Topic: Phasers

[FPF-Bach]

OK So if a P1 is better then a P2 and a P2 is better then a P3 then why isn't a P4 worse then all 3?  Why isn't a Phaser 4 actually a Phaser 1, a P1 a P2, a P2 a P3 and a P3 a P4? 

What's the logic here?

[Corbomite]

In the original SFB Pocket Game there were no Starbases, so that designation got placed a bit out of order for the uninitiated.

[FPF-Bach]

In the original SFB Pocket Game there were no Starbases, so that designation got placed a bit out of order for the uninitiated.

As good an answer as any.  Thanks

[Commander Maxillius]

Of course, calling it the PhaserS (starbase) was out of the question

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

Actually... in the original ADB design concepts for the game, there were no different types of phasers at all, just a Phaser. ADB designed the game based primarily on Franz Joseph Designs Star Trek Starfleet Technical Manual, and script writers documentation from the Original series. In those notes, a Klingon Battlecruiser was described as bristling with phasers all over it, like a Battleship. From a gaming point of view, if this were true, then Kirk should have had his a** handed to him nearly every time when fighting a Klingon D7.
 So, to resolve this anomaly, and remain true to the material, ADB came up with the idea of having different types of phasers. Klingon phasers were made slightly less powerful, and their role evolved into an offensive/defensive one. Thus was made the distinction between Phaser type I and Phaser type II. But if Phaser type IIs had a defensive role, what would they be defending against?
 From this, ADB developed the concept of the drone, phaser II's were designed to shoot them down (thats why the variability of the phaser II is so small compared with a phaser I), yet still afford the ship some firepower. But, we never saw any drones in the Original series, this had to be explained as well. ADB then dreamed up the idea of another bordering race away from Federation space hostile to the Klingons that used drones as their primary weapon. Thus was born the Kzinti. We never saw drones in the Original series, because we never saw any Kzinti ships. (or at least thats the rationale behind it).
Phaser IIIs came later and were designed purely in a defensive role to shoot down drones, but lacked the firepower of the phaserII (thus it only used half the energy).
As Corbomite mentions, when the game expanded beyond the two ships it originally began with (a F-CA and K-D7), they felt that ship mounted phasers were too small for starbases, which were analogous to coastal fortresses that had huge land based cannons. Such cannons are too big to mount on ships, and so ADB wanted to keep that same theme, thus the Phaer-IV was born (since they had already used the numbers 1, 2 and 3). More than likely, if it was designed from the ground up, the phaser nomenclature would probably have been reversed ie. the higher the number, the more powerful the phaser. (PhaserIs would be PhaserIIIs).

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

I always thought it was due to the warning call of "FOUR!" before they were fired......or was that golf......

[Villa64]

Hey, what were the original ships, anyway?

I was reading this thread trying to think of them, and cant remember.  I owned the original (or so I think) Task Force Games #1, SFB (in a 8 1/2 x 11 plastic bag), and the designer addition (in a box with a black and white rulebook.

What I remember from the TFG #1 is some 8 1/2 x 11 sheets that you cut in half because each one had two ships.  Something like:
Gorn CL/CA and Kzinti CS/CL
Rom KR and WE,WB
Klingon D7 and Fed CA
Fed old CL and Fed DN

The designer game was the same but added
Tholian PC and Klingon F5,E4, rom kf5r
Fed Starbase (full 8 1/12 x 11 ssd!)
Kzinti FF and Fed SC,DD.


The expansions (1,2, and 3, all 8 1/2 x 11 in a plastic bag) added more SSD's.  Was a Kzinti CV a designer ship? or an expansion? hmm.


Am I remembering any of this right?

The addition to the above was that a Ph3 was only on a Kzinti ship (as of the designer edition).  Later they said that was explained because of the Kzinti civil wars, and the need for a weapon to defend against drones only.

However, dont look for consistency from ADB.  They consistently were late, inconsistent, and violated even the mandates that they themselves decided to emphasize ("We would never run the Bargentine campaign!")

Villa

[GDA-S'Cipio]

Am I remembering any of this right?

Yep.  The original pocket game saved space by letting the ships share SSD's.  Boxes on the smaller ship were greyed out, and not used in that case.  There were only two SSD sheets, with four ships on each.  You got more than just 8 ships, however, because of the shared SSDs.

The Gorn CA/CL shared an SSD.
The Fed CA/CC shared an SSD
The Klingon D7/D6 and Romulan KR shared an SSD.
The Kzinti CS/CL shared an SSD.
The Rom WE/WB shared an SSD.

-S'Cipio

[Ravok]

Actually... in the original ADB design concepts for the game, there were no different types of phasers at all, just a Phaser. ADB designed the game based primarily on Franz Joseph Designs Star Trek Starfleet Technical Manual, and script writers documentation from the Original series. In those notes, a Klingon Battlecruiser was described as bristling with phasers all over it, like a Battleship. From a gaming point of view, if this were true, then Kirk should have had his a** handed to him nearly every time when fighting a Klingon D7.
 So, to resolve this anomaly, and remain true to the material, ADB came up with the idea of having different types of phasers. Klingon phasers were made slightly less powerful, and their role evolved into an offensive/defensive one. Thus was made the distinction between Phaser type I and Phaser type II. But if Phaser type IIs had a defensive role, what would they be defending against?
 From this, ADB developed the concept of the drone, phaser II's were designed to shoot them down (thats why the variability of the phaser II is so small compared with a phaser I), yet still afford the ship some firepower. But, we never saw any drones in the Original series, this had to be explained as well. ADB then dreamed up the idea of another bordering race away from Federation space hostile to the Klingons that used drones as their primary weapon. Thus was born the Kzinti. We never saw drones in the Original series, because we never saw any Kzinti ships. (or at least thats the rationale behind it).
Phaser IIIs came later and were designed purely in a defensive role to shoot down drones, but lacked the firepower of the phaserII (thus it only used half the energy).
As Corbomite mentions, when the game expanded beyond the two ships it originally began with (a F-CA and K-D7), they felt that ship mounted phasers were too small for starbases, which were analogous to coastal fortresses that had huge land based cannons. Such cannons are too big to mount on ships, and so ADB wanted to keep that same theme, thus the Phaer-IV was born (since they had already used the numbers 1, 2 and 3). More than likely, if it was designed from the ground up, the phaser nomenclature would probably have been reversed ie. the higher the number, the more powerful the phaser. (PhaserIs would be PhaserIIIs).

 Tracy i thought Phaser 2 and 3 where identical in damage? But the main difference between the 2 was the tracking system?

 2s had better tracking and targeting systems than 3s thus could do more damage?

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

 Tracy i thought Phaser 2 and 3 where identical in damage? But the main difference between the 2 was the tracking system?

 2s had better tracking and targeting systems than 3s thus could do more damage?

The Ph-II uses a different damage chart to the Ph-III, A phaser-II at range zero does 5 to 6 damage, as opposed to a ph-III which does 3 to 4 damage. Note that the phaser-III only does 3 damage on a 6-sided die roll of 6 (4 dmg on everything else). The lack of variability in the damage is why these phasers are classed as defensive, ie. they will almost always knock out an incoming drone. The phaser-I, on the other hand, at range zero, does 4 to 9 damage, so on a die roll of 6, it will actually do less damage than a Ph-II. On average, a Ph-I will do more though.

[762_XC]

You're thinking of Ph-2 and Ph-1 Ravok. In SFB lore they are the same unit with a different tracking system. That's why you see so many Ph-2 get upgraded to Ph-1.

[Father Ted]

Actually, it was that a Ph-2 was the same platform as a Ph-1, with less capable fire control(or sensors, whatever ), hence it wouldn't provide the same firepower.

[Ravok]

 Thanks all of you guys its been a while and i just love this stuff.

 +1 for all of you for your prompt and kind replys.

[Julin Eurthyr]

I thought the D7 Blueprints had 2 concerns that ADB needed to deal with.

A launching rack for unmanned targeting drones.
The sheer number of (oddly enough, rearward facing) phasers.

The phaser issue was an easy fix, create the Ph-2.  An offensive / defensive phaser designed to be both capable against ships while being useful against drones.  In theory, the Ph-2 takes the same amount of space etc. as a Ph-1, but the emitters / fire control is a lot weaker on a Ph-2, causing the earlier drop off in effectiveness / range.

The drone rack was added, and obviously the use of the rack to fire actual warheads instead of "clay pigeons" for training was put into use.  ADB then did another trick, as it were.  Seeing the Klinks as Dizzy / Drone, and having access to the Kzinti from Niven's TAS episode, they made the Kzinti a Drone / Disruptor user, being the "extreme" of drone-use.

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

Quite correct, Julin 

[FPF-Bach]

All interesting info, thanks all for posting.