Register Register

Author Topic: WarShip Record Sheets, adjusted by year and tech availability  (Read 192 times)

Liam's Ghost

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7224
  • Miss Chitty finds your honor rules quaint.
I originally made this set of record sheets as part of my General War setting, however it occurs to me that it might also be useful outside of that.

The basic problem is this: TRO 3057 revised and nearly(?) every historical WarShip created was done before the release of Interstellar Operations, which codified when each piece of tech became available. As a consequence, nearly every historical WarShip has problems matching up with that list.

Mostly because of the armor. Standard armor doesn't reach production status until 2470. Higher grades take longer. A large number of historical ships, from the Dreadnought to the Farragut would have been originally armored with primitive armor.

The easiest assumption to avoid rewriting all the things is to assume the published stats represent the ships towards the end of their service lives rather than their date of introduction, after however many overhauls and updates. (though my question whether this is officially the case or not has so far only netted an ambiguous answer).

But, since my General War setting takes place at a point where these various refits might not have been completely implemented yet, I made this set of record sheets.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nggarV9jQvzaeu4a3IdIxOfDoVWn6lBW/view?usp=sharing

This starts with the canon stats, and works backwards, trying to stay as close to what we ended up to as possible. Using the Farragut class as an example, I started with the stats on hand and referenced the relevant tables in Interstellar Operations to determine when that variant could have existed (because of the Ferro Carbide armor, that was 2570). This became the 2570 variant, which matches the canon stats. From there I also extrapolated the 2470 variant, which has standard armor, and the original 2440 variant, which would have primitive armor.

(apparently I decided against including a 2520 variant that could have had ferro aluminium armor).

The date assigned to each variant, with the exception of the original model's introduction date, does not necessarily indicate when the variant would have entered service, but when the tech was available to make it. For example, the Dreadnought could have had standard armor fitted by 2470, but it almost certainly wouldn't have at the time, as the remaining ships in the class would have been canonically mothballed and wouldn't be reactivated until the reunification war, which was probably when they were rearmored.

I also skipped some possible variants I could have added for similar reasons, based entirely on my own judgement and what I intend for the General War Setting. For example, I didn't include an Aegis class Cruiser equipped with ferro carbide armor, even though the canon Aegis (2372) model has it because, again, it was most likely a product of the reunification war, and wouldn't come up in my setting.

I also made some design adjustments beyond simply fitting some ships into a specific tech base. Like I gave the Dart and Aegis dropshuttle bays in their earliest form so that they had the same transport capability of the Cruiser, I gave some ships naval comm scanners, and I designated the various marks of Vincent in the book the mark 5, 15, and 25 for purely arbitrary reasons. These are all purely guesses on my part, sometime based on very little (or no) evidence. Use them as you see fit.

Good news is the lab boys say the symptoms of asbestos poisoning show an immediate latency of 44.6 years. So if you're thirty or over you're laughing. Worst case scenario you miss out on a few rounds of canasta, plus you've forwarded the cause of science by three centuries. I punch those numbers into my calculator, it makes a happy face.

(indirect accessory to the) Slayer of Monitors!

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 29056
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: WarShip Record Sheets, adjusted by year and tech availability
« Reply #1 on: 06 October 2022, 20:05:21 »
That sounds reasonable enough to me, good sir!  :thumbsup: