Archive through February 16, 2003
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board: The "X" Files: Hellbores and PPDs: Archive through February 16, 2003
By Dave Morse (Dcm) on Monday, February 10, 2003 - 01:15 am: Edit

Quote:

Swivel mounts...swivel mounts....

yeah there's a little 30 degree notch of low-plamsa-coverage between RP and L+LR that my enemies are always exploiting. (yeah yeah that's what the little ships with FP are for ... but sometimes the little ships aren't there to help you ... like when you've been displaced).

Agreed rear-Fs are racial flavor.
Also I think the rulebook says something like "ISC rear firing F torps can never ever be upgraded to swivel mounts, so don't even ask, chump". I think the solution is to wait till they invent plasma-L then ask. :P

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, February 10, 2003 - 03:08 pm: Edit

I like the ISC's lateral torps. It's part of what makes them the ISC.

I'm not thrilled with a multi-pulse-per-impulse PPD. The mizia potential is pretty severe. It makes the weapon harder to deal with.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Monday, February 10, 2003 - 08:06 pm: Edit

What if the only improvements the ISC got were the ph-5, the rapid PPD, 48 warp, and minor shield improvements?

The CC is 220 BPV.
It has 8 ph-1, 6 ph-3, 2 S-torps, 6 F-torps, 2 PPDs.

The CCX is rated at 315.
It has 12 ph-1, 0 ph-3, 2 M-torps, 6 L-torps, 2 PPDs, and the non-SSD X1 advantages.

The XCC should be in the 375-400 range.
If it has 8 ph-5, 6 ph-6, 2 M-torps, 6 L-torps, 2 XPPDs, and some of the X2 advantages, would it make the BPV right?

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 07:58 am: Edit

Power: 5x5 Bats, 4 imp, 8 awr, 48 warp that’s 60 power. That’s +55 BPV.
Weapons: If 8 P5 = 12 P1 then +6 P6 +2 PPD(X2). +28
SIF: +12
Random X2 benefits: +10
CCX(X1) = 315
XCC(X2) = 315+10+12+28+55 = 420 BPV

But that's without speed 48 plasma, speed 32+, more shields, EW enhancements or any of the other major changes being discussed. Add in a +5% pre-playtest fudge and you have 441 BPV.

By Aaron Gimblet (Marcus) on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 03:01 pm: Edit

On the Hellbores...

a while back I threw out an idea for an improved HB Direct Fire mode, to wit dealing all damage to the facing screen rather than 1/2 damage. Someone else said that it was maybe an X tech idea, so im tossing it out here again for group commentary...

By Aaron Gimblet (Marcus) on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 04:25 pm: Edit

NM... turning the HB into an every-turn 10-points-to-facing-screen weapon might be a wee tiny bit of a much.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 06:44 pm: Edit

Quote:

On the Hellbores...

a while back I threw out an idea for an improved HB Direct Fire mode, to wit dealing all damage to the facing screen rather than 1/2 damage. Someone else said that it was maybe an X tech idea, so im tossing it out here again for group commentary...



I like it.

I like it alot.

Not so sure if having four weapons on a ship that can each inflict 30 points of damage on the facing shield is a good idea...it'll make the Feds look right true pusseys.
But limiting it to Standard shots might be do-able...even if it does still equal out with their 20 point warheads ( if they don't go to 24 point warheads ) with a much higher to hit chance, especially at range.

But I still like the ingenious simplicity of it.

By Aaron Gimblet (Marcus) on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 10:09 pm: Edit

19, 10, 30

Its not the 120 point strike on one screen from the moral descendant of a DG that worries me... at point-blank range to a Hydran, you die. Thats an old story.

What worries me is the 19 point OLs to one screen at R8/10... kinda depends on how much damage were going to let Photons do, and at what energy cost.

Beyond that, what worries me is a 10 point shot every turn at Range 15. ECM resistant, potentially 40 points off a facing sheild with 4 bores... that lets an XCA potentially (with a handful of our phaser-5's) go internal on most anything at Range 15 in a single salvo. Once youve got internals, your staring down the mizia horror of 4 every-turn bores.

Ill grant that my SFB experience is a bit dusty, and I tend to either overpowered proposals or over-dissection of proposals, so ill see what everyone else thinks.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 11:04 pm: Edit

IMHO, The hellbore is simply too powerful a weapon to give a full-power DF mode to.

By Dave Morse (Dcm) on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 11:12 pm: Edit

I don't know about the hellbores. However ships with 15-30 points in batteries are going to be alot more capable to balance their weak shield with reserve specific reinforcement. This will hurt the X2 Hellbore.

By Jeremy Gray (Gray) on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 11:24 pm: Edit

How's this for an idea? Give the HB a feature evolved from Aegis systems. Allow the HBs to be fired either before or after direct fire in a seperate fire declaration on the same impulse. Big difference is that the HB-firing player could observe fire from other direct fire weapons, examine what damage was inflicted, then decide if they want to follow up with enveloping HBs, all in the same impulse.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 01:11 am: Edit

Quote:

How's this for an idea? Give the HB a feature evolved from Aegis systems. Allow the HBs to be fired either before or after direct fire in a seperate fire declaration on the same impulse. Big difference is that the HB-firing player could observe fire from other direct fire weapons, examine what damage was inflicted, then decide if they want to follow up with enveloping HBs, all in the same impulse.


Now maybe I'm wrong and this and I haven't checked but isn't that aready the case, that the Hellbore user can choose not to fire in the Post DF situation isn't to his liking!?!

By Jeremy Gray (Gray) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 06:27 am: Edit

I don't believe so. Currently, HBs are ANNOUNCED with all other weapons fire in the DF step, but the user gets to choose if enveloping HBs are RESOLVED before or after direct fire. So there is no opportunity to shoot, check the damage, then decide to fire HBs all in the same impulse. If everything is going to happen in one impulse, you have to hope/gamble/guess when you announce fire that you will create a weak shield before the HBs are resolved. Aegis is pointed to as an exception to the "all direct fire announcements are simultaneous" rule, but HBs are not.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 03:43 pm: Edit

...so you're suggesting a flash-adjust option for the hellbore where the player can choose when hellbores reslove after looking at the DF weapons damage results?

By Aaron Gimblet (Marcus) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 04:23 pm: Edit

Hmm... were knocking around a 24 point OL Photon... vs a 19 Point OL Bore (at Range 10). This is as opposed to the 0X situation, of a 16 point OL Photon vs a 10 point (facing) Bore.

This does make 'Bores relatively more-strong, compared to Photons, in the 2X situation when compared to the 0X situation.

Proposition: Increase arming cost of the 'Shaped Charge' arming mode (full damage direct-fire).

Alternate Proposition: Increase HB firepower 50%, to paralell Photon Increase (waits for sounds of screaming to fade)

By Jeremy Gray (Gray) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 04:24 pm: Edit

Quote:

...so you're suggesting a flash-adjust option for the hellbore where the player can choose when hellbores reslove after looking at the DF weapons damage results?



Pretty much. X2 Hellbore shooters would have a second opportunity to declare HB fire after all DF had been resolved, just like the later Aegis shots. I have no idea if it would really be too unbalancing or not, but it could be one alternative (or at least part of one) to the weapon improvement = harder punch approach.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 05:00 pm: Edit

I like it you could keep the HB damage the same as it is now without having to up it's total firepower. While letting it have a greater possible Mizia impact based on being able to see the Damage already done.

But monkeying around with the SOP in DF maybe the thing SVC/SPP would object to the most.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 07:51 pm: Edit

Aaron,

On reason the hellbore is less powerful than the Photon is that it has better accuracy.

A general rule of thumb is that no DF weapon should hit as hard as a photon unless it accepts the accuracy of a photon or has a similarly serious disadvantage.

Otherwise, what's the difference between a full-power DF hellbore and a photon? Rolling 1d6 vs 2 and that's it?

Bleah.

By Aaron Gimblet (Marcus) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 08:59 pm: Edit

John, maybe I was unclear...

Photons SHOULD hit harder, and the final 'power level' of the Hellbore should never be higher than that of the Photon.

However, I would like to see the same basic ratio preserved... IE a 50% increase in Photon firepower coupled with a 50% increase in HB firepower, etc.

Maybe we should table the other weapons discussions until we sort out that most basic of systems, Photons and Disruptors. Once we know what we want our Photons and Disruptors to look like, well know what we can and cant, should and shouldnt do with the other Heavies.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 09:47 pm: Edit

Just goign to full-power DF increases the hellbore's power by 100% in terms of raw crunch.

A fully overloaded HB cost 9 total power and delivers 19-30 damage at better to-hits.

Our best (serious) photon proposal delivers 24 damage and a lot of people don't want to go above 20.

A full-DF hellbore could easily be too powerful as compared to a 24-pt photon and absolutely is too powerful vs a 20-point photon.

Add to this that the photon draws more juice and the proposed full-power hellbore is simply too much.

By Aaron Gimblet (Marcus) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 09:53 pm: Edit

Then limit it to normal loads. Make it cost at 3+6, like OLs.

I kinda like the 'leading burst' methodology HBs you proposed, but would like something as simple as possible if that can be aranged.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 10:04 pm: Edit

If you limit full-DF hellbores to normal loads, it isn't worth the effort to do. You get 13 to the facing shield with a STD, 10 to the weakest sheild with an enveloping OL. That isn't much.

Most DF weapons perform the same way standard vs. overload, except for the overload range-limit.

I have a proposal very early in the archives where for a 4+4 standard load, 4+8 overload, a hellboredelivers an extra 20% of warhead thump ahead of the enveloping damage, which helps "notch" a shield for enveloping damage.

Take a look and see what you think.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 02:11 am: Edit

Quote:

Proposition: Increase arming cost of the 'Shaped Charge' arming mode (full damage direct-fire).

Alternate Proposition: Increase HB firepower 50%, to paralell Photon Increase (waits for sounds of screaming to fade)


1) I think it'll need a different arming cost and be very expensive, say 5+5 and 5+10. although I'm against allowing it to fire as an Overload because an R1 30 point strike a sheild is massive, capaired to what the Photon can do.
Perhaps just 5+5 and 10 and leave it at that.
Also note that the hellbore is very good at hitting tarhets so perhaps a natural ECM bonus to the target would be in order.

2)Increase the Hellbore to have it arm as 6+6 ( with the ability fire fastloaded standard on the first turn if needed ) to produce a hellbore that has a warhead that does twice the damage of a standard hellbore.
A 33% increase in damage might not sound as good as a 50% increase but considering how well the Hellbore Hits and how much damage it does, I think that would be a good thing, the hellbore doesn't need to be the King of weapons through all periods of technology.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 02:15 am: Edit

Actually having the Hellbore do full damage tio the facing shield in both standard and Overload mode, wouldn't be so tough, if ships could only mount the X2 hellbores at a rate of 0.5 times their MC ( rounded off ) on their hulls.

That is CAs with 2 Uber hellbores and DDs and FFs with 1.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, February 16, 2003 - 01:59 pm: Edit

Sure but then 4 regular hellbores firing in DF mode will do the same damage as your 2 uber-bores.

You have gain no net DF advantage and lose ground where the hellbore shines, which is being able to hit the non-facing shield.

all you really gain is power savings, which only help if the ship in california at the time. :)

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