Author Topic: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?  (Read 10666 times)

Hellraiser

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13013
  • Cry Havoc and Unleash the Gods of Fiat.
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #30 on: 11 September 2012, 12:04:32 »
We don't know if, like the Leopard-CV, it simply trades the 'Mech bays for ASF cradles, or if it only carries 12 ASFs with additional cargo and weaponry, or what.

The Union-CV is pseudo-canonical in that it exists, but we have no canon stats for it.

Given the one fluff description of fighter deployment we have in canon, we have a pretty good idea what the stats would be.

Canon Deployment was Vengeance (40-43) and 2x Union-CVs (12-14) deployed 70 fighters.

If you do the math you see that 42+14+14 = 70.
There isn't a lot of room to maneuver anything around there.
Short of some major "turn cargo into bays" overhauls the only way to get that deployment is to use all 14 potential cubicles on the UCVs as well as 2 of the shuttlebays on the Vengeance to kick out 70 fighters with 1 backup shuttle bay left.

14 fighters isn't a canon formation but it does cover 2 Squadrons (1 Company) and a flight for command/reserve/DSprotection.
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

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13013
  • Cry Havoc and Unleash the Gods of Fiat.
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #31 on: 11 September 2012, 12:25:52 »
The Vengeance mentioned in SLSB (p57) was indeed declared an earlier design that shared the same name when I asked about it a board iteration or two ago. As has been noted before, it's no different to the other examples of unit types sharing the same name, such as the Demon, Centurion, Fury, etc.
 
Given that JS&DS established the 2782 date for the Vengeance and that it was published prior to SLSB, with the latter suffering from the typical poor fact checking we sadly too frequently saw at FASA, it makes little sense to retcon the date to satisfy a passing comment in the out of date, out of print SLSB when the above explanation neatly provides the answer.

DS&JS also predaged the SLSB but that didn't stop them from having to fix the dates on the Mammoth & Behemoth when that conflicted with later fluff.

What is easier, coming up w/ explanations for the THREE different examples of the Vengeance being in places where it really shouldn't be or just backdating 1 number of the date for it ?
They did that w/ the Mammoth & Behemoth and LOADS of mechs from 3025.
In this case I really don't see it as a major retcon.
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

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3939
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #32 on: 11 September 2012, 12:50:14 »
What is easier, coming up w/ explanations for the THREE different examples of the Vengeance being in places where it really shouldn't be or just backdating 1 number of the date for it ?

Nope, not three, just a single example.

Again: the Vengeance was introduced before Kerensky's Exodus, so that covers both Klondike and TRO2750, leaving only the SLSB p57 example, and TPTB have come up with a perfectly reasonable and viable answer for that.

Without a doubt, in just another example of FASA's poor fact checking, the writers for both TRO2750 and SLSB were thinking of the published Vengeance when the name was mentioned in those two publications, but the dates and answers we have allows all publications to stand without requiring any changes, whereas what you're suggesting would require changes. It's a no-brainer just to leave things as they are.

Hellraiser

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13013
  • Cry Havoc and Unleash the Gods of Fiat.
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #33 on: 11 September 2012, 13:41:19 »
Nope, not three, just a single example.

Again: the Vengeance was introduced before Kerensky's Exodus, so that covers both Klondike and TRO2750, leaving only the SLSB p57 example, and TPTB have come up with a perfectly reasonable and viable answer for that.

Without a doubt, in just another example of FASA's poor fact checking, the writers for both TRO2750 and SLSB were thinking of the published Vengeance when the name was mentioned in those two publications, but the dates and answers we have allows all publications to stand without requiring any changes, whereas what you're suggesting would require changes. It's a no-brainer just to leave things as they are.

Stating that a 2750 era Star League document was in fact refering to 2800 era Fed Suns Frigates as being who was paired up w/ the Vengeance isn't "Perfectly reasonable", its stretching it a tad and you know it.

Having the Klondike example which is a NEW Catalyst era document where fact checking is supposedly not the same as the FASA era then be chalked up to "well Kerensky got ahold of some of the 1st production run" isn't much of a stretch.  Till we look at where the 2 Vengeance factories are in 3025 canon.  So then we have to account for some added factory being in the TH post Amaris war destruction for a couple years before getting pasted by the Houses.

Finally, stating that its a "previous Vengeance" is just giving us one MORE unstated historical unit that people are going to want a canon RS for.  (Like the above mentioned Union-CV)

A single # change would have been a much better fix, IMHO.
It would account for why factories are all over the IS (older SLDF design)
It would account for any mentions in 2750, SLSB, & Klondike.
And as mentioned, its already something they have done for units in DS&JS & 3025/26.

But its clear we have different opinions on what is or is not a good fix, and we are getting off topic so I'm dropping it here.

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

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3939
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #34 on: 12 September 2012, 00:47:41 »
TRO2750 was written in-universe after the discovery of the Helm Core in 3028, thus it's not impossible or unreasonable to mention designs and events from later than 2750.

There's absolutely no reason why there couldn't have been a Vengeance shipyard in the Hegemony and even if there wasn't there's still absolutely no reason why the SLDF couldn't have obtained some during the two years between their introduction and the Exodus.

As for the unstatted old-Vengeance mentioned in SLSB p57, it's not as if there's large numbers of players screaming out for it, so I don't think TPTB have to worry about being put on the spot with the need to actually design it.

Wrangler

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 24877
  • Dang it!
    • Battletech Fanon Wiki
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #35 on: 12 September 2012, 11:14:45 »
As for the unstatted old-Vengeance mentioned in SLSB p57, it's not as if there's large numbers of players screaming out for it, so I don't think TPTB have to worry about being put on the spot with the need to actually design it.

Too bad, it would be nice to have another fill-in the blank stated.  Middle-of-the-road design would be useful animal to have.  Though i rather see a Inner Sphere general design we haven't seen yet.
"Men, fetch the Urbanmechs.  We have an interrogation to attend to." - jklantern
"How do you defeat a Dragau? Shoot the damn thing. Lots." - Jellico 
"No, it's a "Most Awesome Blues Brothers scene Reenactment EVER" waiting to happen." VotW Destrier - Weirdo  
"It's 200 LY to Sian, we got a full load of shells, a half a platoon of Grenadiers, it's exploding outside, and we're wearing flak jackets." VoTW Destrier - Misterpants
-Editor on Battletech Fanon Wiki

truetanker

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9901
  • Clan Hells Horses 666th Mech. Assualt Cluster
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #36 on: 12 September 2012, 22:01:34 »
Ya know, the Lion is fluffed to carry mech, fighter or a combo of both. So I can see one or two as a 6 ASF carrier.

TT
Khan, Clan Iron Dolphin
Azeroth Pocketverse
That is, if true tanker doesn't beat me to it. He makes truly evil units.Col.Hengist on 31 May 2013
TT, we know you are the master of nasty  O0 ~ Fletch on 22 June 2013
If I'm attacking you, conventional wisom says to bring 3x your force.  I want extra insurance, so I'll bring 4 for every 1 of what you have :D ~ Tai Dai Cultist on 21 April 2016
Me: Would you rather fight my Epithymía Thanátou from the Whispers of Blake?
Nav_Alpha: That THING... that is horrid
~ Nav_Alpha on 10 October 2016

Frabby

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4242
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #37 on: 13 September 2012, 05:27:28 »
Ya know, the Lion is fluffed to carry mech, fighter or a combo of both. So I can see one or two as a 6 ASF carrier.
Where is it fluffed to carry fighters? Couldn't find that in TRO3057.
Even if that was the case though, it would be not much different from a Leopard-CV then, except four times bigger, a bit slower and three times the firepower. The Lion is even bigger than a Union - pretty much twice the size, with half the fighter capacity (or less, depending on the stats of a Union-CV)

In The Sword and the Dagger, the Liao invaders launch swarms of fighters from unspecified "modified freighters". I personally like to think these were Quetzalcoatls, but the text doesn't specify if they're jump capable or not so they could conceivably be refitted DropShips as well. Union-CV is thinkable but these aren't really known as freighters; otherwise Mule springs to mind, or perhaps Danai.
Sarna.net BattleTechWiki Admin
Author of the BattleCorps stories Feather vs. Mountain, Rise and Shine, Proprietary, Trial of Faith & scenario Twins

truetanker

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9901
  • Clan Hells Horses 666th Mech. Assualt Cluster
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #38 on: 13 September 2012, 18:56:56 »
Trojans and Danais droppers. Respectfully, 1,550 tons and 1,700 tons cargo, both 2 smallcraft bays.

TT
Khan, Clan Iron Dolphin
Azeroth Pocketverse
That is, if true tanker doesn't beat me to it. He makes truly evil units.Col.Hengist on 31 May 2013
TT, we know you are the master of nasty  O0 ~ Fletch on 22 June 2013
If I'm attacking you, conventional wisom says to bring 3x your force.  I want extra insurance, so I'll bring 4 for every 1 of what you have :D ~ Tai Dai Cultist on 21 April 2016
Me: Would you rather fight my Epithymía Thanátou from the Whispers of Blake?
Nav_Alpha: That THING... that is horrid
~ Nav_Alpha on 10 October 2016

boilerman

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 952
  • Spinning wrenches since 1968.
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #39 on: 14 September 2012, 22:41:02 »
I always thought the Seeker would make a good DropShip carrier.
Avatar by Wombat. Thanks Wombat!

Belisarius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1371
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #40 on: 15 September 2012, 01:16:45 »
When it comes right down to it, a Mammoth or Behemoth would both be remarkable carriers... Due to sheer size alone. Cargo space and fighters.

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40758
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #41 on: 15 September 2012, 07:52:36 »
You don't have to modify a Behemoth to make a good carrier... ^-^
My wife writes books
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

Hellraiser

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13013
  • Cry Havoc and Unleash the Gods of Fiat.
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #42 on: 18 September 2012, 11:23:41 »
You don't have to modify a Behemoth to make a good carrier... ^-^

Behemoth-CV........for when you absolutely, positively, have to deploy more fighters than a Thera.
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

Belisarius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1371
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #43 on: 19 September 2012, 05:42:33 »
Accept no substitutes...   O0

HobbesHurlbut

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3089
  • Live Free or Die Hard
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #44 on: 19 September 2012, 09:32:48 »
Union-CV is thinkable but these aren't really known as freighters;
Union does have civilian models in fluff though.
Clan Blood Spirit - So Bad Ass as to require Orbital Bombardments to wipe us out....it is the only way to be sure!

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40758
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Fighter Carrier(s) between Leopard-CV and Titan size?
« Reply #45 on: 19 September 2012, 09:45:29 »
Union does have civilian models in fluff though.

And stats. See the Danais... ;)
My wife writes books
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

 

Register