Register Register

Author Topic: Advanced technologies for a BT faction  (Read 2184 times)

Korzon77

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2361
Advanced technologies for a BT faction
« on: 25 May 2019, 02:24:36 »
For a faction that left during the age of war, and is only recontacting the inner Sphere via Marco Polo style trading fleets, I was considering the use of new technologies that came about due to a focus on warships. Just some thoughts at this point, but I'd like people to give feedback on how transformative these various technologies would be.

  • Reducing the weight of SI and basic structure by 10 percent.
  • Allowing for multiple round types for NAC weapons, flak, long range, armor penetrating, etc.
  • Allowing for fast recharge of jump drives without any increased chance of KF damage or misjumps.
  • Advanced networking allows all ships to mount C3 systems for no mass penalty.
  • The use of hangerpods that can be attached as dropships, but allow for the carrying of multiple smaller dropships within their bays.

I'm not really interested in weapons thta do more damage--but more accurate weapons or weapons that have a different function than just "do 2x the damage of SLDF versions" would be more interesting.

idea weenie

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3853
Re: Advanced technologies for a BT faction
« Reply #1 on: 25 May 2019, 03:41:06 »
Not so much advanced, but different:

Bracing mounts
Using additional tonnage to better brace a weapon, these increase the range brackets of a weapon by 50%.
Tonnage: equal to the weapon being modified, counts as part of weapon tonnage for Fire Control Limits
Construction rules: Double the weapon mass, this doubled mas counts as weapon tonnage if the Fire Control limit is exceeded
Game rules: Weapon has 50% greater range (FRU for each bracket; so a standard Medium Laser goes from 3/6/9 to 5/9/14)


Heat Sink Ice Pack
Using the massive cargo tonnage to chill and store a giant block of ice, this is used to provide a heat sump that allows a Dropship, Warship, or space station to fire more energy weapons than expected.
Construction rules: Treat as hydrogen tanks and pumps for representing the giant block of ice, the baffles/internal radiators, and links between the ice and the ship's HeatSinks
Game rules: Each ton of ice provides 4 pts of Heat Sump.  Each pt of heat beyond what the ship can dissipate is marked off the heat sump to reflect the ice melting, instead of the ship melting.  Each 2 pts of excess heat capacity allows for refreezing 1 pt of ice.
So if a ship has 1000 pts of Heat Sinks, and fires 1250 pts of heat from its weapons, it gets 250 pts of heat marked off from its sumps.  Next turn, it only fires weapons that generate 800 pts of heat.  The ship has 200 pts extra coolant, and so 100 pts of heat are removed from the Heat Sump.
(pts per ton of ice are speculative, adjust as physics determines.  I figured 4 would be a nice number.)


Smuggler holds
When trying to recontact the Inner Sphere, someone got the idea that having hidden supplies would be useful.  Hiding the supplies from Customs inspectors would be better.  Each Smuggler hold only counts as 90% of the listed tonnage, due to sensor masking equipment.  However, the hold reads as a regular hydrogen fuel tank when scanned externally.
Construction Rules: Buy Smuggler Holds similar to cargo holds, but note that you only get 90% of the listed tonnage
Game Rules: Not much in combat, but the RPG side means whenever someone inspects your ship they have a chance to spot the voids within the fuel tanks.  Or if they notice you are fueling up more often than you should, and with less fuel than your design should have capacity for.


Hidden Weapons/Ammo
Sometimes you need to hide what you are really capable of.  Unfortunately, you also need better disguises since you are having to set up the weapons externally.  Each 4 tons allocated for hidden weapons allows up to 3 tons of weapon/ammunition to be mounted.  Total mass is calculatd, then weapons are installed in their respective location.
So if you have 6 arcs, and want to install a PPC in each arc, with a second in the nose, the weapons mass a total of 42 tons.  This means you need a total of 56 tons worth of hidden weapon gear to hide and deploy them.  However, the heat Sinks are not part of this, so a careful inspector might notice you have much more cooling capacity than normal.  Hope you have a good excuse.
Construction Rules: Hidden weapon tonnage does not count towards Fire Control tonnage, but the mounted weapons do.
Game Rules: Have two ship record sheets, one with the unhidden weapons, and a second adding the hidden weapons.  Ammunition and heat sinks mounted with the hidden weapons are not shared with the regular weapons, so you need to track that for them separately.  Normal procedure is to have ammunition for one fight on-mount, reloading when not in combat.


Expanded Ship skeleton regulations
Changing the rules in ship design regulations, your vessels can now mount as much SI tonnage as they choose.  This means that if your ship gets damaged internally during combat, and that damage reduces the SI, your ship can still use the full thrust of its engine(s)
Construction rules: Ship Thrust limitation on SI tonnage is lifted


Expanded Ship armor regulations
Changing the rules in ship design regulations, your vessels can now mount as much armor tonnage as they choose.  However, armor mounted in excess of th SI capacit does not contribute towards Threshold rating.
Construction rules: Ship SI limitation on armor tonnage is lifted, but note that the Threshold is still based on the original SI limit
Game rules: Yes you have a lot of armor points, but Threshold is still something to worry about


Thrust-augmented spinal aiming
Linking the Spinal mount weapons to the ship's thrusters, this allows a spinal mount to be more flexible in its targeting.  If a target is outside of the spinal weapon's hex spine firing arc, the owning player can choose to spend 1 Thrust point to change facing so it can fire at the target.  This is limited to 1 hex spine on either side of the original firing arc.  Due to the override on the ship's thrusters, all other weapons fire gets 1 penalty to hit
Construction Rules: No change, it is a hardware and software refit
Game rules: Instead of just having the forward hex spine to shoot a spinal mount into (assuming the spinal mount is forward mounted), you can engage any target within the forward arc (at the usual to-hit penalties for the size of the target).  However, if the target is outside of the forward hex spine, you have to spend 1 pt of Thrust to reflect turning the ship to aim at the target.  Also, all other weapons fire by the ship takes a 1 pt penalty de to the spinal mount computers commandeering ship attitude controls


Acceleration-tolerant Energy Storage Banks
Energy Storage Banks on board a space station cannot handle rapid thrust changes that can be made by a warship.  These can.  Treat them as the standard 100 kton Energy Storage Bank, but they can be mounted on a Warship.  They count as a hard connection for recharging from a space station, including the 2 pt bonus on recharge rolls, allowing the Warship to recharge its KF core faster than if trying to charge by Light Sail.  Although more massive than a Li-Fusion battery, this Energy Bank is not affected by KF Core cost multipliers.
Construction Rules: As regular Energy Storage Banks, but can be mounted on Warships
Game Rules: Needs to be recharged either by onboard fusion plant (using fuel), or by Jump sail, or be power beamed from another source.  Allows a Warship to recharge its KF core (or Li-Fu battery) from the onboard Energy Bank instead of needing to deploy its Jump Sail.


Half-sized Acceleration-tolerant Energy Storage Banks
The original 100 kton Energy Storage Banks are modified to be divided into two 50 kton banks, allowing them to be mounted in a pair of Dropships.  This allows the KF unit to be jumped to one location, have the Energy Bank Dropships dock, and charge itself from them.  Although charging time is unchanged (though treated as being charged from a regular Energy Storage Bank), this allows a KF unit to recharge at a long-recharge star.
Construction Rules: Treat as Energy Storage Battery, but it only masses 50 ktons, and is only half the cost.  Can be mounted in Dropships and Space Stations.

So a Warship with a Li-Fu Battery, an empty internal Energy Bank, and a KF Core could use six Docking collars, each with Energy Storage Dropships on them, and charge all three items at space station connected rates (two Dropships charge the Li-Fu battery, two charge the internal Energy Bank, and the last two charge the K-F Core).  After the charging is complete, the Dropships can detach and either use internal fuel to recharge, or hook to a local space station/vessel to recharge.


Sturdy Space Stations (yes, this eventually leads to Monitor tech)
Building a space station with more structural members than normal, this allows the station to be parked in more risky areas.  However the relatively open nature of a space station means that more structural material is needed.
Construction rules: SI limit of 1 is rescinded, you can add as much SI as you want, but the tonnage is based on a Warship of similar mass, multiplied by the square of the SI you want.  (So calculate the tons per SI for a Warship, and multiply that by the square of the desired SI).  This extra SI can allow for more armor tonnage
Game Effect: you have more SI


Enhanced station mobility (and this is where you might get Monitors)
With stronger stations, sometimes you need them to maneuver faster than normal.  This is just installing Warship grade engines, and hoping you never have to use them.  Max safe acceleration is equal to the station's SI.
Construction rules: 6% of SS tonnage per Thrust point
Game Effect: You have acceleration!  However, each Thrust pt used in excess of the SI causes either an internal critical hit (defender's choice), or you mark off 1 pt of station SI.
« Last Edit: 25 May 2019, 13:30:36 by idea weenie »

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3695
Re: Advanced technologies for a BT faction
« Reply #2 on: 26 May 2019, 22:37:17 »
I can see reduced SI as part of tech advancement. I can also see it as weight savings for slower ships, with increased penalties if the go faster. I can also see reinforced SI at a cost in weight but allows increased speeds and maneuvers. This would be for all units that use SI.

I'd allow vehicle jump jets on satellites. They'd follow the same rules as those for mechs. I'd also allow sealed vehicles with jump jets to operate in space under the same rules. Id also have a thruster system for vehicles under 5 tons.

I'd let space stations mount engines for a thrust point. Sometimes they need to move and tugs aren't available. Id allow capital scale weapons on dropships.

I'd allow alternative ammo on AS units. That would include capitol scale weapons.

I'd allow faster recharging in general but I'd keep the penalty for trying to recharge faster than that.

I don't know about a portable dropship hanger but I can see an adaptor for the docking collar allowing additional dropship to be transported. Like turning a single light socket into a dual one or a single wall outlet into a triple or something. It'd weight 10% per each of the dropships to be carried. To a max of 5 dropship. So you'd have to be careful loading your dropship. Its use limits the ships thrust and increases the chance of a jump failure. More adaptors increase the risk. Overloading increases the risk even more. Loading, a Potempkin with 125 Behemoths is asking to visit Kaetetôã.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 27522
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Advanced technologies for a BT faction
« Reply #3 on: 27 May 2019, 07:31:41 »
For a faction that left during the age of war, and is only recontacting the inner Sphere via Marco Polo style trading fleets, I was considering the use of new technologies that came about due to a focus on warships. Just some thoughts at this point, but I'd like people to give feedback on how transformative these various technologies would be.

  • Reducing the weight of SI and basic structure by 10 percent.
  • Allowing for multiple round types for NAC weapons, flak, long range, armor penetrating, etc.
  • Allowing for fast recharge of jump drives without any increased chance of KF damage or misjumps.
  • Advanced networking allows all ships to mount C3 systems for no mass penalty.
  • The use of hangerpods that can be attached as dropships, but allow for the carrying of multiple smaller dropships within their bays.

I'm not really interested in weapons thta do more damage--but more accurate weapons or weapons that have a different function than just "do 2x the damage of SLDF versions" would be more interesting.

Per your request:
1) This will lead to more heavily armored ships, as SI limits the amount of armor you can mount.  I would hope this technology is at least more expensive.
2) This will depend on the exact types you permit.  I don't think I'd allow "longer range" rounds, but flak and armor piercing could work.
3) If it comes with a tonnage cost, I think this could be balanced, though I'd only reduce the chances of core damage and leave the table otherwise intact.
4) C3 is a pretty powerful ability to give for "free".  At most, I'd reduce the mass cost, not eliminate it.
5) If you're simply looking to dock a larger number of smaller ships, abandoning KF antennas and going back to DropShuttles might work.  Without mass (or other) limits, this modification is ripe for abuse in the vein of what RifleMech mentions.

Korzon77

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2361
Re: Advanced technologies for a BT faction
« Reply #4 on: 06 June 2019, 00:13:37 »
On the dropship hangers, the problem is that by the rules, that shouldn't be hard--a 100KT pod with say, 50K of storage space for droppers is still, at least the way the rules are written, a 100KT pod.
It doesn't normally matter for the IS, given how small most dropship fleets, are, but this faction is about 1/4 the economic size of the Terran Hegemony.  I figure it's the kind of thing that someone with a fairly big budget would come up with when it's asked: Why are we still using regular collars for all of our 1500-3K assault droppers?

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 27522
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Advanced technologies for a BT faction
« Reply #5 on: 06 June 2019, 03:18:40 »
Seriously, DropShuttle Bays.  Collars are the cheapest way to move raw tonnage, and that's why the universe converged on that solution centuries ago.  Lots of little ships are less efficient, but assault DropShips aren't about efficiency.

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3695
Re: Advanced technologies for a BT faction
« Reply #6 on: 06 June 2019, 06:35:56 »
Doesn't it take a long time to load and launch a Dropshuttle?

Korzon77

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2361
Re: Advanced technologies for a BT faction
« Reply #7 on: 08 June 2019, 00:18:31 »
Doesn't it take a long time to load and launch a Dropshuttle?

by the current rules yes. But equally, dropshuttles are considered rather obsolete, so you could assume that a modern version, especially one built for military usage, would have faster ways to dock or launch.

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3695
Re: Advanced technologies for a BT faction
« Reply #8 on: 08 June 2019, 06:50:54 »
by the current rules yes. But equally, dropshuttles are considered rather obsolete, so you could assume that a modern version, especially one built for military usage, would have faster ways to dock or launch.

Wouldn't the modern version be the dropship?

idea weenie

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3853
Re: Advanced technologies for a BT faction
« Reply #9 on: 09 June 2019, 20:29:39 »
by the current rules yes. But equally, dropshuttles are considered rather obsolete, so you could assume that a modern version, especially one built for military usage, would have faster ways to dock or launch.

Custom rules so a Dropshuttle bay is optimized for a specific mass/design?  A Dropshuttle bay could be optimized for 4 kton Dropshuttles, so anything that size gets a reduction in loading/launching times.  Anything too large/small uses standard cargo handling times.  Make it even fancier, so it can only handle the 4 kton 'Screamer' Dropshuttle, and it gets a further time reduction but only for handling the 4 kton Screamer Dropshuttle design.

Even include special rules for fast-launching that specific design?

I.e. assume a 4 kton Dropshuttle takes 200 hrs to deploy using cargo handling rules.  A Dropshuttle bay optimized for 4 kton Dropshuttles would take 100 hrs to deploy them, but other than 400 ktons would still take the full 200 hrs.  Optimizing the bay further the Screamer Dropshuttle would cut it down to 50 hours.  From there, spend more C-Bills to reflect adding Power loaders and similar gear, and you reduce the time farther.

But each of those improvements will cost money, take up additional tonnage, etc, in your desire to launch Dropshuttles in a tactical scale.  (By tactical scale, I mean like launching ASF at a rate of one per tactical turn per bay door allocated to ASF Bays.  Dropshuttles might get to a rate of one per ten tactical turns (exact numbers TBD), and you have to specify which one will be launched at the beginning of the 10-turn cycle.  This means attackers can try to fake you out by sending in ASF, so you prep the Dropshuttle that looks like a sparkler with all the anti-ASF weaponry on it.  Then after a few turns you move up your Dropshuttles that are designed for anti-shipping purposes, and the anti-fighter Dropshuttle is stuck.  If you try to launch a different design, the 10-turn launch delay starts all over again.

Korzon77

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2361
Re: Advanced technologies for a BT faction
« Reply #10 on: 09 June 2019, 20:36:39 »
I'd reduce that a bit--I wsa thinking more along the lines of the launch systems we see in HALO:

https://conceptbunny.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/UNSC-Infinity-from-Halo-4.jpg

Can't figure out how this can be resized and the basic size pretty much covers teh page, so just check the link.

Note again, that this is specifically for someone who has been focusing on shipos rather than battlemechs, so when estimating capacities, they'd have about the same gap over Star League warships that the Clans have over the IS during the 3050s.
« Last Edit: 09 June 2019, 20:39:50 by Korzon77 »

 

Register