BattleTech - The Board Game of Armored Combat
BattleTech Player Boards => Fan Designs and Rules => Aerospace => Topic started by: Maingunnery on 01 June 2020, 18:32:56
-
I wanted to objectively determine the best way to reach all parts of the Milky Way galaxy using BT technology (think long-term reliability).
For this I selected two criteria: cost per person and tonnage per person. Keeping the former low is important to get such an enterprise off the ground, while the latter reduces the industrial burden on the decedents for making additional additional ships (to house population growth and other reasons).
To calculate the best setup I compared various combinations (DS, JS & WS) with standardized stats (same armor type, SI value, ratio of cargo/quarters, etc). [I had also considered Space Stations with KF booms as an option, but the answer to my rules question makes it clear that they aren't a viable option for this scenario.]
The results clearly point out some facts, bigger is always better and that the DropShips cost multiplier is a killer.
Cost-wise a JumpShip fully loaded with ten 100k DropShip scores only average on the list of combinations, while 2.5MT WarShip with no DropShips gives the best cost per person. This can be demonstrated using mostly canon ships. Here I am assuming that half of the cargo (including all the yard stuff and escape pods) will be used for additional steerage quarters. So a Monolith & 9 Behemoths vs a stripped Newgrande & 4 Behemoths.
Monolith (habitat)+9B: 68257P 26.5B 1330kt = 388,239 CBill/P & 19.49 Ton/P
NewGrange (habitat)+4B: 119709P 29.71B 2700kt = 248,185 Cbill/P & 22.55 Ton/P
Now compare those to somewhat optimized custom designs to how far it can be improved.
Cluster JS & 10 Island DS: 88839P 30.07B 1455kt = 338,477 CBill/P & 16.38 Ton/P
Sunflower ColonyShip* (0 DS): 111115P 16.12B 2500kt = 145,074 Cbill/P & 22.50 Ton/P
Canon ships are pretty decent, but custom designs can really get some real gains, however the existing facts don't change. Using a JumpShip gives a noticeable mass advantage, however using a compact-core ship (WS) cuts the costs down by more than half. This does suggest to me that the 'Single WS' set-up is likely the best technical solution, but we all know that most factions will not be able to build such large ships. But personally I can see something like it being commissioned by DOME (Department of Mega Engineering, from the first Star League).
ps. [TPTB should really look into a separate cost multiplier for non-atmospheric DropShips, so some errata please.... pretty please... ]
-
Those mega-scale ships should have at least one collar each. You can't beat the ability to land on a planet with that much mass at one time... ^-^
-
All parts of the Milky Way? The IS is roughly 2/3rds of the way out from the galactic core. The farthest point would be the rim on the opposite side of the core. Distance roughly 16.000 parsecs.
At 30 parsecs/week (nice round number), we get about 1,600 parsecs/year theoretical max speed. 10 years - much better than I originally thought it would be! But there's no way any ship could maintain 52 jumps/year, year after year, so the practical limit would be somewhat less.
And yes, there should be some way of having DropShips with no maneuver drives, and just attitude jets, for "spam in a can" transport ;)
-
"hey we're about a jump out of the supermassive blackhole and our drive broke down. why is everything looking like funhouse mirrors? why is your message dated Sept 5, 3553?"
-
Hmmm.
Use a Jumpship with a large repair facility and bring stations in there?
Also, I definitely recommend better quarters than steerage. Better recycling, and you'll have sane crew. Useful at times.
-
Worktroll: parsecs and light-years are not the same thing... One parsec is a bit over 3 light years.
-
Those mega-scale ships should have at least one collar each. You can't beat the ability to land on a planet with that much mass at one time... ^-^
Good idea, one collar doesn't raise the price that much, we just have to be sure it is a good DS.
Now standard/second-class quarters those inflate the price, but it is still cheaper than the best JS-DS combo.
1 DC. -> 16,92 B
2nd Class 79685 -> 17,86 B
224,133 Cbill/P
31.37 Ton/P
And yes, there should be some way of having DropShips with no maneuver drives, and just attitude jets, for "spam in a can" transport ;)
Well in MML I can reduce the thrust to 0, but that also causes the SI to be 0, reverting to an 1 mp safe thrust engine is good enough.
But the big problem is the DropShip cost multiplier, which is x36, now if non-atmospheric DropShips had a lower multiplier of about half of that it would make a huge difference.
Hmmm.
Use a Jumpship with a large repair facility and bring stations in there?
You might be right, according to TO p335, that combo should work.
135,044 Cbill/P
20.3 Ton/P
But is the station online while in the repair facility?
Also, I definitely recommend better quarters than steerage. Better recycling, and you'll have sane crew. Useful at times.
OK will use those in any final design, on a related note how do kids count? Do they get their own quarters at a certain age?
-
Worktroll: parsecs and light-years are not the same thing... One parsec is a bit over 3 light years.
Whoops! Elder's moment. So make it 10 parsecs/jump, near enough for government work. 30 years is certainly more ambitious, and challenging, than 10 ...
-
Is it wrong I am seriously considering the merits of slower then light for this?
-
Yes.
Standard jump - minimum 30 years to Farside.
STL: minimum 48,000 years to Farside. External universe time.
The closer you get to Tau Zero, the shorter internal time - but the BT universe lacks the magitech to survive travelling at such speeds. One grain of dust at .99999999999999999999999999C ... :o
-
That said, we know slowboat colonization is possible. Wonder how long it would take at the 0.68c of the Pathfinder probes.
-
Tens of thousands of years.
-
but the BT universe lacks the magitech to survive travelling at such speeds. One grain of dust at .99999999999999999999999999C ... :o
BT armor does actually quite well against high-velocity impacts.
Anyway the true problem remains travel-speed, but thankfully BT KF-drives are quite fast.
-
Even BT armour isn't going to cope with specks of dust at relativistic speeds.
At 99% of lightspeed, a sand grain hits with the force of 1000 tons of TNT.
Okay, space doesn't contain that many grains of sand. But it does contain a lot of atoms. And at .99C, you're plowing a big channel. And throw in that at .99C there's a Tau factor of .14 or so, the crew will be seeing things happen 7 times faster than the leftbehinds.
No, BT armour ain't up to it.
-
That said, we know slowboat colonization is possible. Wonder how long it would take at the 0.68c of the Pathfinder probes.
Yeah, I went and actually did the math. Nowhere near close enough. Seventy-three thousand years earth time, fifty-three thousand years ship time. For a fifty thousand light year trip.
It would be doable over shortish distances though...
-
So my tens of thousands swag was on the money... ^-^
-
Going somewhere just to get there is a very human thing.
Colonizing a nearby system, on the other hand, can have very practical reasons.
-
Going somewhere just to get there is a very human thing.
Colonizing a nearby system, on the other hand, can have very practical reasons.
While it would take longer to reach across the galaxy, this would be a more reliable method of crossing it.
-
While it would take longer to reach across the galaxy, this would be a more reliable method of crossing it.
Depend on what people mean with nearby.
I am imagine the process to be more like going into a big circle around the milky way, depositing excess population into colonies wherever garden worlds are found, building up the required infrastructure before moving on. These garden worlds will in time produce their own colony ships which then travel to the local unexplored area (such as towards the edge or center) for more garden worlds. This would be a way for a single ship to make an efficient start at colonizing the entire galaxy.
-
All parts of the Milky Way? The IS is roughly 2/3rds of the way out from the galactic core. The farthest point would be the rim on the opposite side of the core. Distance roughly 16.000 parsecs.
The IS is located at around 26,000 light years from Sagittarius A*. The thin disk of the Milkyway has a nominal radius of around 100,000 light years, but once we include densities, if we want to set a reasonable target : Use the end of the Carina arm. That's about 75-80,000 light years from us on the other side, probably 90,000 on a reasonable flight path around the center.
At an optimized 176 hours per jump (incl. plotting) getting there takes at least 60 years. With BT technology it should be possible to move a colony of up to 30,000 people over there, more if using cryostasis.
-
The IS is located at around 26,000 light years from Sagittarius A*. The thin disk of the Milkyway has a nominal radius of around 100,000 light years, but once we include densities, if we want to set a reasonable target : Use the end of the Carina arm. That's about 75-80,000 light years from us on the other side, probably 90,000 on a reasonable flight path around the center.
At an optimized 176 hours per jump (incl. plotting) getting there takes at least 60 years. With BT technology it should be possible to move a colony of up to 30,000 people over there, more if using cryostasis.
You'd also have to plot your path pretty tightly unless you want to be dealing with that fun space between the arms. Sure, there are stars there, just like there are oasis in the Sahara. You just have to be careful how you go about getting there.
-
Sure, there are stars there, just like there are oasis in the Sahara.
The density of stars in the Milky Way is near-equal throughout the disk. There aren't quantifiably more stars in the arms than in the space inbetween. The spiral arms of Galaxies simply represent the places where bright B and O stars are born - short-lived stars who do not live long enough to drift out of the arms.
That said going as close as possible in a particular direction in jumps of as close as possible to 30 light years in a 2D space is not as easy as it may sound anyway. You're pretty much always dodging and weaving a path between stars within around a 45° angle either side of the planned direction.
-
How expensive are space stations? I think that space stations can keep life support while linked to a jumpship (if not, it's a common sense house rule) and they're a bit less expensive than dropships--and in terms of mobility they have the same station keeping drives as jumpships so they can move about a solar system.
you'd probably want factory modules, as well as a population large enough to establish waypoint colonies as you went out.
In fact, such an attempt might spend extended periods of time "resting" which is when you'd set up your factories and more or less rebuild everything you'd been working on.
-
That was asked recently up in the rules forum... the answer was definitively "no", so a house rule is your only option.
-
That was asked recently up in the rules forum... the answer was definitively "no", so a house rule is your only option.
Which is, honestly, ridiculous. The only difference between space stations and dropship is that one has a maneuver drive and the other has station keeping drives.
-
Here is the link:
https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=69470.0
I was hoping for them to scrap "is fully shut down, and", sadly that didn't happen.
-
Which really raises the question of what exactly is happening given that a dropship can apparently still support its own crew just fine.
One would assume that the regular crew quarters should function just fine on batteries even if the reactors were off.
I mean, how is that supposed to work, everyone don a spacesuit before docking and then you turn everything off and open the doors?
-
I think it's just inelegant game balance, really. Consider being able to stitch a "Death Star" together out of Space Stations and a Potemkin...
-
I think it's just inelegant game balance, really. Consider being able to stitch a "Death Star" together out of Space Stations and a Potemkin...
That is also what I am thinking, but that would still be prevented by reducing the sentence to: "While docked, the space station may not fire weapons, use sensors, or perform any special communications actions".
The shutdown part was really unnecessary.
-
Perhaps they were trying to avoid people shifting all their crew quarters to the "space stations", leaving more room for weapons on the ship. Who knows?
-
Perhaps they were trying to avoid people shifting all their crew quarters to the "space stations", leaving more room for weapons on the ship. Who knows?
It's more likely related to this, to which there still isn't an answer:
https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=52629.msg1462097#msg1462097
-
Well, I personally assume that anything not directly connected to the jump engine can't be carried, so daisy-chaining along a line of stations for the jump is out anyways - and makes sense, from a fluff perspective. You can't extend a jump bubble infinitely.
But I would expect the regular crew quarters in any ship regularly docked to the jumpship to still function, otherwise you'd have to evacuate every ship attaching to a jumpship immediately.
That the unit is otherwise offline is fine by me. Needn't even keep the passenger-berths online, using them just for cargo seems completely acceptable.
-
I think Kato has identified the most likely reasoning for the rule.
-
It's more likely related to this, to which there still isn't an answer:
https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=52629.msg1462097#msg1462097
Does this mean that stations need a KF-Boom in order to jump in an un-pressurized repair facility?
-
True. I would assume so. At least if you want it to stay operational. Now that I read it that way, that might preclude transferring stations, but I was under the assumption that it was supposed to be possible to transfer them from one system to another.
-
True. I would assume so. At least if you want it to stay operational. Now that I read it that way, that might preclude transferring stations, but I was under the assumption that it was supposed to be possible to transfer them from one system to another.
It would mean that the crew of that expensive station (because of the KF Boom) would have to be transferred to a collar mounted DropShip (attached to the JS) for that Jump. What a hassle.
ps. Wouldn't it be a more elegant solution to just forbid yard stacking (A unit with a repair facility can't hold anything in that, while being carried in a repair facility itself.)?
-
Yes, that would be the more obvious way to do it.
The way the errata linked lacks a final answer, we don't know if such vessels count as external, though, even though I would assume so.
What does a K-F boom cost on a station, anyways?
-
What does a K-F boom cost on a station, anyways?
It changes the cost multiplier from x5 to x20.
-
And limits weight to 100,000 tons of course.
-
Just read that in IO before coming back here. ;D You can modularize stations, but that obviously jacks up the cost.
-
Modular stations are not inhabitable when docked in their disassembled state.
-
True. And it also fails our aim, that to cheaply traverse the universe.
-
I envision something more like a Carrack, maybe with a dropshuttle bay or two to carry some space stations for resource gathering/maintenance facilities.
1st Class living quarters across the board, and a hydroponics area for food production.
-
Wouldn't that be nice?
I, for one, am partial towards luxurious quarters and fresh food. ;D
In our warship race thread, a discussion regarding jumpable stations recently brought up the possible interpretation that a repair facility would include booms for vessels held therein.
Still doubt that is the case, but how would that affect the calculations?
-
Wouldn't that be nice?
I, for one, am partial towards luxurious quarters and fresh food. ;D
Sure but it would be harder to exist in the long term with small populations.
In our warship race thread, a discussion regarding jumpable stations recently brought up the possible interpretation that a repair facility would include booms for vessels held therein.
Still doubt that is the case, but how would that affect the calculations?
Another question would be if the station has to be shutdown as well whist in a repair facility, if it is shutdown then it would be a dud.
Right now the maximum sized compact-core ships with minimal DS has the best technical/economic stats, however it doesn't feel right for the BT universe.
A JS with max DS feels better but it is an economic disaster.
A JS with max SS sounds very logical, feels right, has great stats, but the fact that people can't life and work those stations during a jump makes this concept a dud.
-
But you could use them to store cargo, right?
I think you could go with a compact core ship with repair facilities?
-
But you could use them to store cargo, right?
I think you could go with a compact core ship with repair facilities?
Repair facilities do increase the cost of the JS/WS by a significant factor, so the average cost will go up.
-
Repair facilities do increase the cost of the JS/WS by a significant factor, so the average cost will go up.
Given how far away you're going to be from support, I'd argue that there's no way to avoid needing not simply repair facilities, but enough of a "key tools" manufacturing ability to replace everything you're using.
-
About how many "passengers" and "security" personnel do you think such an exploration vessel carry?
About how many Drop Ships and Small Craft should such a vessel carry?
How many burn days of fuel should it expect to have?
-
Given how far away you're going to be from support, I'd argue that there's no way to avoid needing not simply repair facilities, but enough of a "key tools" manufacturing ability to replace everything you're using.
With "key tools" manufacturing they can simply build a yard whenever they need one.
-
I would assume an actual shipyard to be equally expensive when it comes to necessary parts. A single bay does't cause that horrifying an amount.
Still, while we're at it, why not 2 ships?
A jumpship with a repair facility or 2 and some collars, carrying some dropships and deactivated stations containing spare parts, supplies, and a bit of living space + large grav decks to comfortably work on during breaks of exploration, and a compact core colony ship with mostly living arrangements.
-
I would assume an actual shipyard to be equally expensive when it comes to necessary parts. A single bay does't cause that horrifying an amount.
If one assembles or manufactures it onsite, then they can avoid the costs and complexity of a jump-compatible repair facility.
Still, while we're at it, why not 2 ships?
A jumpship with a repair facility or 2 and some collars, carrying some dropships and deactivated stations containing spare parts, supplies, and a bit of living space + large grav decks to comfortably work on during breaks of exploration, and a compact core colony ship with mostly living arrangements.
I am going to have to calculate that...
-
Question here:
As the discussion recently came up in our warship race, is the cost-inefficiency of dropships mostly down to the crew quarters?
Apparently, those are supposed to be free on advanced aerospace units.
While I strongly disagree on warships, it is an easy solution to make droppers more competitive in the "haul people" job.
Example:
New Colony Dropship
Type: Civilian Spheriod
Mass: 75,000 tons
Technology Base: Inner Sphere (Standard)
Introduced: 3145
Mass: 75,000
Battle Value: 2,036
Tech Rating/Availability: E/X-X-X-E
Cost: 3,590,216,000 C-bills
Fuel: 2,500 tons (25,000)
Safe Thrust: 3
Maximum Thrust: 5
Heat Sinks: 152
Structural Integrity: 20
Armor
Nose: 130
Sides: 120/120
Aft: 130
Cargo
Bay 1: Small Craft (12) 2 Doors
Bay 2: Cargo (14540.5 tons) 1 Door
Ammunition:
None
Escape Pods: 200
Life Boats: 50
Crew: 11 officers, 39 enlisted/non-rated, 60 bay personnel, 5000 passengers, 10 marines
Notes: Mounts 70 tons of standard aerospace armor.
Weapons: Capital Attack Values (Standard)
Arc (Heat) Heat SRV MRV LRV ERV Class
Nose (19 Heat)
2 Laser AMS 14 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) AMS
1 ER Medium Laser 5 1(5) 1(5) 0(0) 0(0) Laser
RS/LS Fwd (19 Heat)
2 Laser AMS 14 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) AMS
1 ER Medium Laser 5 1(5) 1(5) 0(0) 0(0) Laser
RS/LS Aft (19 Heat)
2 Laser AMS 14 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) AMS
1 ER Medium Laser 5 1(5) 1(5) 0(0) 0(0) Laser
Aft (19 Heat)
2 Laser AMS 14 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) AMS
1 ER Medium Laser 5 1(5) 1(5) 0(0) 0(0) Laser
If one assumes free quarters, that cost drops by almost two thirds.
Would that change the calculations?
-
Question here:
As the discussion recently came up in our warship race, is the cost-inefficiency of dropships mostly down to the crew quarters?
Apparently, those are supposed to be free on advanced aerospace units.
While I strongly disagree on warships, it is an easy solution to make droppers more competitive in the "haul people" job.
Example:
New Colony Dropship
Type: Civilian Spheriod
Mass: 75,000 tons
Technology Base: Inner Sphere (Standard)
Introduced: 3145
Mass: 75,000
Battle Value: 2,036
Tech Rating/Availability: E/X-X-X-E
Cost: 3,590,216,000 C-bills
Fuel: 2,500 tons (25,000)
Safe Thrust: 3
Maximum Thrust: 5
Heat Sinks: 152
Structural Integrity: 20
Armor
Nose: 130
Sides: 120/120
Aft: 130
Cargo
Bay 1: Small Craft (12) 2 Doors
Bay 2: Cargo (14540.5 tons) 1 Door
Ammunition:
None
Escape Pods: 200
Life Boats: 50
Crew: 11 officers, 39 enlisted/non-rated, 60 bay personnel, 5000 passengers, 10 marines
Notes: Mounts 70 tons of standard aerospace armor.
Weapons: Capital Attack Values (Standard)
Arc (Heat) Heat SRV MRV LRV ERV Class
Nose (19 Heat)
2 Laser AMS 14 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) AMS
1 ER Medium Laser 5 1(5) 1(5) 0(0) 0(0) Laser
RS/LS Fwd (19 Heat)
2 Laser AMS 14 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) AMS
1 ER Medium Laser 5 1(5) 1(5) 0(0) 0(0) Laser
RS/LS Aft (19 Heat)
2 Laser AMS 14 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) AMS
1 ER Medium Laser 5 1(5) 1(5) 0(0) 0(0) Laser
Aft (19 Heat)
2 Laser AMS 14 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) AMS
1 ER Medium Laser 5 1(5) 1(5) 0(0) 0(0) Laser
If one assumes free quarters, that cost drops by almost two thirds.
Would that change the calculations?
That would make a huge difference to the cost calculations, but aren't free quarters limited to just the base crew?
-
Not sure. But as far as I've gathered, the cause of this ruling was specifically to make dropships better at moving people. So I do believe that is indeed mostly directed at passengers, and those are mentioned in the ruling on page 160 SO.
Newer errata even deletes the crew quarters from the cost table, apparently.
-
That would make a huge difference to the cost calculations, but aren't free quarters limited to just the base crew?
Both crew and passenger quarters as well as infantry bays are considered to be fully covered by the "life support" cost (140,000-180,000 per person after multipliers) and hence free.
TM p282
-
Considering the quarters costs about three times the life-support costs, this is a big deal.
Even my most cost efficient steerage designs have their costs nearly cut into half (down to 55%).
EDIT:
Adjusted my own designs a bit, standard quarters, arming the JS, adding a grav deck, leaving 1 collar open for a combat/landing dropship.
9 DS + 1 JS
Total Tonnage 1,360,000
Total Persons 81,547
Total Cost 16,168,740,134
Total Cargo 228,133
Cost/P 198,275
Tons/P 16.68
This is very acceptable, further saving will likely require reducing the DS engine to below 1/2 thrust but is that even possible?
-
As long as you're not trying to land on anything, a Station Keeping engine should work.
-
As long as you're not trying to land on anything, a Station Keeping engine should work.
But is that even allowed? That would also reduce the IS to 3 right?
-
It's unclear. StratOps introduces Station Keeping drives, but doesn't seem to prohibit them from being installed on smaller ships.