Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	Archive through June 16, 2004	25		06/16 12:15am

MJC: Not 1 point of damage. 1 point per launcher per shot fired; so each ADD matches a photon for damage (8 points over 12 impulses). Also would change the course of knifefights with the extra chance of having small volleys. Except for fights against Kzintis with exotic drones, this round would pretty much supplant both ADD and Type-VI.

You would have to design a new race to incorporate the technology.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, June 16, 2004 - 09:48 pm: Edit

Wait, are you saying that the ADD launcher can launch a one space starfish-SSADD drone every impulse, I think not.

With a To hit of 1-2 at R2&3 (her best ranges ) her full 12 impulse burst from an ADD at those ranges is only going to generate ( 12 x 1/3 x 1 ) four points of damage.

Sure you could hit with all of them for a massive 12 points of damage ( for 3 BPV worth of SSADDs BTW ) but the chance of that are 1 in 531441.
A One in half a million chance isn't really worth worrying about, if someone gets that lucky they deserve 12 points of damage.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Thursday, June 17, 2004 - 09:34 am: Edit

As Cfant already said (see, I can agree with him occasionally!), the Type-VI drone already covers this area (and has the added bonus, over on the Romulan front, of being a warp-seeker).

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, June 17, 2004 - 09:38 am: Edit

It's all in how you look at it. MJC views the ADD as a "useless weapon" when opposing a non-drone using race. Me, I just see it as a system I don't have a need for all the time. I don't use a probe in every game, I don't use transporters in every game, and I don't use t-bombs in every game; so not needing my ADD's because my opponent has no drones doesn't make me feel that my ADD launcher is wasted. If nothing else, it gives me a few free damage hits that protect my real drones.

By Ken Humpherys (Pmthecat) on Thursday, June 17, 2004 - 10:07 am: Edit

Becides the ADD is always good vs shuttles.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, June 17, 2004 - 11:32 am: Edit

Besides the ADD is always good vs Mines too. (see rule E5.33).

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, June 17, 2004 - 07:09 pm: Edit

M.R., K.H. & J.W.:

Yes, yes and yes.

Note. Having a SSADD in 8 slots in the ADD-12 does not mean the other four can't by type VI or ADD and probably should be...varriety is the spice of life or something like that.

P.S. I don't see an ADD as useless against a non-drone chucker, just not living up to its full potential...goldbricking slackers!


J.O.:

I see the weapon as being different.
1) A Ph-3 shot at R1 can't stop a SSADD round nor can a tractor beam.
2) SSADDs ( unlike the type VI ) can be fired every impulse granting a modest mizia flavour to the Klingons ( and other ADD using races ( FRAX anyone!?! )).

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, June 17, 2004 - 08:36 pm: Edit

MJC-

Perhaps you would benefit by listening to Richard Wells advice...design a new race and use the SSADDs as one of its weapons.

most of the comments seem to favor the Type VI and ADD systems.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, June 17, 2004 - 09:23 pm: Edit

I just don't see it as a new race weapon, even as a new race secondary weapon. It just doesn't do enough damage, is far too inaccurate and nine match-ups out of ten it would be less effective than ADDs or type VIs...it can only really be an ADD augmentation in my veiw.

By David Kass (Dkass) on Thursday, June 17, 2004 - 10:36 pm: Edit

MJC, the problem you are running into is that you are trying to modify (in a major way) a very well established and well balanced weapon. When doing so, you have two options. The first is make the modification so weak it is meaningless and not worth including. The second is to make is sufficiently powerful to be useful. In this case, it breaks the game by upsetting the existing balance. The middle ground between the two is razor sharp and your proposal is trying to balance on that razor.

Worse, your basis for making the proposal is a point that many disagree with. And thus they see no purpose to the proposal, beyond modification for the sake of modifications. And even if one accepts your basis, the concern you have is historically so rare one can argue it should be ignored (the Klingons don't historically face Romulans when they had ADD racks).

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, June 17, 2004 - 11:02 pm: Edit

David Kass;

I'm not a big fan of the SSADDs concept for exactly the reasons you just mentioned. But in fairness to MJC, this could have some use against the Tholians, who are a major (in aggravation and annoyance at any rate) historical Klingon enemy.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, June 18, 2004 - 02:21 am: Edit

D.K.:

There a lot of opponents the weapon could be used on...Non-Drone chucking Orions spring to mind as do the Tholians and even particular ships like the Fed DD+...an AD5 would have a lot more fun against a Fed DD+ with ADDs than without even though it's not really a fair match-up.

I would say the real balancing point with this weapon is based on the BPV, at 0.25 BPV each the enemy could Buy a T-bomb for the price of 32 SSADDs...since 32 SSADDs is about 10 points of damage, I don't really think that's so bad but I'ld be willing to have SSADDs cost 1.5 BPV each if it increased fun by giving the ADD rack some ability to harm shipping beyond unleashing a type VI.


A.T.:

Thanks for the heads-up.

By David Kass (Dkass) on Friday, June 18, 2004 - 02:37 am: Edit

Sorry I was not clear, I was discussing enemies for which the Klingons would spend R&D funds to design counter weapons. In the ADD era, this includes the Federation, the Kzinti and the Hydrans. While the Tholians are a neighboring race, I can't think of a design decision or R&D effort designed to counter them.

Individual ships are irrelevant (well, maybe not the B10). One does not design weapons to counter a specific enemy ship. Note that most Orions have drone/plasma racks built into the ship.

I disagree that BPV is a balancing factor at these levels. Until BPV is approaching 5% of the force, it ends up being in the wash. The difference between victory and defeat will be at least 5% of the total force.

Equating damage like you are doing does not seem very relevant. It is the extra options and when and where the damage is applied that counts. The ability to replace 32 ADD rounds with 32 SSADD is worth much more to a fleet (large enough to want 32 of them) than a T-bomb; the fleet will have other T-bombs so one less doesn't matter. 32 SSADD converst 4 to 6 ADD racks into DF weapons against ships. That is a major ability improvement.

If I had to guess a BPV value for the rounds, I would suggest 3 to 5 BPV per ADD launcher in the fleet if it has any SSADD (call it a refit), plus the 0.25 BPV per round. Remember that ADD racks are 360 weapons. The 0.25 EPV per round seems like a fine economic cost for campaigns.