemy shield and start doing some real damage right now or do you kill ALL the enemy shield boxes in a single strike in the hope that he'll surrender or leave!?!

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 12:03 am: Edit

If plasma can ignore weasels, then the price of a ROmulan ship should double.

It is way too good.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 12:25 am: Edit

Quote:

If plasma can ignore weasels, then the price of a ROmulan ship should double.

It is way too good.


It depends on a number of factors, bases will suffer badly, X2 ships will zoom around taking plasma hits outside of effective range and so the BPV change differs based on target.

Also tactics will change the BPV of the ships.
The Plasma String renders the WW almost useless, so you won't gain much where as launching all your plasma in one mightly array of Psuedoes and one Real followed by all remaining real plasma will die off as a tactic in favour of simply launching all real...indeed who needs psuedoes at all if you can't be weaseled, you just fire and hit or don't fire...trying to draw out the weasel will be a waste of effort and thus ships won't carry pseudoes.


That brings up an interesting question.
Should X2 plasma ships have three Pseudoes or just two???


Personnally I think we should follow on in the better ships but not nessisarily armed with bigger weapons philosphy and have the third Pseudo.

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