Mike:

While I agree it's a cool idea, there AREN'T any plain D hulls left by the time period and the chance that the Tholians would design a ship that was a step backwords (without the casters or photons) seems slim to me.

Strictly speaking though, if the races are to the point of converting BCs than almost by default the DPW becomes the most powerful ship within the class range.

The problem though is that they won't exactly have very many of them and the odds that they would let them ouside the holdfast seem also rather low.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 05:32 pm: Edit

I'm just starting up my web page so be patient, but I've uploaded my Fed X2 designs. The newest look is XFFB4 and XCL4 for those already familiar with the look of the others.

http://www.crawfordeducationgroup.com/sfb/ssd/federation/federation.html

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 06:19 pm: Edit

"A step backwards"? An X2 ship, a step backwards? Guys, no offense...wait until you see the thing, hmmm? I haven't even finished it yet. Just wait until I do, then you can see it and decide if it's not enough, too much, or whatever.

By Daniel Knudtson Thompson (Brezgonne) on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 06:33 pm: Edit

Design wise, yes. A D hull without the casters or photons is a step backwords in design terms compared to the DPW. I'm not talking about specific technolagy so much as in terms of a design.

I'll wait till you post the ship before commenting further.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 07:03 pm: Edit

Okay, here we go.

R7.?? Tholian XBC

Now, a few points. It is NOT a DN. It is built on three XPC hulls, true, but is not built as a DN, nor will it have the same mission as a DN. Hard to put it any other way, but I think the natural reaction to seeing a Tholian ship with three hulls is "Oh, it's a DN". Not so. The fact is, two hulls aren't enough to build an effective XBC with. So, this was an alternative.

Here are some comparison points with the Fed XBC.

	Boxes	Phaser 5	Phaser 1	Phaser 6	Hvy. Wpns.	Hull	Warp	Reactor	Imp.	Total Power	Shield 1	Shield 2/6	Shield 3/5	Shield 4	Total
Fed	129	12	0	2	8	18	44	8	4	56	64	45	45	45	289
Tholian	137	8	8	0	8	21	44	6	6	56	54	50	50	50	304

It is, alas, true that the Tholian ship has a bit more shields and internals than the Fed. However, it doesn't have quite as good a phaser suite (more of them total, but less of the "good" phaser-5's) and won't have the punch the Fed has, either. Power is the same, though distrubted a bit differently.

Sigh. I guess Alan is right; it's just too big. Shame, that. Maybe a BC built from two CWH type hulls would work. Be weird looking, that's for sure.

By Daniel Knudtson Thompson (Brezgonne) on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 08:21 pm: Edit

Two CWHs will be worse.

Where is the Tholian XPC?

You made some very odd choices for the Tholian XBC you made.

You didn't follow the normal welded hull conventions as near as I can tell. Nor the same conventions you used when you convereed the phasers on the federation ship. It looks like you tried to make the Tholian ship a near exact match of the Fed ship instead of just converting the ship.

2 Webcasters
4 XPC
2 Option (Photon/PC slots)
11 Ph5 (4 FX, 3 LF+L, 3 RF+R)
2 Ph1 (one RF+R, one LF+L)
8 Ph1 (RA)
Shields: 48 shields.
Warp: 45 (three 15 box engines)
APR: 6
Impulse: 6
Hull: 24

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 08:27 pm: Edit

What conversion? It isn't a conversion of anything. It isn't like I took a DN and said "let me make this an X2 ship" or something. And no; it doesn't use the same conventions on phasers. Long time ago, we all agreed that not everyone would use purely phaser 5's; some would use a mix of phaser 5's, phaser 1's, and phaser 6's. As for being similar, of course it is. Similar power, similar number of weapons. The layout, functionality and coverage of those weapons is pretty much completely different.

By Daniel Knudtson Thompson (Brezgonne) on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 08:56 pm: Edit

Conversion may not be the right word but you based it on the D hull.

Except you reduced the number of phasers by 4, changed the engine configuration so that it doesn't match 3 XPC/PCs (Thinking about it they should probably be 16 box engines since the XPC is going to have two equal engines)

The weapons I listed in my post above are not all Ph5s. half the phasers are Ph1s.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 09:32 pm: Edit

I like to think the web caster is an X2 weapon.

I haven't been convinced that the Tholians need X2 tech yet or could develop it even if they wanted to. Let them build a DX instead to keep them unique and otherworldly.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 09:36 pm: Edit

Tos,

Do you think they can compete without it? Would you be open to allowing X2 Tholians to develop an X1 type particle cannon?

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 09:48 pm: Edit

Sure, an X1 PC is a worthy upgrade to consider. Maybe they would use it, maybe they wouldn’t, but I’d like to see how close to balance we could get.

Perhaps someone with campaign experience can share their thoughts, but I’ve always felt the Tholians are heads and shoulders better than everyone else once you put enough web casters into play. In the X2 era I’d simply allow Tholian ships to carry more WC. Picture how nasty the DDX would be if you kept the disruptors but replaced the snares with LS/RS WC. I’d even be cautious about allowing the P5 to fire through web.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 09:50 pm: Edit

I have some time; I'll play with an X1 Tholain DPW and post it, and we'll see how it stacks up.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 09:53 pm: Edit

Important difference is the lack of center-hull. The 12-10 ratio is balanced for the die roll averages but those can skew.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 10:09 am: Edit

Remember to use the NEW D SSDs.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 10:11 am: Edit

Of course. Did that with the above, and will with this new one, too.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 11:03 am: Edit

Mike, if you agree I'd like to see what the DPWX (DX?) would look like with web casters replacing the snares.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 12:21 pm: Edit

Okay, here you go:

R7.?? Tholian DX Advanced Dreadnought

What a brute. Shields got a bump to 45 all the way around. Got rid of the phaser-3's, and replaced pairs with phaser-1's, with a bit left over. Increased number of phaser-1's, as with other X-ships. Added two more disruptors, sort of like what the Klingons do...probably shouldn't, but for an XDN going up against 2X ships, it ought to just rock. Engine power increased along the lines of the PCX.

For a PC armed version, swap out the disruptors for paired PC's. Sleep well, all you Selt players out there.

By Daniel Knudtson Thompson (Brezgonne) on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 12:35 pm: Edit

Ken: What new D ssds?

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 12:39 pm: Edit

Captain's Log 29 revised the Tholian DN family. Loren Knight and I submitted a story and SSD for the Tholian BB last year; re-designing the ship led SVC and SPP to re-do the DN's, as well. The shape of the XBC and DX above are examples, and are based on those SSD's.

By Jeff Johnson (Jeffro) on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 12:40 pm: Edit

See Captain's Log #29.

Just a different layout and a tweak to the warp engine arrangement.

By Daniel Knudtson Thompson (Brezgonne) on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 01:06 pm: Edit

Bah! people have to tell me these sort of things lol

The store here hardly ever has SFB stuff so I don't have CL29.

Can someone tell me or show me what was changed on the DPW? I sorta need that one later tonight.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 01:13 pm: Edit

Take the DX above and:

• delete phasers 5, 6 and 11
• Change phasers 14-19 to phaser 3's; add one to each grouping.
• Remove disruptors C and F
• Change C warp to six boxes...change L/R warp to 14 boxes.
• Above disruptors, add one phaser 3 to each side of the ship, same arcs as disruptors.
• All shields set to 36.

By Chad Carew (Blackhawkckc) on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 01:38 pm: Edit

Mike, the box to the right of the lower transporter (across from the disruptors) is not labled.

By Daniel Knudtson Thompson (Brezgonne) on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 02:46 pm: Edit

o.O thats a drop in total warp power isn't it...

Old D has 12*3 (36) warp, 6 AWR, 6 impulse.

New D has 14+14+6 (34), 8 awr, 6 impulse.

Thats a curious change....

By Chad Carew (Blackhawkckc) on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 03:14 pm: Edit

Huh? 36+6=42, 34+8=42. Same total warp power.