Archive through May 18, 2004
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: OLD X2 FOLDER: X2 plasma: Archive through May 18, 2004
By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Monday, April 19, 2004 - 12:24 pm: Edit

No kidding. X1 rapid pulse was hell on seeking weapons, it really does not need to improve anymore.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, April 19, 2004 - 01:24 pm: Edit

Agreed. As I posted above the Ph-5 firing two Ph-6 will have considerly increased effectiveness as is.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, April 19, 2004 - 08:23 pm: Edit

Quote:

Reminder: X1 plasma almost came out taking 1:3 damage from phasers because rapid-pulse was so effective.


But that also was when the Rapid Pulse Ph-3 shots from an X1 Ph-1 could be overloaded making them 50% more effective than they are today.


As I said before.
If we get an average of 4.5 from a Ph-6 shot at R2 then we'll stay level pagged with X1 Anti-Plasma Phaser work.
We might be willing to fall behind if the X2 Plasma Suite of enemy vessels is smaller but running around with Ph-6s that are "slightly" better than Ph-3s ( and I've seen several propossed ) at R2 will put the X2 vessels at a disadvantage that I'm not happy with.
6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1 (an R2 Ph-3 with a 5 & 6 thrown in ) comes out at just 3.5 and that's too low in my oppinion; 6, 6, 5, 4, 3 & 3 is another matter at 4.5 and right were it ought be if the reduced number of capital phasers is our real starting point.


If we refit an XCA from a 8Ph-5s to 12Ph-5s at the same time as the Plasma ships go through the refits of 2 Ms to 2Ms + 2Ls to 2Ms + 2Ss then the Ph-6 shots won't need to be producing 4.5 average but I'm not sure if we're willing to go down that path.


Mind you.
If we do have consistantly good ouputs from Ph-6 shots at R2, then speed 40 drones become less of a threat...to X2 ships.
Actually the Ph-3 generates 4, 4, 4, 3, 2 & 1 at R2 so shooting down incomming speed 40 drones isn't impossible with X1 Rapid Pulse but since you can sqweeze a minimum 3 points of damage out of a Ph-1 ( or even Ph-2 ) at R2, the X1 and GW ships will just have to direct large chunks of their Phaser suite to destroy the handful of speed 40 drones they'll encounter which will still be VERY playable.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, April 19, 2004 - 09:29 pm: Edit

It occurs to me that since most drones have no ECM if the X2 ship gets an ECCM -1 to hit the phaser 3 range 2 damage will be 4,4,4,4,3,2 = 3.5; which isn't too shabby.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, April 19, 2004 - 10:11 pm: Edit

Hmmm, maybe a 1 point ECM add-on collar for drones might be in order. 1/4-1/2 BPV perhaps?

That damage level isn't very effective against the type VII and type VIII drones though. However, the -1 in combination with the Ph-6 it would be very effective against those drones. And I think it should be. This is part of the reason why the number of phaser units on X2 were reduced. So this supports that suposition.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 01:58 am: Edit

Not real useful, IMHO.

1 Pt of ECCM and who cares? Does it stack with a ECM drone?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 03:12 am: Edit

1 pt. of ECM not ECCM. This point applies to it's self and would increase the cost of an X-ship gaining a -1 to hit. But wouldn't be harsh against GW.

Just a thought anyway.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 02:55 pm: Edit

Not necessarily. What I meant was 1 ECCM from the defending ship would be all that's needed to counter the advantage.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 04:28 pm: Edit

Sorry, I don't know what the hell I was thinking. For some goofy reason I was thinking of countering the -1 advantage that X-SHips have but duh, that would take at least 7 ECM. Not doable.

Drone cloak? Drone vail: not cloaked but add 5 to range.

[Ducks and runs...]

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 08:45 pm: Edit

That would have an interested effect on ADD and AEGIS fire. And it's veil.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 09:20 pm: Edit

How 'bout a ASIF module that allows the drone take damage as a shuttle?

No drone vs. drone auto-kill, ADDs do a d6 of damage.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 09:24 pm: Edit

The problem with adding too much to drones is that drones are:

A) Not reduced by damage
B) Following you for multiple turns
C) Comming at you in swarms!


If drones only acted like plasmas then they would need much improvement.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Wednesday, April 28, 2004 - 08:10 pm: Edit

SSJ2 introduced a lot of new plasma stuff. I suggest reading it before making more plasma commentary.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, May 17, 2004 - 10:01 pm: Edit

SVC:

I was just reading Pg 44 of CL24 and found that there was some debate that the Sabotted Plasma would need to move on the 4th, 8th and 12 Impulses after launch rather than in accordance with the impulse chart because of the fear of Plasma Jumping from R2 to R0 and thus not giving an R1 shot in defense.

How did that all turn out ( I don't have R10 )?

From work I've done with Speed 48 plasma Sabot for X2 I think that since you launch after Seeking Weapon movement but before Direct fire, there will ALWAYS be an R2 shot and that even the most haniously effected Phasers ( Ph-3 ( and therefore Ph-Gs and Rapid Pulses X Phasers ) ) still run at over 80% of effectiveness in the R2 shot and as such the fear that the R2 jump will be a game breaker would be unfounded.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, May 17, 2004 - 11:38 pm: Edit

MJC: Maybe somebody who isn't trying to finish CL29 can look it up for you?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, May 17, 2004 - 11:53 pm: Edit

My lip hurts.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 05:30 am: Edit

Sorry Steve, I guess it was really an SPP question anyway.

By Charles E. Leiserson, Jr. (Bester) on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 10:32 am: Edit

MJC: It was balanced by ruling that sabot plasma moves only one hex the impulse following its launch, even if it's on an impulse where the torpedo would normally move two.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 12:18 pm: Edit

The whole thing was to make sure the plasma wouldn't jump 2 hexes on launch. Too good.

I will ignore all future posts conserning speed-48 plasma and suggest other posters here do as well.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 03:30 pm: Edit

For the new people on the topic, the "super sabot" was first brought up over a year ago. After some debate, the people around here at that time pretty much decided to shelve the idea as too good and unneeded. It's something held in reserves incase plasma needs an extra kick.

The idea was origianlly proposed to balance proposals allowing X2 ships to go speed-32 or higher. while speed-32 had some support, exceeding speed-32 had almost none.

MJC's repeated arguments for the Super Sabot always assumed ships breaking the speed-32 barrier. I don't really care to reopen either debate. Here's why.

Even allowing ships to go AT speed-32 carries serious (and often hidden) ramifications. Effects on seeking weapons are not the least but it isn't limited to that. There's a lot of game balance tied to ships NOT moving on IMP 1. Going higher than speed-32 stands an excellent chance of giving any X2 ship a massive RPS advantage over any standard-technology ship.

This conflicts with SVC's mandate that X2 maintain BPV parity with standard-technology. ("Play nice" is the usual way this is phrased)

If X2 ships still have a top speed of 31, speed-48 plasma is not necessary and could have the sort of RPS effect on GW-technology we want to avoid.

Result:
Just say no to the Super Sabot
Just say no to ships exceeding speed-31.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 03:41 pm: Edit

I agree totally. There is a school of thought regarding X2 which seems to be "too much is never enough". It isn't necessarily anymore invalid than anyone else's plans for X2, but I do think the majority here (and almost certainly the Steves) will agree that this isn't the way to go. On a ship with ample power, the regular speed forty sabot is deadly enough.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 05:35 pm: Edit

I for one have been slowly dragged, kicking and screaming, to the above points of view. SVC's caveat "this way lies madness" oozes all over the super-speed ideas, some of which I've proposed over the past few years. Besides there's bound to more ingenuitive ideas out there on tweaking movement and using space and time (on the hexmap). When those ideas come out people are going to say, "D**N that's clever!" That's what I think people should be able to say about X2 in general.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 07:10 pm: Edit

I have entertained various ideas of how to have ships move at speed 32 as a way of showing their superior technology and as a way of adding tactical complexity to the game.

Ultimately each idea was weak or failed and not worth printing.

Super Sabot is no way to counter speed 32 ships. Speed 32 is only one hex of movement and the desire to add 12 more movement to Sabotted Plasma to counter 0ne movement point by ships seems goofy to me. Currently there is no need for Super Sabot. There has been, IMO, no proposal for X2 that would warrent one. Still, it's an idea that might should be held in reserve as X2 is not yet fully developed.

I'm still hoping to win more people over with my Drone Booster Pack idea though.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 07:36 pm: Edit

I still like the drone booster pack myself. As to 2X Plasmas. I dont think we need to actively develop Super Sabots.

Believe me there are a lot of Plasma ideas out there that would be easier to balance than Super Sabots.

(PS. The Shield Galaxy E-module already has 4 new plasma types.)

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 07:41 pm: Edit

I like the drone booster module idea. Always have.

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