Author Topic: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser  (Read 316 times)

sillybrit

  • Freelance Writer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3683
McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« on: 02 April 2016, 23:09:40 »
Inspired by the McKenna/Luxor discussion in the McKenna's WSot? article, here's a Luxor with a McKenna-like armament. The Luxor doesn't have the payload tonnage for a straight copy of the McKenna's armament, despite being a much toothier design (the Luxor has a 6.3% cargo fraction, compared to the McKenna's 13.2% - the McKenna's cargo bay could actually hold both the Luxor's cargo and its entire armament, with room to spare) so some sacrifices had to be made, mostly by focusing on long-range capability instead of extreme-range capability. I wanted to keep the cargo fraction as unchanged as possible, so that restriction also guided my redesign.

Like the McKenna, the McLuxor has a trio of 60-point bays on its broadside and aft quarters, but by switching two-thirds of those bays to triple NAC20s, that provides a saving of nearly 9kt per bay. Dual NAC30s would have saved some more mass, but at the cost of an even greater loss in bracketing capability. I aimed for a balance between the mass and bracketing by opting for the NAC20s.

With the main batteries out of the way, that left the bow, stern and forward quarters, which the McKenna covers with an array of NAC40s, NL55s and AR10s. There wasn't enough tonnage to be able to exactly mimic the McKenna's setup, with the stern losing a couple of NAC bays. I did add an extra White Shark and Killer Whale to the AR10 magazines for the forward quarter launchers, so that they had 4 full salvos of both, instead of just 3.5 salvos, fixing a minor irritation about the McKenna.

I also looked at removing a NAC40 bay from the forward quarters to improve the DS and ASF capacity, increasing the number of collars to 6 and adding 42 ASFs to give a full regiment. The problem with this version is that it drives the cost up massively due to the price of collars, especially when they're combined with a LF battery. My first McLuxor costs about two-thirds of the price of a McKenna - about the same as the canon Luxor, for that matter - while the alternative McLuxor would cost about five-sixths of a McKenna. Not an issue for table-top play, but I like to think about in-universe issues too and with the price gap with the McKenna so reduced, you'd have to question even more as to why you'd bother with the smaller, less capable vessel. Another idea was using the mass saved from removing just a single aft NAC40 to make improvements to the rest of the armament instead of the extra DS/ASFs, but I decided to stop tinkering with the weaponry.

The last change I made was to the armor. The Luxor had made the false cost saving of using Improved Ferro-Aluminum. I say false because the cost of armor is a tiny fraction of the overall cost of a WarShip, but can make a big difference to its survivability, and thus the potential need to buy a replacement. This is of course an issue suffered by most canon WarShip designs, but that's enough said about that.

I left the crew, escape systems, etc untouched and I adjusted for the incorrect armor mass calculated by HMA plus the extra KF drive support costs added in StratOps. The final design actually has more cargo capacity than the Luxor, possessing 181t extra capacity (the alternative McLuxor would have 982t more cargo than the Luxor), which is a trivial difference for a 890kt WarShip.

Overall, for a ship that's about half the mass and two-third the C-Bill cost of the McKenna, the McLuxor comes out very well in comparison. Given the respective cargo fractions it's not surprising, and it would be extremely easy to also redesign the McKenna to roughly halve its cargo and add more weaponry and armor for a relatively small C-Bill cost increase (eg. for just a 1.7% C-Bill increase, you could have a McKenna with more than double the armor, 4 extra ASFs, 2 extra SCs, 10 extra AR10s with larger magazines per launcher, 4 extra NL55s and the 12 NAC40s swapped for 63 NAC20s while possessing a 6.3% cargo fraction like the Luxor).

                    AeroTech 2 Vessel Technical Readout
                                  VALIDATED

Class/Model/Name:  McLuxor
Tech:              Inner Sphere / 2690
Vessel Type:       WarShip
Rules:             Level 2, Standard design
Rules Set:         AeroTech2

Mass:              890,000 tons
K-F Drive System:  (Unknown)
Length:            975 meters
Sail Diameter:     1,490 meters
Power Plant:       Standard
Safe Thrust:       3
Maximum Thrust:    5
Armor Type:        Ferro-carbide
Armament:         
   12 NL55
   10 NAC/40
    6 AR10 Launcher
   16 Heavy NPPC
   24 NAC/20
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class/Model/Name:  McLuxor
Mass:              890,000 tons

Equipment:                                                            Mass 
Power Plant, Drive & Control:                                      160,200.00
Thrust:  Safe Thrust: 3
      Maximum Thrust: 5
Kearny-Fuchida Hyperdrive:  Compact (Integrity = 18)               402,725.00
Lithium Fusion Battery                                               8,900.00
Jump Sail: (Integrity = 5)                                              74.00
Structural Integrity: 80                                            71,200.00
Total Heat Sinks:    3,250 Double                                    2,639.00
Fuel & Fuel Pumps:                                                   3,060.00
Bridge, Controls, Radar, Computer & Attitude Thrusters:              2,225.00
Fire Control Computers:                                                   .00
Armor Type:  Ferro-carbide  (1,182 total armor pts)                  1,417.00
                           Capital Scale Armor Pts
   Location:                            L / R
   Fore:                                177
   Fore-Left/Right:                  215/215
   Aft-Left/Right:                   215/215
   Aft:                                 145

Cargo:
   Bay 1:  Fighters (12) with 6 doors                                1,800.00
           Small Craft (4)                                             800.00
   Bay 2:  Cargo (1) with 1 door                                    56,214.00

DropShip Capacity:  4 Docking Hardpoints                             4,000.00
Grav Decks #1 - 2:  (95-meter diameter)                                100.00
Life Boats:  35 (7 tons each)                                          245.00
Escape Pods:  30 (7 tons each)                                         210.00

Crew and Passengers:
     62 Officers (58 minimum)                                          620.00
    210 Crew (161 minimum)                                           1,470.00
     83 Gunners (68 minimum)                                           581.00
     44 Bay Personnel                                                     .00
Weapons and Equipment      Loc        SRV    MRV    LRV    ERV  Heat    Mass
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 NL55                     Nose        11     11     11     11  170  2,200.00
1 NAC/40(42 rounds)        Nose        40     40     --     --  135  4,551.00
1 NAC/40(42 rounds)        Nose        40     40     --     --  135  4,551.00
3 NL55                     FL/R        17     17     17     17  510  6,600.00
1 NAC/40(42 rounds)        FL/R        40     40     --     --  270  9,102.00
1 NAC/40(42 rounds)        FL/R        40     40     --     --  270  9,102.00
1 NAC/40(42 rounds)        FL/R        40     40     --     --  270  9,102.00
2 AR10 (8 KW, 8 WS, 10 B)  FL/R         *      *      *      *   80  3,040.00
4 Heavy NPPC               L/RBS       60     60     60     60 1800 24,000.00
3 NAC/20(135 rounds)       L/RBS       60     60     60     --  360 15,108.00
3 NAC/20(135 rounds)       L/RBS       60     60     60     --  360 15,108.00
4 Heavy NPPC               AL/R        60     60     60     60 1800 24,000.00
3 NAC/20(135 rounds)       AL/R        60     60     60     --  360 15,108.00
3 NAC/20(135 rounds)       AL/R        60     60     60     --  360 15,108.00
4 NL55                     Aft         22     22     22     22  340  4,400.00
1 NAC/40(42 rounds)        Aft         40     40     --     --  135  4,551.00
1 NAC/40(42 rounds)        Aft         40     40     --     --  135  4,551.00
2 AR10 (6 KW, 6 WS, 10 B)  Aft          *      *      *      *   40  1,340.00
1 Armor correction                                                       1.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS:                                            Heat: 7,530     890,000.00
Tons Left:                                                                .00

Calculated Factors:
Total Cost:        21,145,666,000 C-Bills
Battle Value:      221,711
Cost per BV:       95,374.91
Weapon Value:      103,297 (Ratio = .47)
Damage Factors:    SRV = 9,574;  MRV = 9,574;  LRV = 7,544;  ERV = 1,975
Maintenance:       Maintenance Point Value (MPV) = 607,016
                   (80,144 Structure, 220,422 Life Support, 306,450 Weapons)
                   Support Points (SP) = 788,625  (130% of MPV)
BattleForce2:      Not applicable


And for comparison, the alternative McLuxor:

                    AeroTech 2 Vessel Technical Readout
                                  VALIDATED

Class/Model/Name:  McLuxor II
Tech:              Inner Sphere / 2690
Vessel Type:       WarShip
Rules:             Level 2, Standard design
Rules Set:         AeroTech2

Mass:              890,000 tons
K-F Drive System:  (Unknown)
Length:            975 meters
Sail Diameter:     1,490 meters
Power Plant:       Standard
Safe Thrust:       3
Maximum Thrust:    5
Armor Type:        Ferro-carbide
Armament:         
   12 NL55
    8 NAC/40
    6 AR10 Launcher
   16 Heavy NPPC
   24 NAC/20
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class/Model/Name:  McLuxor II
Mass:              890,000 tons

Equipment:                                                            Mass 
Power Plant, Drive & Control:                                      160,200.00
Thrust:  Safe Thrust: 3
      Maximum Thrust: 5
Kearny-Fuchida Hyperdrive:  Compact (Integrity = 18)               402,725.00
Lithium Fusion Battery                                               8,900.00
Jump Sail: (Integrity = 5)                                              74.00
Structural Integrity: 80                                            71,200.00
Total Heat Sinks:    3,250 Double                                    2,639.00
Fuel & Fuel Pumps:                                                   3,060.00
Bridge, Controls, Radar, Computer & Attitude Thrusters:              2,225.00
Fire Control Computers:                                                   .00
Armor Type:  Ferro-carbide  (1,182 total armor pts)                  1,417.00
                           Capital Scale Armor Pts
   Location:                            L / R
   Fore:                                177
   Fore-Left/Right:                  215/215
   Aft-Left/Right:                   215/215
   Aft:                                 145

Cargo:
   Bay 1:  Fighters (54) with 6 doors                                8,100.00
           Small Craft (4)                                             800.00
   Bay 2:  Cargo (1) with 1 door                                    57,015.00

DropShip Capacity:  6 Docking Hardpoints                             6,000.00
Grav Decks #1 - 2:  (95-meter diameter)                                100.00
Life Boats:  35 (7 tons each)                                          245.00
Escape Pods:  30 (7 tons each)                                         210.00

Crew and Passengers:
     62 Officers (58 minimum)                                          620.00
    210 Crew (161 minimum)                                           1,470.00
     83 Gunners (66 minimum)                                           581.00
    128 Bay Personnel                                                     .00
Weapons and Equipment      Loc        SRV    MRV    LRV    ERV  Heat    Mass
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 NL55                     Nose        11     11     11     11  170  2,200.00
1 NAC/40(42 rounds)        Nose        40     40     --     --  135  4,551.00
1 NAC/40(42 rounds)        Nose        40     40     --     --  135  4,551.00
3 NL55                     FL/R        17     17     17     17  510  6,600.00
1 NAC/40(42 rounds)        FL/R        40     40     --     --  270  9,102.00
1 NAC/40(42 rounds)        FL/R        40     40     --     --  270  9,102.00
2 AR10 (8 KW, 8 WS, 10 B)  FL/R         *      *      *      *   80  3,040.00
4 Heavy NPPC               L/RBS       60     60     60     60 1800 24,000.00
3 NAC/20(135 rounds)       L/RBS       60     60     60     --  360 15,108.00
3 NAC/20(135 rounds)       L/RBS       60     60     60     --  360 15,108.00
4 Heavy NPPC               AL/R        60     60     60     60 1800 24,000.00
3 NAC/20(135 rounds)       AL/R        60     60     60     --  360 15,108.00
3 NAC/20(135 rounds)       AL/R        60     60     60     --  360 15,108.00
4 NL55                     Aft         22     22     22     22  340  4,400.00
1 NAC/40(42 rounds)        Aft         40     40     --     --  135  4,551.00
1 NAC/40(42 rounds)        Aft         40     40     --     --  135  4,551.00
2 AR10 (6 KW, 6 WS, 10 B)  Aft          *      *      *      *   40  1,340.00
1 Armor correction                                                       1.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS:                                            Heat: 7,260     890,000.00
Tons Left:                                                                .00

Calculated Factors:
Total Cost:        25,864,394,000 C-Bills
Battle Value:      217,237
Cost per BV:       119,060.72
Weapon Value:      101,233 (Ratio = .47)
Damage Factors:    SRV = 9,274;  MRV = 9,274;  LRV = 7,307;  ERV = 2,049
Maintenance:       Maintenance Point Value (MPV) = 605,954
                   (86,652 Structure, 224,622 Life Support, 294,680 Weapons)
                   Support Points (SP) = 788,625  (130% of MPV)
BattleForce2:      Not applicable

HobbesHurlbut

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1385
  • Live Free or Die Hard
Re: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« Reply #1 on: 03 April 2016, 10:01:21 »
Just a nitpick. The cost of a component (FA armor in this case) isn't a factor in the fluff, the production capability for a component is. IS Houses facing a bottleneck in WarShip construction in the early 31st century due to availability of mass transit engines is such an example. They may have gone with FA to save time on construction and that it's more widely available. Most of the Ferro Carbide armor production may have gone to McKenna and such.


edited: correction of which century.
« Last Edit: 03 April 2016, 10:27:08 by HobbesHurlbut »
Clan Blood Spirit - So Bad Ass as to require Orbital Bombardments to wipe us out....it is the only way to be sure!

marauder648

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2385
Re: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« Reply #2 on: 03 April 2016, 10:15:38 »
I like it! She's a meaty vessel that's for sure!
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

sillybrit

  • Freelance Writer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3683
Re: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« Reply #3 on: 03 April 2016, 17:30:22 »
Just a nitpick. The cost of a component (FA armor in this case) isn't a factor in the fluff, the production capability for a component is. IS Houses facing a bottleneck in WarShip construction in the early 31st century due to availability of mass transit engines is such an example. They may have gone with FA to save time on construction and that it's more widely available. Most of the Ferro Carbide armor production may have gone to McKenna and such.

Yes, no. The Luxor has the maximum armor tonnage possible for its SI and mass, so the only way for it to get tougher would be to use more of its already limited cargo and increase the SI, or switch to better armor. Meanwhile, there are designs like the Vincent Mk 39, Lola III and Congress - to limit the selection to lesser classes - that use Ferro-Carbide but are not even remotely maxed out on armor tonnage and also have large amounts of cargo capacity to easily accommodate a switch to a lesser armor material while retaining the same strength.

The Vincent Mk 39 could switch to Improved Ferro-Aluminum and maintain its armor values for a mere 35t extra armor, out of a cargo capacity of over 97kt. Similarly, the Lola III would need 108t more armor tonnage by switching, out of a cargo capacity of over 117kt, while the Congress would need 163t more armor out of 167kt cargo. None of them really even notice the lost cargo space and have plenty of capacity to increase their armor further, both in terms of spare cargo or max armor tonnage limits.

By switching those three classes (530 Vincent Mk 39s, 470 Lola IIIs & 200 Congress) to Improved Ferro-Aluminum, that would free up 304125t of Ferro-Carbide. So even if there is a manufacturing bottleneck - and that's very much an unproven if and one on very shaky footing given the purchasing proclivities of the monstrosity that is the SLDF - you'd be able to equip 214 McLuxors, with zero negative impact to the other classes' survivability and negligible impact to their operational capability. Meanwhile, the McLuxor - which as a LF-battery heavy cruiser is a much more important combatant - gets a 31% increase in its armor strength over the Luxor. While we don't have numbers for the Luxor, I would be surprised if there are 200, with probably half that being deployed at most - the SLDF tends not to build numerically large cruiser classes, with the Sovetskii Soyuz being the sole known exception.

Of course, the actual reason why the Luxor has Improved Ferro-Aluminum is most probably because the Avatar it replaces only has Standard armor. Knowing the real-world discussions that occur with canon designs, improving just one step in armor quality would be considered reserved and reasonable. Canon designs of all sorts, from WarShips down to infantry, typically tend to be less optimized than the typical custom design.

Hellraiser

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6267
  • Cry Havoc and Unleash the Gods of Fiat.
Re: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« Reply #4 on: 23 April 2016, 16:56:05 »
While we don't have numbers for the Luxor, I would be surprised if there are 200, with probably half that being deployed at most - the SLDF tends not to build numerically large cruiser classes, with the Sovetskii Soyuz being the sole known exception. 
While I agree with the 1st part, I'm not so sure the 2nd is completely accurate.
We really don't know for sure.
We know the Aegis which was an EARLY era Cruiser had at least 106 Hulls made as that is how many were mothballed, and who knows how many they lost in 200 years.  We do know they spent a lot more money as time went on however.
We also know the Avatar was its replacement class so likely a similar # as the Aegis & probably more given the 2 centuries of use.
The Luxor then replaces the Avatar so probably a decent amount as well though it was in service for a shorter period.
The only really "Low" # is the Cameron at 40.
The Dart was probably fairly common & the Black Lion had 82?-ish IIRC.


As for the ship itself,  while it doesn't match the NAC's of the McKenna,  maybe swap those 40's around for Twin-35's to keep that close in sledgehammer feel & give it the ability to smash even harder in a single hit.
3041: General Lance Hawkins: The Equalizers
3053: Star Colonel Rexor Kerensky: The Silver Wolves

"I don't shoot Urbanmechs, I walk up, stomp on their foot, wait for the head to pop open & drop in a hand grenade (or Elemental)" - Joel47
Against mechs, infantry have two options: Run screaming from Godzilla, or giggle under your breath as the arrogant fools blunder into your trap. - Weirdo

sillybrit

  • Freelance Writer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3683
Re: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« Reply #5 on: 24 April 2016, 00:54:39 »
The SLDF didn't build the Aegis, so the numbers built by the HAF are irrelevant, although I'd be surprised if more than a handful were lost.

The SLDF built (or commissioned, if you prefer) the Kimagure, Potekmin, Cameron and Black Lion II classes of cruisers before the Luxor and Sovetski Soyuz, building 12, 106, 40 and 62 respectively. Arguably the Potemkin is a transport more than a cruiser, but it was designated as a troop cruiser so I included it. Compare that to 400 Carsons, 470 Lola IIIs, 300 Essex IIs, 200 Congress and 280 McKennas that the SLDF built. Even non-combat classes, the Bug-Eye and Newgrange, were built in higher numbers, with 170 and 200 respectively. It's unknown whether the 200 Congresses includes the 6 built for the AFFS by 2765, but even 194 SLDF Congresses is still the better part of double the number of Potemkins. So, my point still stands.


The Dart is another HAF build, not SLDF. We only know for certain that 20 were built - the HAF had 7 battleships and 20 cruisers in 2314, when their only class of cruiser was the Dart. The Black Lion I was introduced a year later in 2315 and thus it's possible that not many more Darts were built after that. In addition, however, the HAF had "over 300" WarShips in 2333, with that number including the Dreadnoughts, Cruiser-class cruisers, Black Lion Is, Vigilants and Bonaventures in addition to the Darts. Apart from the Dreadnoughts, we don't know the numbers built for any of those classes, but the majority are most likely (YMMV) to be the two corvettes, which would squeeze the available numbers for the three cruisers.


Re swapping the single NAC40s for twin NAC35s, each swap would cost 3.5kt of cargo space if a nose or aft bay, 7kt if a forward-quarter bay. As I stated, I wanted to leave the cargo fraction as unchanged as possible, so to do a swap like that would require serious sacrifices elsewhere, perhaps dropping another NAC40 bay entirely for every one swapped, which isn't a good exchange and would also mess with the aesthetic I was aiming for.

marauder648

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2385
Re: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« Reply #6 on: 24 April 2016, 05:07:18 »
Intersting so the SLDF was very heavily weighted towards massed destroyers and escorts and didn't get a mass of Battleships until the McKenna's (there was 52 Texas class ships, I don't know how many Monsoons (call it 40 - 60 ish) and the Dreadnoughts seem to have been a fairly low production class (few dozen perhaps at the most?) and the same with the Farragut's.

I'm surprised there's less cruisers but then again I think too much in terms of wet navy for that.
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

Dragon Cat

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4605
  • Not Dead Until I Say So
Re: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« Reply #7 on: 24 April 2016, 05:23:05 »
I just like the name it's like the Luxor's Scottish/Irish distant cousin
My Alternate timeline http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,20515.0.html
New Tech from the AU http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=32328.0
All my stuff together http://www.ourbattletech.com/forum/dragon-cat-collection/


Really, as long as there is an unbroken line of people calling themselves "Clan Nova Cat," it doesn't really matter to me if they're still using Iron Wombs or not. They may be dead as a faction, but as a people they still exist. It's not uncommon in the real world, after all.

marauder648

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2385
Re: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« Reply #8 on: 24 April 2016, 05:45:51 »
What about trying to make her as a dedicated escort.  If the McKenna is the equivalent of a modern CVN then how about making the Luxor an AEGIS ship so instead of her being a big brick of aggression and guns aka a Black Lion II, have her job be killing smaller faster ships that might try to get in range with their speed.  As well as being a mission of warding off dropships and fighters.
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

Dragon Cat

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4605
  • Not Dead Until I Say So
Re: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« Reply #9 on: 24 April 2016, 06:16:30 »
Would that not be the job of the massed Aegis, Lola and Essex class vessels
My Alternate timeline http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,20515.0.html
New Tech from the AU http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=32328.0
All my stuff together http://www.ourbattletech.com/forum/dragon-cat-collection/


Really, as long as there is an unbroken line of people calling themselves "Clan Nova Cat," it doesn't really matter to me if they're still using Iron Wombs or not. They may be dead as a faction, but as a people they still exist. It's not uncommon in the real world, after all.

marauder648

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2385
Re: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« Reply #10 on: 24 April 2016, 06:28:58 »
Would that not be the job of the massed Aegis, Lola and Essex class vessels

The Aegis is an angry go away brick along with something like the Black Lion II the Lola and Essex are escorts, but you could probably make her into a weird kind of 'heavy escort' lots of NL's to deal with fighters  along with AR-10's as well for more fighter popping.  Some NAC-20 batteries to flatten dropships or other 'leakers' who get past the outer ring of escorts. 
Basically its goal is to make things that the McKenna should not waste its time shooting at 'go away' and if something big does come on in then that's what the McKenna's guns are for.

Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

I am Belch II

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5131
  • It's a gator with a nuke, whats the problem.
Re: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« Reply #11 on: 24 April 2016, 09:34:54 »
That is a great refit.
Walking the fine line between sarcasm and being a smart-ass

500 is the number of Warships Now. 500 looks like it will stay for a long time.

Hellraiser

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6267
  • Cry Havoc and Unleash the Gods of Fiat.
Re: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« Reply #12 on: 24 April 2016, 12:26:02 »
the HAF had "over 300" WarShips in 2333, with that number including the Dreadnoughts, Cruiser-class cruisers, Black Lion Is, Vigilants and Bonaventures in addition to the Darts.

Re swapping the single NAC40s for twin NAC35s, each swap would cost 3.5kt of cargo space if a nose or aft bay, 7kt if a forward-quarter bay. As I stated, I wanted to leave the cargo fraction as unchanged as possible, so to do a swap like that would require serious sacrifices elsewhere, perhaps dropping another NAC40 bay entirely for every one swapped, which isn't a good exchange and would also mess with the aesthetic I was aiming for.
Interesting look at the warship figures.  Any idea what the #'s were at just before the forming of the SLDF?

To be clear, I wasn't saying turn 1-NAC40 into 2-NAC35,  I was saying group up 2-NAC40's into a single bay of 2 NAC-35's.   So you would actually get back some cargo in exchange for reduced total, but, more concentrated, firepower.  As you say, its very short on cargo & this was a way to get a big hammer hit while gaining some cargo.
3041: General Lance Hawkins: The Equalizers
3053: Star Colonel Rexor Kerensky: The Silver Wolves

"I don't shoot Urbanmechs, I walk up, stomp on their foot, wait for the head to pop open & drop in a hand grenade (or Elemental)" - Joel47
Against mechs, infantry have two options: Run screaming from Godzilla, or giggle under your breath as the arrogant fools blunder into your trap. - Weirdo

Hellraiser

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6267
  • Cry Havoc and Unleash the Gods of Fiat.
Re: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« Reply #13 on: 24 April 2016, 12:27:08 »
I just like the name it's like the Luxor's Scottish/Irish distant cousin
I thought it was its Fast Food cousin  ;)
3041: General Lance Hawkins: The Equalizers
3053: Star Colonel Rexor Kerensky: The Silver Wolves

"I don't shoot Urbanmechs, I walk up, stomp on their foot, wait for the head to pop open & drop in a hand grenade (or Elemental)" - Joel47
Against mechs, infantry have two options: Run screaming from Godzilla, or giggle under your breath as the arrogant fools blunder into your trap. - Weirdo

sillybrit

  • Freelance Writer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3683
Re: McLuxor Heavy Cruiser
« Reply #14 on: 24 April 2016, 14:32:45 »
Intersting so the SLDF was very heavily weighted towards massed destroyers and escorts and didn't get a mass of Battleships until the McKenna's

The 2765 SLDF had 332+ battleships, with the random factor being the unknown number of remaining Farraguts before the last example's decommissioning in 2766. There were 690+ cruisers, with the random factor being the unknown number of Luxors and remaining Avatars, which still served in the reserves and as training vessels. The Congress was the sole frigate class, so there were 194 or 200 of those depending upon whether or not the original Congress-Ds counted towards the Congress numbers. Destroyers appear to number 849 and corvettes 530. Added to the combat vessels there are 220+ transports, with the exact number of Volgas uncertain plus an unknown number of Carracks, alongside 200 yardships and 170 surveillance/intel ships. Altogether, that would give a low end total of 3185 WarShips, although not all are warships.


Quote
(there was 52 Texas class ships, I don't know how many Monsoons (call it 40 - 60 ish) and the Dreadnoughts seem to have been a fairly low production class (few dozen perhaps at the most?) and the same with the Farragut's.

Only 7 Dreadnoughts were ever built, and we know of only 10 Monsoons for certain, although there were likely more given the wording in TRO3057R.

The big problem with WarShip numbers is that once you really start looking at the multiple sources written over the history of BattleTech, it all turns into a massive turd sandwich.

As I noted before, the HAF are claimed to have "over 300" in 2333 according to the SLSB.

After the formation of the SLDF, the new navy had 507 WarShips, of which 195-219 were contributed by the AFFS, CCAF, DCMS and FWLM, the wild card factor being the "almost two-thirds" of the CCAF fleet that was transferred. The LCAF's contribution is unknown, being only described as "significant", leaving them with 67 WarShips. Assuming 50-60 LCAF WarShips transferred to the SLDF, then that puts the HAF contribution as 228-262.

That would imply that the HAF navy actually shrunk over the course of the Age of War, despite the new 14 ship classes built between 2333 and 2575, although some of those new classes would have been replacements for earlier designs. HistRW possibly gives us an escape clause on p27, with the Image and Reality sidebar suggesting that an operational reserve existed, although even that can be argued against as it also implies that WarShip numbers are too high and only talks about a reserve of "troops". The Bug-Eye fluff in TRO2750 perhaps does support the notion that the HAF originally kept some of its WarShips: first entering service with the HAF in 2525, it wasn't until 2620 when the first Bug-Eye entered SLDF service.

Looking at other numbers, we have 250 Quixotes and at least 106 Aegis that served together, so that's at least 356 HAF WarShips right there, together with some or all of the 170 Bug-Eyes that the Hegemony built. Compounding the mess is the Quixote fluff, which talks about the SLDF reclassifying the Quixote during its design phase, but the Quixote was introduced before the Age of War even began. I don't even. The latter alone should be giving very strong hints that the pre-CGL fluff was being written with no real coherent plan. We then have the Vincent originally described in TRO2750 as being built in the thousands, so there's also the indication that the original viewpoint was that the navies were much, much bigger - or that the Vincent fluff could have been written without much actual thought, and it's yet another throwaway line that should not have any weight placed on it. In any case, Battlespace corrected the Vincent issue with a hard number of 530 built.

High battle losses during the Age of War could be one answer as to why the HAF seemed to contribute only a fraction of their ships to the SLDF, but even then it'd require the HAF to be driving their WarShips like a rental. The Quixote at least apparently didn't suffer huge losses, because we know that the vast majority survived to become Volgas. Over 200 Volgas were destroyed in the Amaris Coup and about two dozen survived to join the Exodus, so assuming that all surviving Quixotes were converted, then there was originally 220 or more Volgas, so Quixote losses couldn't have been more than a couple dozen. Ten-percent losses simply doesn't seem enough to bridge the gap.

This is the reason why CGL generally avoids giving us actual numbers as they risk contradicting a prior publication and potentially limits future material.

I thought it was its Fast Food cousin  ;)

McDonalds was indeed on my mind at the time, which I thought amusingly ironic given that my goal was a slimmed down McKenna.