Topic: Planning OP+ shiplist 2.1 .. controversial?

[jdmckinney]

Weighing in on the F-rack question (had a chance to peek at R3 while checking in at the hotel just now):

The SSDs of the affected ships (D6S for example) all seem to specify they could fire one drone per turn, or one drone per rack per turn with the B refit. Ships that came out before the B refit and have just one drone rack are not limited because only pairs of racks were affected by this rule. So, F-racks generally go on ships pre-B with 2 drone racks. The Taldren F-rack is, like many things, a close approximation of pre-B A-racks, but they fire half as quickly instead of the normal A-rack speed with a limitation on pairs. So, Klingons with F-racks get a slight disadvantage in that if they lose one F-rack, the other still fires at half speed rather than the full speed it would be able to achieve without a second rack competing for time.

About E-racks, I noticed the E3D has 2 of these. If I recall correctly, they use type-VI drones which aren't available for ship use in SFC, but only for fighters. The C-rack substitution seems like a fair translation in this instance, unless someone knows how to get fighter drones to work on a ship of the line. Heck, I wasn't aware there was an E-rack available in SFC until this discussion.

Can someone refresh my memory on X-ship drone racks (don't have that module with me)? Is there such a thing as CX racks? If so, wouldn't they be essentially like the E-racks people have described here?

On the Mirak X2s, has anyone tried testing a Mirak X with 1 heavy disruptor in place of 2 normal ones? I know the HDisr is a Klingon-only weapon in the stock Taldren list, but I wonder if it would help at all with the desire for more energy weapon crunch while also relieving some of the power drain? I'm just toying with an idea here, not being all that familiar with the HDisr stats after a long vacation from Xes.

[jdmckinney]

Kortez, I didn't mean to imply you should yell at the wife or anything, but rather that I'd be inclined toward drooling and banging my head against a wall like the stereotypical movie nuthouse resident. Think restraints and heavy medication. Of course, I'm just joking anyway. I don't envy you this particular misfortune.

[Kortez]

Quote:
Kortez, I didn't mean to imply you should yell at the wife or anything, but rather that I'd be inclined toward drooling and banging my head against a wall like the stereotypical movie nuthouse resident. Think restraints and heavy medication. Of course, I'm just joking anyway. I don't envy you this particular misfortune.  

Thanks, but, ... I already do that when I look at Kzinti ships and see that none of our advatages CAN carry over from SFB to SFC2.   NO special mines, no special drones, no ships with more than 16 fighters.   To me, SFB portrays the Kzin as if they were the dumbest idiots ever to live.  We kill each other we get bashed into almost non-existence by never ending Klingon and Lyran attacks, the Feds give us tidbits to amuse ourselves and them with, and we fly garbage scows.

Where is that wall?
 

[FireSoul]

Quote:
Weighing in on the F-rack question (had a chance to peek at R3 while checking in at the hotel just now):
The SSDs of the affected ships (D6S for example) all seem to specify they could fire one drone per turn, or one drone per rack per turn with the B refit. Ships that came out before the B refit and have just one drone rack are not limited because only pairs of racks were affected by this rule. So, F-racks generally go on ships pre-B with 2 drone racks. The Taldren F-rack is, like many things, a close approximation of pre-B A-racks, but they fire half as quickly instead of the normal A-rack speed with a limitation on pairs. So, Klingons with F-racks get a slight disadvantage in that if they lose one F-rack, the other still fires at half speed rather than the full speed it would be able to achieve without a second rack competing for time.

Ok. thanks.

Quote:

About E-racks, I noticed the E3D has 2 of these. If I recall correctly, they use type-VI drones which aren't available for ship use in SFC, but only for fighters. The C-rack substitution seems like a fair translation in this instance, unless someone knows how to get fighter drones to work on a ship of the line. Heck, I wasn't aware there was an E-rack available in SFC until this discussion.

Type VI drones are supposed to only have 12 hexes of life. Unless we can also do that, I don't want to touch the E rack.
.. and BTW.. this is why I don't put the M rack on pre X2 ships. The MIRVed drones live for too long and split too early.

Quote:

Can someone refresh my memory on X-ship drone racks (don't have that module with me)? Is there such a thing as CX racks? If so, wouldn't they be essentially like the E-racks people have described here?

Yes.
CX racks have 3 reloads instead of 2. They are capable of using the X drones.

Quote:

On the Mirak X2s, has anyone tried testing a Mirak X with 1 heavy disruptor in place of 2 normal ones? I know the HDisr is a Klingon-only weapon in the stock Taldren list, but I wonder if it would help at all with the desire for more energy weapon crunch while also relieving some of the power drain? I'm just toying with an idea here, not being all that familiar with the HDisr stats after a long vacation from Xes.  

I'd rather have 2 dizzies instead. BESIDES! .. the Heavy Disruptor has a leak feature when rolling a 1, I beleive.

-- Luc

[Fluf]

Nomad its not so much a question of crunch power on the X2 Mirak ships.  They have that with the "all powerfull MIRV" (yeah right).  Its a matter of power.  As you know, speed is life in this game.  Compare the following:

H-XCA - 60 power
L-XCA- 56 Power
K-XCA - 56 Power
F-XCA - 56 Power
I-XCA - 53 Power
G-XCA - 52 Power
R-XCA- 52 Power
Z-XCA- 42 Power

Z-CCX - 52 Power!  That is the reason we are willing to fly it in 2300.  We might live.  None of the other Mirak X2 ships are flyable except the X-DD and the X-DG.  

The Mirak X2 heavy cruisers just dont have enough power to manuever and fire weapons.  Once they are out of drones and lose a shield, they are done.  I would rather take my chances in a Z-CCX vs the other X2's in the game, then wallow in one of these tubs.
 

[KBF-Dogmatix]

Quote:
I agree Dogmatix, the CC is a fine ship..  Although if you notice, its not supposed to be that way.  SFB I believe had it carrying 2 A racks and the CC+ was the refit to C and B racks.  As it stands now, there is no difference in the CC and the CC+ in the stock shiplist.  My personal opinion is the CC+ should get a 2AMD6 for its refit.  Our CC is a good boat until 2270, then it becomes pretty much useless with the new fighters and other ships coming out between 2270 and 2273.

So we edit the CC per SFB specs?  I'm in favor of the CC+ being fitted with 2xAMD6.  It makes sense and is reasonable.

Quote:
 And yes the AOTK MCC was a great help, although we did kill the expanded Dizzy Arcs and took a Phaser off of it I think.  It was still no match for a D5 series boat.  Also the NCC that was added to the AOTK was used alot.  I know Cougar, Green, Jinn and Hades used that boat alot and it was a fine addition to the fleet.  It actually gave us a boat that could compete.

I must have never run into those guys.  I seem to remember running into Cougar in a CVS, and J'nn in some other boats, but not the NCC.  I eaccept they they did indeed fly them.  I just never had the pleasure of running into them during those times.

Well, I wouldn't say the MCC was "no match" for a D5 series boat.  I mean..it probably competes as well as any of our D5 boats do vis a vis the other races, no?  The two extra drone racks count for something..especially when fast drones are available.  There's not a huge amount of differnce between the "fixed" MCC and the D5 boats.  In addtion, I don't see much reason why we shouldn't have a sweet spot (if we can even call the D5 series that) when other races have their chonological and hull-class sweet spots.  I mean...what do we have the competely fairly in Early vs. the Z-DN?  Anyone think the C8V is better than the the Z-CVA?

Quote:
And I know you dont like the E rack and I agree with you, it should'nt be on any other ships, other then a 1st Gen X, but I do think it would be the logical progression that the Kzin would follow in their designing of a 1st Gen X ship.

I'm glad there's some agreement there.  I look forward to its future use as a "sort of" 1st generation x-weapon mount.

Quote:
This was the MCC in AOTK:

Designation: Z-MCC
<snip>
4x Disruptor 3  (split into 2 Hardpoints FA arc - we wanted FAR/FAL to counter the D5L's FHR, FHL)

<snip>

I think the split of the hardpoints is absolutely proper, but I didn't think it a good thing to retain all four drone racks and then also get the expanded disruptor arcs in an effort to create a Miraki dogfighter.  Drop two racks and add the expanded disruptor arcs or leave the ship's racks intact and keep the FA arc.  This seems emminently fair to me.

Quote:
The refit for the CC+ in AOTK was taking one of the Dizzy Hardpoints and making it and FX arc, expanding shuttles to 4 and adding the E rack to replace the C rack.  It was never flown simply because flying a heavy cruiser in mid era with no AMD is a death blow.

These modifications make sense, though I note that unless we take into account new Klingon variants in the AOTK shiplist, we do not have a CC or refitted CC with expanded disruptor arcs, let alone FX arcs.  The addtion of some AMD (how much needs to be examined) to a heavy command cruiser belonging to an drone/AMD-using race only makes sense.  I would not argue against such a change.

Quote:

Also notice the BCH+

Designation: Z-BCH+

<snip>

2 more power.  Throw the G rack off.  Mirak hate G Racks!  E Rack added for more reloads to replace the C rack. This thing could almost fight a C7.  And I said almost!    It still lost most of the time.  Year released 2284.

Again..."almost" can be considered fine since there are similar instances in which Klingon ships do not stack up favorably vis a vis Miraki ships (or those of other races).  We can either decide to create parity at all class levels or we can continue with the model of disparity at the various hull class levels.  Depending upon which way we choose to go, the arguments for or against change dramatically.


How many times did you lose in a Z-CVA vs. K-anything battle?  I'm aware multiple players with multiple ships can and did win, but what about a 1 on 1 battle.  Would you consider any single Klingon ship a threat (barring the obvious and usually unavailable B10/K/V or B11K).


 

[jdmckinney]

Quote:
H-XCA - 60 power
L-XCA- 56 Power
K-XCA - 56 Power
F-XCA - 56 Power
I-XCA - 53 Power
G-XCA - 52 Power
R-XCA- 52 Power
Z-XCA- 42 Power

Z-CCX - 52 Power!

Wow. That seems pretty bad, but you know what else looks bad? The Plasma races get less power than the Klingons and Federation, who have drones on board. Since drones don't cost any power to use, I could understand a Mirak having less power because they have fewer energy-draining weapons, but then the Fed and Klingon ships should also be lower than they are now using that rationale, though their X-heavies do cost power wheras the MIRV doesn't. As an experiment, has anyone tried giving ALL XCAs 56 power, except the Hydran 60 (though I'm not clear why theirs would be so high, unless it's due to hold costs)? Or, try the 52-53 range?

[KBF-Dogmatix]

Quote:

Quote:
Kortez, I didn't mean to imply you should yell at the wife or anything, but rather that I'd be inclined toward drooling and banging my head against a wall like the stereotypical movie nuthouse resident. Think restraints and heavy medication. Of course, I'm just joking anyway. I don't envy you this particular misfortune.  

Thanks, but, ... I already do that when I look at Kzinti ships and see that none of our advatages CAN carry over from SFB to SFC2.   NO special mines, no special drones, no ships with more than 16 fighters.   To me, SFB portrays the Kzin as if they were the dumbest idiots ever to live.  We kill each other we get bashed into almost non-existence by never ending Klingon and Lyran attacks, the Feds give us tidbits to amuse ourselves and them with, and we fly garbage scows.

Where is that wall?
 

Things are tough all over, mah brutha.  We Klingons get to play the part of the Evil Empire (Soviets).  We all know how that worked out...heheh.

Nor are you the Hydran's bitch in Early Era PvP.


At least your people aren't shown constantly being defeated or made into charicatures on the various weekly Star Trek dramatic series.  


 

[KBF-Dogmatix]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
can you help me find the part that mentions 2272-2273 for the K refit in the SFB material?

..as for the Casual Carriers..... that change *IS* for them. I would not leave them alone. They need fixing. That's the issue, here... a balance overhaul for carriers, casual or not.

-- Luc

EDIT: All master ship charts show Y175..

No..because my SFB material is stuffed away in offsite storage.  Going by Taldren's FYAs, that's when the K-refits come out.  That was my actual point of reference.  

I had all the SSDs as of 4/2002, but my wife threw EVERYTHING away, by accident.  I could cry.  Anyone know of a good place to order from to regain my status?
 

My wife only stuffed them away where I will likely never get to them.  Same diff, but somehow not quite as bad, I guess.


I've been considering buying new stuff, so opposed am I to mucking around in the dusty, hot offsite storage.


 

No, I would retrieve them if I could.
 

Pardon me.  


 

[KBF-Dogmatix]

Quote:

Quote:
H-XCA - 60 power
L-XCA- 56 Power
K-XCA - 56 Power
F-XCA - 56 Power
I-XCA - 53 Power
G-XCA - 52 Power
R-XCA- 52 Power
Z-XCA- 42 Power

Z-CCX - 52 Power!

Wow. That seems pretty bad, but you know what else looks bad? The Plasma races get less power than the Klingons and Federation, who have drones on board. Since drones don't cost any power to use, I could understand a Mirak having less power because they have fewer energy-draining weapons, but then the Fed and Klingon ships should also be lower than they are now using that rationale, though their X-heavies do cost power wheras the MIRV doesn't. As an experiment, has anyone tried giving ALL XCAs 56 power, except the Hydran 60 (though I'm not clear why theirs would be so high, unless it's due to hold costs)? Or, try the 52-53 range?  

The K-XCA may have a few more points of power, but it lacks the crunch of the G and R-XCAs, drones are finite (plasma is not) and far less useful in an era rife with PhG and PlasD (Miraki MIRVs overcome this problem) and the holding cost of all forms of disruptors is pretty high when you consider their damage potential.


I can see the problem with the Z-XCA sitting at 42 power.  That would appear to beed some "repairing" at least on a testing basis.  In my humble opinion. there is no problem with any of the power levels of the other ships, though I do wonder why the H-XCA has four more power than the next closest race.  I know Hydran X-ships are quite good...heheh.


 

[FireSoul]

Quote:

Quote:
I agree Dogmatix, the CC is a fine ship..  Although if you notice, its not supposed to be that way.  SFB I believe had it carrying 2 A racks and the CC+ was the refit to C and B racks.  As it stands now, there is no difference in the CC and the CC+ in the stock shiplist.  My personal opinion is the CC+ should get a 2AMD6 for its refit.  Our CC is a good boat until 2270, then it becomes pretty much useless with the new fighters and other ships coming out between 2270 and 2273.

So we edit the CC per SFB specs?  I'm in favor of the CC+ being fitted with 2xAMD6.  It makes sense and is reasonable.

SFB specs: there are no ADDs on the Z-CC, refitted or not.

Quote:

Quote:
And I know you dont like the E rack and I agree with you, it should'nt be on any other ships, other then a 1st Gen X, but I do think it would be the logical progression that the Kzin would follow in their designing of a 1st Gen X ship.

I'm glad there's some agreement there.  I look forward to its future use as a "sort of" 1st generation x-weapon mount.

I .. .. won't let OP+ become a test shiplist for experiments. Sorry.

Quote:

Quote:
This was the MCC in AOTK:
Designation: Z-MCC
<snip>
4x Disruptor 3  (split into 2 Hardpoints FA arc - we wanted FAR/FAL to counter the D5L's FHR, FHL)

<snip>

I think the split of the hardpoints is absolutely proper, but I didn't think it a good thing to retain all four drone racks and then also get the expanded disruptor arcs in an effort to create a Miraki dogfighter.  Drop two racks and add the expanded disruptor arcs or leave the ship's racks intact and keep the FA arc.  This seems emminently fair to me.

I fully intend to do what I can about mounts that can be split.


 

[jdmckinney]

So, are we thinking  the Z-XCA deserves 52 power? 54? 56? I'd opt for 52 and see how that flies, then up it if needed. Certainly I see no reason why an X1 would have more power than an X2 of the same race. FS, could this possibly be asked in the testers' forum?

Of course, this is all speculative without test results. Now I wish I were at home where my OP is.

[Fluf]

Quote:

Quote:
H-XCA - 60 power
L-XCA- 56 Power
K-XCA - 56 Power
F-XCA - 56 Power
I-XCA - 53 Power
G-XCA - 52 Power
R-XCA- 52 Power
Z-XCA- 42 Power

Z-CCX - 52 Power!

Wow. That seems pretty bad, but you know what else looks bad? The Plasma races get less power than the Klingons and Federation, who have drones on board. Since drones don't cost any power to use, I could understand a Mirak having less power because they have fewer energy-draining weapons, but then the Fed and Klingon ships should also be lower than they are now using that rationale, though their X-heavies do cost power wheras the MIRV doesn't. As an experiment, has anyone tried giving ALL XCAs 56 power, except the Hydran 60 (though I'm not clear why theirs would be so high, unless it's due to hold costs)? Or, try the 52-53 range?  

True, however most know that the Gorn XCA is the best in the game too.  I think its just a matter of balancing these ships a little more, and I wish Firesoul or somebody could do this based on SFB instead of Taldrens weird approach to the X2 ships. Hence my reasoning that trying to put another heavy weapon on a Mirak ship, would just exagerate the power problem even more.  I think Taldren just felt they had to give the Mirak a cut somewhere, with the introduction of the all powerfull Mirv in the game.  If you remember, the Mirv was the most feared weapon in the forums when the game first came out and everyone was complaining about the Mirak X2 ships.  After awhile, everyone learned drone defense and this arguement went away leaving the Mirak far behind in the X2 level.

[FireSoul]

Quote:
So, are we thinking  the Z-XCA deserves 52 power? 54? 56? I'd opt for 52 and see how that flies, then up it if needed. Certainly I see no reason why an X1 would have more power than an X2 of the same race. FS, could this possibly be asked in the testers' forum?

Of course, this is all speculative without test results. Now I wish I were at home where my OP is.  

What we really need is someone to change it and play it against another player a few times..
.. and tell me how it went. It shouldn't be OTT, nor underpowered.

-- Luc

[jdmckinney]

And, yes, I agree with FireSoul's stance on OP+ being a list based on SFB and not a testbed. Maybe with good testing results, the Z-XCA could be redesigned and even submitted to Taldren for consideration. Or, maybe FS would consider changing it in his list if he felt a revised one necessary. Bottom line, it's his list. People are certainly free to make their own custom lists.

[KBF-Dogmatix]

I understand all of that, Luc.  I wasn't suggesting you would.  We have gone off on a minor tangent.


As far as the E-rack on 1st generation x-ships, it seems proper to use them as a reasonable approximation of the CX rack.  I can see not fault in this logic.  Anyone?


 

[FireSoul]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
H-XCA - 60 power
L-XCA- 56 Power
K-XCA - 56 Power
F-XCA - 56 Power
I-XCA - 53 Power
G-XCA - 52 Power
R-XCA- 52 Power
Z-XCA- 42 Power

Z-CCX - 52 Power!

Wow. That seems pretty bad, but you know what else looks bad? The Plasma races get less power than the Klingons and Federation, who have drones on board. Since drones don't cost any power to use, I could understand a Mirak having less power because they have fewer energy-draining weapons, but then the Fed and Klingon ships should also be lower than they are now using that rationale, though their X-heavies do cost power wheras the MIRV doesn't. As an experiment, has anyone tried giving ALL XCAs 56 power, except the Hydran 60 (though I'm not clear why theirs would be so high, unless it's due to hold costs)? Or, try the 52-53 range?  

True, however most know that the Gorn XCA is the best in the game too.  I think its just a matter of balancing these ships a little more, and I wish Firesoul or somebody could do this based on SFB instead of Taldrens weird approach to the X2 ships. Hence my reasoning that trying to put another heavy weapon on a Mirak ship, would just exagerate the power problem even more.  I think Taldren just felt they had to give the Mirak a cut somewhere, with the introduction of the all powerfull Mirv in the game.  If you remember, the Mirv was the most feared weapon in the forums when the game first came out and everyone was complaining about the Mirak X2 ships.  After awhile, everyone learned drone defense and this arguement went away leaving the Mirak far behind in the X2 level.  

Based on SFB? .. I truncate the shiplist and toss these out if this was based on SFB.  
.. but .. OP+ .. it's an enhancement to the stock shiplist. The idea is to preserve anything that is unique to SFC..


.. see.. I tossed out the X1 ships thinking no one would mind or notice if I replaced them with the real ones. I didn't realize the Z-CCX was that much better than the Z-XCA. It's reappearance as the Z-CCX2 will fix that problem, I would think.


-- Luc

[FireSoul]

Quote:
I understand all of that, Luc.  I wasn't suggesting you would.  We have gone off on a minor tangent.
As far as the E-rack on 1st generation x-ships, it seems proper to use them as a reasonable approximation of the CX rack.  I can see not fault in this logic.  Anyone?
 

The CX rack is a C rack with 3 reloads. Simple, eh?
.. how many drones are in a E rack? How fast does it reload exactly? .

-- Luc

[Kortez]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Kortez, I didn't mean to imply you should yell at the wife or anything, but rather that I'd be inclined toward drooling and banging my head against a wall like the stereotypical movie nuthouse resident. Think restraints and heavy medication. Of course, I'm just joking anyway. I don't envy you this particular misfortune.  

Thanks, but, ... I already do that when I look at Kzinti ships and see that none of our advatages CAN carry over from SFB to SFC2.   NO special mines, no special drones, no ships with more than 16 fighters.   To me, SFB portrays the Kzin as if they were the dumbest idiots ever to live.  We kill each other we get bashed into almost non-existence by never ending Klingon and Lyran attacks, the Feds give us tidbits to amuse ourselves and them with, and we fly garbage scows.

Where is that wall?
 

Things are tough all over, mah brutha.  We Klingons get to play the part of the Evil Empire (Soviets).  We all know how that worked out...heheh.

Nor are you the Hydran's bitch in Early Era PvP.


At least your people aren't shown constantly being defeated or made into charicatures on the various weekly Star Trek dramatic series.  


 

I don't care how we are portrayed.  I only care about the ships we fly, since this is not a RPG bro :P muahahahahahaha
 

[FireSoul]

Quote:
And, yes, I agree with FireSoul's stance on OP+ being a list based on SFB and not a testbed. Maybe with good testing results, the Z-XCA could be redesigned and even submitted to Taldren for consideration. Or, maybe FS would consider changing it in his list if he felt a revised one necessary. Bottom line, it's his list. People are certainly free to make their own custom lists.  

Thanks Nomad. You said it well..
.. if a balanced better version of the invented version is decided on, I might go for it.

.. but!!
- the SFB ships are going to stay as-is.. any correction would be to SFBize it.
- the invented ships from Taldren are to be left alone.. unless corrections are really needed.
- any other invented ships except from official SFB printed modules or material will be turned down.
- ships from new modules coming out will be.. weighed for balance. An exmaple is J2 based ships..  .. unbalances the shiplist towards non-PF races.
- the original Taldren fighters will remain.. no additional fighters added.
  - note that I copied the fighters' data from empires to pirate races, but they're the same fighters.
  - note that I have accepted raising the cost of the Killerbee.I and will make appropriate BPV adjustments in the shiplist.



strict, isn't it? These above are all about ship additions tho, not balance.

-- Luc