WP Stagnation

Discussions about Cosmic Starfire.

Moderators: SDS Members, SDS Owner

Forum rules
Cosmic Starfire is being designed by Fred Burton (aka 'Crucis'). Please direct all inquiries to him.

1. Nothing obscene.
2. No advertising or spamming.
3. No personal information. Mostly aimed at the posting of OTHER people's information.
4. No flame wars. We encourage debate, but it becomes a flame when insults fly and tempers flare.

Try to stick with the forum's topic. Threads that belong to another forum will be moved to that forum.

Re: WP Stagnation

Postby Crucis on Tue 15 Jan 2013 20:10

AlexeiTimoshenko wrote:
Crucis wrote:You misunderstood. Those rules I think you're thinking of were the "safe" ST rules. The highly risky ST rules will probably be similar to those that already exist. There's probably nothing stopping you from dumping thru a hundred counter swarm CT's, as long as you're willing to lose some in the process.


That's a big difference. A race willing to take losses could easily swamp a swarm defense. Just run enough hulls through the wp in each wave to gut the defenses before they all are activated.


Quite true. But how many is enough, and how many is just wasting good ships?



Crucis wrote:Another thing to consider... We mentioned TL8 vs. TL9. Under the existing 3E rules, at TL9 (IIRC), the first gen missile pods show up, and they are the ultimate anti-swarm weapon, at least as long as you know what to program them to attack.


You're right. First gen pods are HT9. How quickly they show up may depend on a races development priorities.


True, though I'd tend to think that missile pods would be a very, very high priority, at least for any empire that ends up fighting wars from time to time. But even then, I'd think that missile pods would be a high priority item even for the less militant empires. It's a great tech to have in your back pocket, as it were, just in case.
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: WP Stagnation

Postby AlexeiTimoshenko on Tue 15 Jan 2013 21:03

A race focusing on fighters as the decisive weapon may neglect heavier/longer range missiles/beams. The Rigellians are a good example. They didn't even have CM's until the battle of Tango-3. By that point they were already HT9. As a player, I probably wouldn't focus that narrowly but a npr may just limit their R&D to shorter range weapons, particularly if they hadn't encountered races with deep space combat capability.
Charles Rosenberg.

Alexei Timoshenko is the name of my protagonist in the fanfics, although I wish it could have been me.
AlexeiTimoshenko
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 1634
Joined: Sun 05 Sep 2010 21:16
Location: Baltimore MD

Re: WP Stagnation

Postby tmul4050 on Tue 15 Jan 2013 21:41

Its also possible that a race would focus its tech advances on those things that work for it. The Rigilians used fighters, the thebans xray lasers. This doesn't mean they won't change if the situation warrents it.
Also I remember that npr races can have a unusual advance, a tech advance it worked out early, like having force beams a tech 1 or fighters at tech 4. I could be thinking of galactic starfire though. :?
tmul4050
Commander
Commander
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sun 27 Dec 2009 20:28

Re: WP Stagnation

Postby Crucis on Tue 15 Jan 2013 22:09

AlexeiTimoshenko wrote:A race focusing on fighters as the decisive weapon may neglect heavier/longer range missiles/beams. The Rigellians are a good example. They didn't even have CM's until the battle of Tango-3. By that point they were already HT9. As a player, I probably wouldn't focus that narrowly but a npr may just limit their R&D to shorter range weapons, particularly if they hadn't encountered races with deep space combat capability.


The problem with the opening statement is that many missile and beam advances occur prior to the initial development of fighter technology. So it seems like saying that the race wouldn't bother advancing in anything until they can eventually do fighters, assuming that fighter tech was even possible (from the PoV of an empire which may not even know if space fighters are even possible).
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: WP Stagnation

Postby Crucis on Tue 15 Jan 2013 22:33

tmul4050 wrote:Its also possible that a race would focus its tech advances on those things that work for it. The Rigilians used fighters, the thebans xray lasers. This doesn't mean they won't change if the situation warrants it.
Also I remember that npr races can have a unusual advance, a tech advance it worked out early, like having force beams a tech 1 or fighters at tech 4. I could be thinking of galactic starfire though. :?


No, there was the possibility of wild card NPRs in ISF. But the way the rules are structured in ISF, even if you got fighters at TL5 (along with the essentially required hanger bays, and TL8 ftr weapons), that race wouldn't be able to make any further fighter tech advances until they reached TL9 ... which seems really bizarre.

Frankly, I think that the tech trees model in Ultra/Solar/GSF handles this sort of situation better than this "wild card" process. The tech trees model merely shows a race making a conscious decision to push advancement in certain areas over other areas, whereas OTOH, the "wild card" model seems to indicate some sort of utterly miraculous breakthrough that the race is incapable of following up.

Of course, the entire topic of R&D processes can be a sore subject for old time 3rdR players. There are some players who appreciate the more realistic feel of the tech tree model (though at the same time some may also feel that it's a bit too complex for their taste). OTOH, there are some who don't like being limited by the tech tree model and who like the freedom of being able to develop whatever items they want whenever they reach the given TL, and aren't particularly interested in the more realistic aspects of the tech tree process.

Regardless, if one wanted to mimic the tech development seen in the canonical history, you'd be better served by a tech tree model, since it allows empires to focus their R&D in some areas at the cost of ignoring other areas. And yet at the same time, there's at least one example in the novels (Crusade, to be exact) where the Terrans were able to develop the HET laser quite quickly, despite pointing out that they'd ignored laser tech for a very long time. If this were true in the tech tree model, that would seem to indicate that the TFN hadn't invested in laser SL research, and they shouldn't have been able to develop the HET Laser nearly as quickly as they didn. Oh well! :lol:
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: WP Stagnation

Postby PracticalM on Wed 16 Jan 2013 00:40

Crucis wrote:Regardless, if one wanted to mimic the tech development seen in the canonical history, you'd be better served by a tech tree model, since it allows empires to focus their R&D in some areas at the cost of ignoring other areas. And yet at the same time, there's at least one example in the novels (Crusade, to be exact) where the Terrans were able to develop the HET laser quite quickly, despite pointing out that they'd ignored laser tech for a very long time. If this were true in the tech tree model, that would seem to indicate that the TFN hadn't invested in laser SL research, and they shouldn't have been able to develop the HET Laser nearly as quickly as they didn. Oh well! :lol:


The model in this situation is that the Terrans never opened the Lc branch of the L Tree. Thus after discovering the Thebans using DEC and Lj they got a breakthrough that opened the Lc branch and because of the difference between the start of the Lc branch and the Terran EL they had much reduced costs researching the SLs and the tech.

The traditional method had HET very quickly followed by HET2 which was only because they didn't push the HET back a few ELs to make a nice spread between the HET and HET2
--
Jeffrey Kessler
PracticalM
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 728
Joined: Wed 15 Jul 2009 10:27
Location: Long Beach, CA

Re: WP Stagnation

Postby Crucis on Wed 16 Jan 2013 01:18

PracticalM wrote:
Crucis wrote:Regardless, if one wanted to mimic the tech development seen in the canonical history, you'd be better served by a tech tree model, since it allows empires to focus their R&D in some areas at the cost of ignoring other areas. And yet at the same time, there's at least one example in the novels (Crusade, to be exact) where the Terrans were able to develop the HET laser quite quickly, despite pointing out that they'd ignored laser tech for a very long time. If this were true in the tech tree model, that would seem to indicate that the TFN hadn't invested in laser SL research, and they shouldn't have been able to develop the HET Laser nearly as quickly as they didn. Oh well! :lol:


The model in this situation is that the Terrans never opened the Lc branch of the L Tree. Thus after discovering the Thebans using DEC and Lj they got a breakthrough that opened the Lc branch and because of the difference between the start of the Lc branch and the Terran EL they had much reduced costs researching the SLs and the tech.

The traditional method had HET very quickly followed by HET2 which was only because they didn't push the HET back a few ELs to make a nice spread between the HET and HET2


That explanation works for me. Thanks, Jeff.





On a side note, I've never been terribly fond of the nomenclature of "Capital" beam weapons. I guess that when I think of "capital" weapons, I'm thinking of the sort of weapons that belong on ships battleship-sized or larger. I admit that this may be a bit of an overly naval way of looking at it, but if 4 HS beam weapons are the 5-6" guns of WW2, then Starfire's "capital" beam weapons at 6-ish HS seem more like heavy cruiser 8" guns rather than the 14-16" guns that should be found on WW1/2 era battleships.

It seems to me that a true "capital" beam weapon should be something approaching the size of Ultra's "Heavy" beam weapons, with both range and damage (at any range) considerably greater than lighter weight beam weapons. These are the sorts of weapons that you'd really see on capital ships, and would be too large to be mounted on cruiser weight vessels as anything other than a spinal mount.

Note that I give a bit of a pass here to capital missiles mostly because in Starfire, missile effectiveness is highly dependent on volley size. And if "capital" missiles (and their launchers) were much larger, they'd have to increase their damage significantly so that the few hits they could get would hurt a lot more. But that's probably more of a paradigm shift than I'm probably willing to go.
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: WP Stagnation

Postby AlexeiTimoshenko on Wed 16 Jan 2013 06:25

From looking at the scenarios in SaW it seems that the Rigellians effectively ceased shipboard weapons (at least for capital variants) after HT6. They never developed primary beams, opened the E tree and only started Fc and Rc research after the war had started.
Charles Rosenberg.

Alexei Timoshenko is the name of my protagonist in the fanfics, although I wish it could have been me.
AlexeiTimoshenko
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 1634
Joined: Sun 05 Sep 2010 21:16
Location: Baltimore MD

Re: WP Stagnation

Postby tmul4050 on Fri 18 Jan 2013 08:16

In the insurrection book I remember reading that the Thebans eventually got a military again, and a next gen xray laser, instead of HET lasers (and fought a small war to boot). A safer xray laser I guess (Lx2 in the wpn charts). This despite the knowledge of HET lasers and Force beams.

oops. I just read about the next gen xray laser and it was a TFN invention. If fact the more I read it looks like the theban vessels are similar to the FTN units. Interesting quote about tech bias at the end of the tech description

27.15.12 SECOND GENERATION X-RAY LASER

"Despite the range advantage of the "(Dec2)"-based X-ray laser
over the "(HET2)," and the equal mass requirements, the TFN
continued to prefer the Hetlaser for its greater reliability. Indeed, the
TFN showed an increasing inclination to revert to force-beam and
primary-beam armaments as the increasing availability of improved
anti-laser armors began to degrade laser damage values, though it had
no intention of completely abandoning the hetlaser's ability to "reach"
through intact enemy shields".


It may not be bias as the evolving situation made lasers less useful. And who wants a weapon that could blow up in your face ;) . Still if I was in charge I would have build them because of the better range than HET lasers :)
tmul4050
Commander
Commander
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sun 27 Dec 2009 20:28

Previous

Return to Cosmic Starfire

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron