Archive through April 24, 2004
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board:
The "X" Files:
OLD X2 FOLDER:
X2 Hull Box Changes:
Archive through April 24, 2004
How about Void (a thoroughly Naval term)? Also you wouldn't even necessarily need to use a transporter to transfer "ballast" to a Void, just an efficient system of pumps and transfer lines. The U.S. Navy uses something very similar (mostly to maintain an even keel).
Christopher, why no?
For that matter this system doesn't have to apply to Labs or whathaveyou, it could simply be for Hull (and I'd throw in Cargo/Barracks boxes).
It's also worth noting that the SFB game system reckons damage by having power circuits, bus ties, etc. burn out vice wholesale destruction of equipment and spaces (although that certainly happens).
No becuase it would be free repair on top of regualr damage repair, and it would make these ships even more powerful than they are already going to be.
Damage in SFB can be anything from a burnt out circut board to a room that has been knocked about a bit to an actual gaping whole in the side of the ship, exposed to vacuum.
As for beaming.....
Several reasons why beaming is bad:
The ships integrity field keeps things together, there is no reason to "beam" something in to cover the whole, just send in the repair crew.
The ships enviromental controls can fill a room with enough cold inert gas to chill anything. There is no reason to beam a room full of ice.
If a room is on fire, or very hot and it is open to space, the damage control team just drops the integrity field for that room......ice cold and fire out. Then they throw the switch and back the field comes.
These things make up the basis for each and very ship in the game. If they do not have the integrity field anymore, the ship is about to fly apart anyway, so there is no use fixing the large hole in a room about to get a lot more holes.
I have to agree with Cfant here. That system doesn't work for me.
Quote:Let's get past the method of hull repair and look at game mechanics.
The ship could just as easily be taking debris from the weapon hits and using the transporter to merge the stuff into walls and bulkheads.
In a lot of ways the method is improtant.
Otherwise why not pick up raw materials from the from the stores or manufactured parts from the Jobbingshop and then use the transporter ( thanks to the computer holding the data for the pattern buffer ) to beam the matter correctly welded together and thus have a function to repair any SSD box not just HULL boxes.
Just think of it, for 3 points of power our Fed cruiser can UNDEAD three Phot-torps per turn!?!
Quote:No becuase it would be free repair on top of regualr damage repair, and it would make these ships even more powerful than they are already going to be.
Damage in SFB can be anything from a burnt out circut board to a room that has been knocked about a bit to an actual gaping whole in the side of the ship, exposed to vacuum.
BTW, you can't pump liquid water into a breached HULL box and expect it to stay there, you'ld have to freeze it first.
Quote:No becuase it would be free repair on top of regualr damage repair, and it would make these ships even more powerful than they are already going to be.
But they also pop like eggshells with sledge hammers when we don't have the MUTANT HEALING FACTOR.
Quote: The ships integrity field keeps things together, there is no reason to "beam" something in to cover the whole, just send in the repair crew.
Although if the DamCon Teams are already busy...
Quote:These things make up the basis for each and very ship in the game. If they do not have the integrity field anymore, the ship is about to fly apart anyway, so there is no use fixing the large hole in a room about to get a lot more holes.
Again not really.
If I fill a WWII freighter ( an this has happen back in the war ) with lots of empty 44 Galon Drums, then when an enemy ship shells my hull they won't have to put a whole in my ship to start it sinking or even more wholes than my bildge pumps can deal with but rather scores and scores of holes in my hull to get past my massive capsity to retain bouyancy ( oh sure the ship isn't very good for hauling cargo any more, but if you want to build an auxillary patrol vessel... ).
The Ice thing works it's just got a whole heap of drawbacks.
An Igloo works but it's hard to electricty connected...
Chris-
Again, you missed the point. the object is not to reduce temperature in the hull box...it was to fill the destroyed hull box with enough mass that would be an impediment to the next expected volley of enemy weapons fire.
The Ice portion was a suggestion based on the characteristic that water in frozen state would retain its shape better than water in liquid or gas state...and would require some form of energy to change it from solid to liquid to gas.
We could have used stacked deck plates form damage control storage or concrete or sand or other materials if there were a justification for those materials to be present on a starship.
Shoot, for all I know, maybe the reaction mix is sand (silicon) and the fuel tanks are filled with sand instead of water...whatever the fuel is, if it could be used as a heatsink to absorb incoming weapons fire it would exist as an option for the damage control officer.
And for those who may have missed it, these "temp" repairs using the transporter do not actually repair the damaged systems, just creates a "free hit" that allows the 2X ship to survive a bit more damage without adding complicated rules or adding more boxes.
MJC,
We're not talking about using transporters as replicators and repairing anything. Just shoring up hull boxes, we're talking about using spare material to create barricades to defend against future damage.
If water doesn't work, well weapon hits usually leave debris that will work.
Why can't regualr ships do this if all you are doing is beaming a heavy door into the area where the hole is?
Itsn't this already called Damage Control?
I don't think so.
Damcon repairs the functionality of a box (i.e. a lab box works as a lab box again).
Hull boxes don't have a combat function besides taking damage so there's no game difference between raising a barricade and sending in a repair team.
The equivalent would be putting up a barricade in a lab box that takes a lab hit but is not functional as a lab.
Chris-
As I understand, part of what this thread was set up to do is make recommendations for improving Hull boxes on X2 hull boxes.
The implication is that in comparison to the existing hull boxes on a GW ship (or earlier type) X2 hull boxes are superior in some way.
This "ice" idea is simply color dialog (rationale?) for the X2 ships ability to withstand more damage than "normal ships" are able to take without resorting to armor, large numbers of redundant hull boxes or a complicated set of rules such as originally proposed for Lorens A.S.I.F.
I am not sayiing it is better in anyway, but it is a different direction of discussion.
If all we want to do is quantifiably change 2X hull boxes, then instead of debating ASIF's or heatsinks, why not do as sombody in the earlier thread suggested, just make ALL 2X hull boxes require 2 points (or more) of damage to destroy rather than the standard 1 point of damage after allicated by the D.A.C.?
The difference between "upping" the damage needed to destroy a 2X ship and the total damage a 2X ship could withstand over x number of turns using the A.S.I.F. or this "Heatsink" method is that after 10 turns, the number of "repaired" boxes (plus any sheild repairs received using normal damage control methods) would be higher (or perhaps 'more' than any comparable GW or other years technology ship could receive and survive.
If you make an XCA look like a DNL and give it a 1.25 MC it will take damage just fine.
...except then it would be a XDNL, not a XCA
My original ASIF rules were quite simple, really.
So were mine but it's never a bad thing to play with ideas.
If we eally wanted durable ships, we could do this AND either of our ASIFs.
I could see a ship carrying enough material to recreate the bulk of one or two hull boxes but after that they would have to be robbing other sections that are already damaged. If you did that, it seems to me, that would be taking material that makes up what excess damage is made of. I just don't see it working physically.
It is good to entertain all possabilities. I haven't been commenting only because I can't think of anything to support it and I've stated already I don't see it. Unless its a TUg taking from its own supplies in a cargo pod (and then only if its the right material). This rule sounds like a One Time thing suitable for a Star Trek episode but not as a general use Star Fleet issue methode.
I think that EDR is the system that takes care of the unusual, heroic, "I can't believe we pulled it off" type repairs. That and Legendary Officers.
My comment was only to say that my ASIF rules were actually simple, contrary to the above posts implication that they were complicated.
Loren-
It depends on how efficient the matter/antimatter reaction is and the volume of "fuel" needed is.
for instance, if a "shot glass"(lets call it 1 fluid ounce) of water can fuel a starship 500 parsecs (one F&E hex) then 6 months of cruising and battles would require 13 ounces of water...However, if the matter/anti reaction requires 1 ounce of fuel per hour of continous operation...and we use 24 hours per day for 180 days the result is 4,320 ounces...or (divided by 16 ounce to the pound) 270 pounds.
and if its 1 ounce of fuel per minute per engine (and using the constitution class as an example with 2 warp engines necelles) you get 16.2 TONS of fuel that would need to be stored aboard ship somewhere.
and if the fuel requirements approach 1 ounce per second it becomes apparent that a huge volume of the ship is devoted just to hauling its own water around...I don't recall reading anything about this in the rules or in the captains logs but then, fuel has been handled subjectively to the point that "it" just is.
Just a condition of a scenario but no real details of how much or fuel efficiency etc.
For that to hold water (hee hee) you would first have to rule that Warp reactor fuel is Hydrogen and Anti-Hydrogen and that the Hydrogen is stored as water.
I don't find this likely. If you have the technology to store Anti-Hydrogen you can safely store pure Hydrogen; which would take MUCH less volume.
Unless you are suggesting they also store Anti-Water.
In any case, having to split the water first, deal with potentially dangerous pure oxegen and harness the hydrogen, it seems to be quite a lot of extra steps.
Water for the crew is recycled to a pure form and so requires much less volume of water than in a non-closed environment like here on Earth.
I'm lurking, but have one insight. While the idea of beaming material into a damaged "box" is creative, I don't think it will work. The reason is that each box is not just representing space. They represent a system, or group of systems. Simply filling a space with water, metal, or whatever you pick doesn't repair that system. If it isn't repaired it can't be damaged again. Only through damage control can a system be repaired and re-damaged. This is why armor cannot be repaired...it isn't a system, and is immune to damage control rules.
Back to lurking.
Hydrogen is easy to store in ionized form in a magnetic bottle, which, IIRC, is how Classic Trek does store antimatter.
JT: Exactly.
Loren-
It doesnt matter which form of matter the matter takes, the transporter functions casually control not only the position something is in, was in or will be in it can also manipulate the matter in various states.
Classic trek had used the transporter to merge characters, split characters, melt characters (oh wait, that might have been ST:TMP...) as well as transport nomad probe on (I beleive) 'the widest possible dispersion' what ever THAT might mean!
with that ability I would submit to you they would be very capable and comfortable with handling hydrogen, anti hydrogen, steam, water (liquid form) and ice. while anti hydrogen (assuming that is the anti matter created by the dilithium chamber in the warp core) may require a magnetic bottle for storage...it is more likely that they create the anti matter as needed and intermix the fuel from a stable supply onboard ship as needed as the hydrogen (in what ever form they need) is significantly safer and more stable than the anti matter.
IIRC hydrogen at 38% in presence of 7% of oxygen is combustible. water (assuming it is within 100 degrees (plus or minus zero) is not especially flamable or explosive (unless its under preasure)...water stored in liquid form does not require a magnetic bottle to contain it or any other special (read costly) steps to preserve it for future use.
Hydrogen is relatively plentiful and has a number of uses and applications. and it has the benefit that it can be moulded or shaped to fit any application...including Chris Fants 'battle damage plug' if that is what you want to use it for.
Finally, if you store hydrogen in water form you ALSO store oxygen...and still retain the ability to convert it back into a gas AS NEEDED.
in a closed environment such as a star ship...a supply of water could well be considered survival tools as it gives you the ability to breath and drink, in addition to its power generation potential. Not only could it keep you alive, it can "fuel" your way home!
(sorry about the puns...my "warped" sense of humor creeping out again!...honest, I'll try to contain myself!) 
Jeff,
We were talking about antimatter, which kinda does need some kind of non-matter containment.
JT-
It all depends on if the antimatter is generated "as needed"... unless there is some special purpose for storing a supply (such as for a suicide assault shuttle or to use a probe as a weapon) there may not be a need to keep large quatity of anti matter available.
fuel, however, in water form is stable and easily stored and does not require stasis or magnetic bottles or even a warp field.
One other consideration, there must be some way to transfer warp energy to the photon torpedo boxes that is different from "ships power"...something inherent to both the warp drive and photon torps...if we are talking warp energy plasma...then there must be som sort of conduit to allow the transfer...and if the ship is able to handle warp plasma why would handling anti-matter be impossible? (or even just difficult?)
Which is a nice little debate, but doesnt address the topic, "X2 Hull box Changes".
again, I didnt want to start a fight here, just a suggestion for another way of making the X2 hulls "different" qualitatively from earlier technology without having to resort to complicated rules.
Perhaps we should have someone restate the current version (assuming it has changed since originally posted)...especially as there is (IIRC) 2 different ideas in contention(the ship integrity field idea (excluding the water box idea, which I will withdraw as there seems to be many objections to it and few defenders).
Mike R's latest SSD doesn't include an ASIF, but uses self-regenerating shields. What's the latest take on ASIF? I think Loren K. and John T. have the most developed versions (and if I missed someone else please post). I'm inclined toward the more simple version, and shield regeneration is pretty simple. Pros/Cons? I went through some of the archives but I'm sure there's been some "updates" that may not have been posted lately.