Warships with low armor

[Cryhavok101]

Warships like the Sovetskii Soyuz, Agamemnon, and Eagle have always seemed like they have abysmally low armor, enough so to make them basically flying victims. Or at least that is the way I have always viewed them. Is there an opposing view? Can someone show me what I am missing? Is there a way to use these that their armor levels isn't as big a problem?

[snewsom2997]

Well with the SovSoy at least it would have been supported by dozens of other warships and hundreds of fighters and ASF Carriers when designed in the Star League. When used by the Clans it would generally be a centerpiece not a combatant.

When you think about it, a modern carrier doesn't have any armor. because it has concentric rings of defenders, Destroyers, Subs, Helicopters, and Aircraft.

The Eagle and the Aggie, I don't know, The Eagle is at least fast, trades Armor for Speed, the Aggie traded Armor for Speed and Weapons. 4(6) is pretty fast for a Heavy Cruiser.

[Arkansas Warrior]

If it's the only WarShip on the field, it oughta be able to bully fighters and droppers well enough to not need super-thick armor.  Could be the Addie and Eagle were meant more for patrol and interdiction, where encountering lots of other WarShips is unlikely.   IIRC the Eagle is specifically fluffed as a Thera escort, though.  I suppose you could say that it's vulnerability makes it a more likely target, thus drawing fire away from the *important* ship in the carrier group.  lol

[I am Belch II]

The Agamemnon from the new FWL navy was really low also. It had great amounts of fire power but no armor.

[Cryhavok101]

The Eagle is at least fast, trades Armor for Speed, the Aggie traded Armor for Speed and Weapons.

Warships don't trade armor for speed. I don't think I can name even 1 warship whose maximum armor value is eve close to the weight of a single MP. Warship armor weighs a relatively trivial amount, with even the heaviest battleships only having a less than 10,000 tons of it.

If anything they are trading armor for a trivial amount of more cargo space.

[Maelwys]

Warships don't trade armor for speed. I don't think I can name even 1 warship whose maximum armor value is eve close to the weight of a single MP. Warship armor weighs a relatively trivial amount, with even the heaviest battleships only having a less than 10,000 tons of it.

If anything they are trading armor for a trivial amount of more cargo space.

Which is a pretty good way of looking at it. And probably shows just how screwy things are :)

The Tracker at 100,000 tons requires 6000 tons per point of thrust. Its armor is 129.5 tons and its cargo is 2295.5 tons. The Leviathan III requires 144,000 tons per point of thrust. Its armor is only 5373 tons while its cargo is 51,459 tons.

The Agamemnon requires 49,200 tons per point of thrust, it has 735 tons of armor and 70,770 tons of cargo. It could double its armor for like 1% of its cargo tonnage. Quite a few designs have similar ratios.

[cray]

Well, in character, the Sovetskii Soyuz was designed and operated in an era when WarShips were basically transports with some nominal guns and armor. Many of the SLDF WarShips were designed, built, and broken without seeing combat. If they could shrug off micrometeorites and wayward DropShips that screwed up a docking maneuver, that was good enough.

(Out of character, the Sovetskii Soyuz was written up before there were WarShip rules. They didn't exist when TR:2750 was printed. The conversion to BattleForce rules was relatively ad hoc, resulting in vast cargo volumes and thin armor.)

The Agamemnon and Eagle, meanwhile, were first tries by novice WarShip designers.

[Cryhavok101]

Well, in character, the Sovetskii Soyuz was designed and operated in an era when WarShips were basically transports with some nominal guns and armor. Many of the SLDF WarShips were designed, built, and broken without seeing combat. If they could shrug off micrometeorites and wayward DropShips that screwed up a docking maneuver, that was good enough.

Okay, that is an explanation I can work with, thanks!

The Agamemnon and Eagle, meanwhile, were first tries by novice WarShip designers.

Hmmm... that could work as an in-universe explanation too... even Comstar or Word of Blake hadn't been actually designing new warships in a long time despite having some available, and if they used examples like the Sovetskii Soyuz as a model to base decisions off of, I could envision a chain of decisions that resulted in it. The Sovetskii Soyuz is designated as a heavy cruiser, so I could see some design team trying to match performance with it when they put together the Agamemnon, and then the eagle followed a similar pattern after.

[glitterboy2098]

Comstar/WOB had some experience thanks to the Suffren and Dante classes though. and those had fairly good armor.

i suspect that the WOB were playing a long game.. giving the FWLN warships that would not be much of a threat to the WOB navy if the FWL held onto them, but which would do well when supporting the star league era ships the WOB had when the WOB took the FWL ships over.

[Jellico]

Warships don't trade armor for speed. I don't think I can name even 1 warship whose maximum armor value is eve close to the weight of a single MP. Warship armor weighs a relatively trivial amount, with even the heaviest battleships only having a less than 10,000 tons of it.

If anything they are trading armor for a trivial amount of more cargo space.

Sort of.

Large amounts of armour require large amounts of SI. Increases in SI require increased thrust.
For example you can't have Leviathan II levels of armour on a Leviathan I's thrust.

There are a few ships that run into this. Usually around destroyer size. That's why their armour maxes out around 100.

Comstar/WOB had some experience thanks to the Suffren and Dante classes though. and those had fairly good armor.

i suspect that the WOB were playing a long game.. giving the FWLN warships that would not be much of a threat to the WOB navy if the FWL held onto them, but which would do well when supporting the star league era ships the WOB had when the WOB took the FWL ships over.

House ships have armour because they operate alone. Same for the Suffrens and Dantes.
SLDF and FWL run fleets. If they are being shot at they have already stuffed up.

[Daryk]

Yes, but at least part of the point here is that these ships don't even max out the amount of armor their relatively feeble SI allows them (which wouldn't take much).

[Cryhavok101]

Sort of.

Large amounts of armour require large amounts of SI. Increases in SI require increased thrust.
For example you can't have Leviathan II levels of armour on a Leviathan I's thrust.

Eagle

Code: [Select]

Thrust: 4-6
Max possible SI at that thrust: 180
Actual SI: 45
Max Armor at that SI: 558 tons
Actual Armor: 450 tons
Armor Type: Standard (worst, but cheapest type, c-bill-wise)
Armor Points: 180 (plus SI contributions)
Armor Points with Improved Ferro Aluminum: 270 (plus SI contributions)
Armor Points with Ferro-Carbide: 360 (plus SI contributions)
Armor Points with Lamellor Ferro-Carbide: 450 (plus SI contributions) (more than 2X the ship's actual amount)

Agamemnon

Code: [Select]

Thrust: 4-6
Max possible SI at that thrust: 180
Actual SI: 45
Max Armor at that SI: 738 tons
Actual Armor: 735 tons
Armor Type: Standard (worst, but cheapest type, c-bill-wise)
Armor Points: 294 (plus SI contributions)
Armor Points with Improved Ferro Aluminum: 441 (plus SI contributions)
Armor Points with Ferro-Carbide: 588 (plus SI contributions)
Armor Points with Lamellor Ferro-Carbide: 735 (plus SI contributions) (more than 2X the ship's actual amount)

I'd say some amount of cheapness went into choosing the armor. Standard is the worst type of armor for a Warship. However, if I understand it right, standard is basically the same material fighters, small craft, and DropShips use. It may have been chosen for it's abundance, since they would have already had industries geared towards it's manufacture, rather than needing to build whole new facilities for something like Lamellor Ferro-Carbide, which would have increased the start-up costs of the project for each warship quite a bit beyond just the cost of armor itself. Otherwise, I can't really think of a reason that makes much sense to me in universe, because compared to the rest of the ship, the cost of armor is pretty trivial, even if lamellor ferro-carbide is ten times the cost of standard armor.

Sovetskii Soyuz (Star League Version)

Code: [Select]

Thrust: 2-3
Max possible SI at that thrust: 90
Actual SI: 80
Max Armor at that SI: 1,328 tons
Actual Armor: 743 tons
Armor Type: Improved Ferro-Aluminum
Armor Points: 446 (plus SI contributions)
Armor Points with Ferro-Carbide: 595 (plus SI contributions)
Armor Points with Lamellor Ferro-Carbide: 743 (plus SI contributions) (more than 2X the ship's actual amount)

The Eagle is 108 tons short of the armor it could mount with it's current Values, while the Agamemnon is short only 3 tons. With their standard armor, neither of these numbers would make a huge difference, and upgrading the armor type would be make a much more significant impact. The Sovetskii Soyuz on the other hand could mount 585 more tons of armor at it's current values, which would be a major increase, enough of a difference to make it tough enough to be a serious threat.

Leviathan Heavy Transport

Code: [Select]

Thrust: 2-3
Max possible SI at that thrust: 90
Actual SI: 90
Max Armor at that SI: 4,320 tons
Actual Armor: 950 tons
Armor Type: Lamellor Ferro-Carbide
Armor Points: 950 (plus SI contributions)

I don't have the record sheet for a Leviathan II to extrapolate stats from, but suffice it to say that a Leviathan Transport could get a lot closer to it than it is now, seeing as it has less than a quarter of the armor it could be mounting, without changing any of it's other stats.

House ships have armour because they operate alone. Same for the Suffrens and Dantes.
SLDF and FWL run fleets. If they are being shot at they have already stuffed up.

Those are good points. When your neighbors only have individual ships, a fleet would have different needs. On the other hand, if their neighbors had developed fleets out of their ships, the FWL Navy would have been in serious trouble.

[Maingunnery]

I can imagine that the FWL navy might have been planning for some type of block 2 refits.
Likely waiting for some experience and having their industries were ready to produce higher grade armor.

[I am Belch II]

I can imagine that the FWL navy might have been planning for some type of block 2 refits.
Likely waiting for some experience and having their industries were ready to produce higher grade armor.

I would hope so for the FWL navy. They seemed to put all the "eggs" in the Thera, they got that ship right.

[Arkansas Warrior]

Comstar/WOB had some experience thanks to the Suffren and Dante classes though. and those had fairly good armor.

i suspect that the WOB were playing a long game.. giving the FWLN warships that would not be much of a threat to the WOB navy if the FWL held onto them, but which would do well when supporting the star league era ships the WOB had when the WOB took the FWL ships over.

The Dante was designed 120 years before the FWL fleet started shaping up.  I doubt it's design team would've been able to share their experience.

[Fireangel]

My experience with SLDF warships (and BT warships in general) is that the armor is only part of the equation; capital-grade SI is a seriously tough nut to crack; each point is 10 points of standard-scale damage AND it halves incoming damage.

I have learned to not sweat critical checks, because even if I do get a crit, it might be something that does not affect combat effectiveness (grav deck, cargo, bay doors...).

Warships (and other large craft) also have the added advantage of being able to end-over and roll in order to present undamaged armor facings to the most threatening opponent; space battles are not like (pre-2009) Star Trek battles, where ships basically stand there and blast each other.

And do not underestimate the Aggie; its armor may be criminally thin, but properly used, it can be quite surprising; anybody remember the Aggie v. Fox + 5x Grand Inquisitor (PWS) battle some time back?

Edit: Found it.

[Giovanni Blasini]

Also, that added SI isn't exactly lightweight. You may not be giving up much weaponry for armor, but you do for SI.

[sadlerbw]

Sorry for the minor necro, but I've been picking through the warship/dropship landscape recently, and its pretty clear it's a bit of a mess. It's also apparent that the two major books with Warships aren't exactly playing by the same rules. Oh sure, they can generally be built without too much tweaking under the current rules, but the design philosophy is way different. To me, it seems like most of the 3057 stuff was designed to get blown up. The imbalance between armor+structure and the amount of damage many of these things put out is pretty stark. It's like the plan was to have big fleet battles with lots of warships, and several were definitely going to pop in any fight. Sort of like Mech fights.

Pretty much everything bigger than a corvette can scrape together 50 capital scale damage between two adjacent facings. Heck, even some of the corvettes can! Sure it isn't all guaranteed to hit and it is usually medium range or shorter to get there, but 50 damage would clean all the armor off any facing and maybe go internal on a bit less than half the ships in 3057 if I am counting correctly. That is just the minimum. If you line up a good broadside shot with some of these cruisers and battleships, putting out over 200 damage is possible. Even if only half the bays hit, you are going internal on any solid hit on most things smaller than a cruiser, and even several cruisers. It just seems like, if warships actually fight each other, they are supposed to get blown to bits reasonably fast.

The 3067 stuff feels different, like battles with big fleets weren't the goal anymore. There is a whole lot more armor and standard-scale weaponry, and slightly less capital-scale weaponry. It also feels like there is more fighter/dropship transport capability, but that might be my imagination. Several ships can still generate 50 capital scale damage at medium range, but that only has the potential for going internal on the Eagle, the Carrack, and the two corvettes. Furthermore, there are actually a couple of cruiser-class ships that can't manage to crack 200 damage on a perfect three-arc broadside. The Eagle and Aggamemnon are certainly throwbacks to the 3057 way, but they do have better secondary weapon arrays at least. The biggest thing seems to be that 3067 is much more conscious about NOT letting you bracket fire too much. Just about every capital weapon bay in there has no more than two guns in it. In fact, I think the only capital bay with more than two guns is the broadside NL array on the Leviathan! 3057 seems a little less cautious about stacking NAC's (bigger ones at leat), and happily piles up NL's and NPPC's.

I think the craziest part of it all, to me at least, is when you start looking at the newer PWS and assualt dropships. You've got the armor of a half-million-ton Star Leage frigate on a dropship that weighs less than a tenths of that! Sure you are missing a boat-load of SI, but the fact that you have dropships with more armor than warships is just crazy! I was looking at TRO:3085, and the Interdictor PWS is 9400 tons with, unless I misunderstand the armor conversion, the equivalent of 68 capital-scale armor on its nose, 51 on the wings, and 34 on the aft. The Isegrim managed 67 capital-scale armor on the nose, and that beats most Destroyers! Sure the dropships don't have the same firepower, but just the idea that an 8500 ton dropship has better frontal armor than Lola III at 680,000 tons is staggering to me.

[Cryhavok101]

The biggest thing seems to be that 3067 is much more conscious about NOT letting you bracket fire too much. Just about every capital weapon bay in there has no more than two guns in it. In fact, I think the only capital bay with more than two guns is the broadside NL array on the Leviathan! 3057 seems a little less cautious about stacking NAC's (bigger ones at leat), and happily piles up NL's and NPPC's.

To be fair on this specific point, if I remember correctly, bracket fire wasn't a thing when these ships were designed. I don't recall bracket firing being a thing in BattleTech until Strategic Operations came out.

[I am Belch II]

I think the McKenna has low armor for a battleship, less then the Texas.

[Cryhavok101]

The Star League's McKenna only has ~43% of it's max possible armor at it's current SI. The Clan one is at ~38% of max possible armor at current SI.

The Texas has lower Max Armor levels, but also doesn't even come close to max armor for it's SI. The Star League's Texas only has ~67% of it's max possible armor at it's current SI. The Clan one is at ~61% of max possible armor at current SI.

Even though the Texas class has about 500 more total armor than the McKenna, it's still kinda low. The McKenna could take itself out with it's own broadside attack pretty quickly.

[Fireangel]

I think the craziest part of it all, to me at least, is when you start looking at the newer PWS and assualt dropships. You've got the armor of a half-million-ton Star Leage frigate on a dropship that weighs less than a tenths of that! Sure you are missing a boat-load of SI, but the fact that you have dropships with more armor than warships is just crazy! I was looking at TRO:3085, and the Interdictor PWS is 9400 tons with, unless I misunderstand the armor conversion, the equivalent of 68 capital-scale armor on its nose, 51 on the wings, and 34 on the aft. The Isegrim managed 67 capital-scale armor on the nose, and that beats most Destroyers! Sure the dropships don't have the same firepower, but just the idea that an 8500 ton dropship has better frontal armor than Lola III at 680,000 tons is staggering to me.

The armor, yes, but not the SI; since PWS SI is still at standard scale, they rarely have more than single-digit capital scale armor equivalent. Since they also have only four armor facings (versus the six of a warship), their armor will not last as long either.

Their other issue is the range of their weapons; only capital missiles are viable range-wise, but modern AMS and point defense renders those mostly moot, meaning that their main punch comes from masses of sub-caps or even larger masses of conventional weapons, requiring the PWS to close within knife-fighting of the warship in order to strike.

As I have stated on other occasions; heavy-duty PWS are intended to take on other PWS or conventional dropships. Against anything but the lightest already-obsolete warships, they are eggshells with hammers.

[Cryhavok101]

they rarely have more than single-digit capital scale armor equivalent.

The Castrum has an SI of 150 and armor facings of 1000+, converted to capital scale that is an SI of 15 (low for a warship), but armor of 100 or more (higher than most light warships, and even some heavier warships). The Aesir/Vanir has low SI, but double digit capital scale armor. The Isegrim is the same way, as is the Interdictor, Arondight, Draagau, and Tiamat.

I am not really sure where your 'single digit' figure is coming from. Are you talking about the cobbled-together-out-of-desparation piles of junk from the Jihad, or actual purpose build PWSs?

Their other issue is the range of their weapons; only capital missiles are viable range-wise, but modern AMS and point defense renders those mostly moot, meaning that their main punch comes from masses of sub-caps or even larger masses of conventional weapons, requiring the PWS to close within knife-fighting of the warship in order to strike.

I've seen it pointed out quite often that most capital fighting happens at medium range, thanks to electronic warfare disrupting targeting and making it unlikely to hit anything at longer ranges. Besides that point, it can also be pointed out that a DropShip is capable of being built with considerably more speed that a warship, simple due to having a higher percentage of mass available to get put into the maneuvering drive, since the DropShip doesn't have to use half their weight on a K-F drive. Between the two, range isn't a huge issue.

Even if it were an issue, sub-capital weapons can reach long capital range, and only missing the extreme bracket is not a huge problem... especially if you are more likely to have naval C3 than a warship is.

[sadlerbw]

The armor, yes, but not the SI; since PWS SI is still at standard scale, they rarely have more than single-digit capital scale armor equivalent. Since they also have only four armor facings (versus the six of a warship), their armor will not last as long either.

Oh, I get that, but it's still one of those things where you look at it and say, "They had to do that to make the game not totally broken, because it makes NO sense otherwise." It's not like it is just the newer 3085+ stuff that is crazy either. Looking at the small assault dropships in 3057 is enough to cause head-scratching. The Avenger is a 1400T dropship with 23/20/18 capital-scale armor, 81 total. The Claymore at 1400T has 25/20/15, 80 total. If you look at a warship in that same book that is 100 times its mass, the armor isn't much different: The Tracker at 140kT is 18/15/15/15, 93 total. The Vigilant at 140kT is 16/16/14/13, 92 total. The Mako at 200kT is 38/31/31/38, 200 total, which is a lot more armor, but the weight difference is around 150 times the dropships!

So, for comparison, Imagine a Clan Elemental battle suit. It weighs 1T. Now, imagine it had similar armor as a unit 100 times its mazz. Say, an Atlas D. Even if you are generous and only have it match the armor of a single location, that is at least 34 armor! If you look at total armor, and say it gets about 60% of the Atlas' total, that would be 177 armor...on an Elemental! That would be absurd, even if it does only mount a small laser and a two-shot SRM2. Even if you fudge a bit and say 60% of a Cyclops 10-Z, which is only 90T and has fairly low armor for an assault, you end up with about 90 points of armor...on a 1T unit.

Things get a little more reasonable if you move to the top end of the dropship weight class. The 100kT Castrum is about 10% of the mass of a Nightlord, and has 25% of it's armor. Still off, but better than 1% of the mass and 80%+ of the armor!

I'm not saying the armor is necessarily broken gameplay-wise. If you didn't have low-end capital-scale armor, then dropships would have zero chance of surviving fire from capital scale weapons. As it is, they still might get one-shot, but they at least have a chance against some of the laser bays and smaller AC's and PPC's. So, game-wise it kinda has to be that way, but when you compare it to other scales in the game, it looks crazy. Now, the fact that they can do so little to actually hurt a warship...that is a different problem, and one I don't think you should have to make 100kT dropships to fix!

[Jellico]

Who cares about DropShips.

A little thought exercise.
A Leviathan II has 6000 points of armour and a broadside of about 500. Assume 50% accuracy so 250.

So 24 turns for a Leviathan to strip a Leviathan.

Do you want a game 24 turns long?

Obviously a Leviathan is at the extreme end. A McKenna takes about 6 turns to strip itself. The questio  becomes what number in between is adequate?

[Cryhavok101]

So 24 turns for a Leviathan to strip a Leviathan.

Do you want a game 24 turns long?

Obviously a Leviathan is at the extreme end. A McKenna takes about 6 turns to strip itself. The questio  becomes what number in between is adequate?

Personally, I am okay with both existing, I was mostly looking for an in-universe reason for the lowest end to have been created. Game mechanics are fine do x to get Y result in game, etc. but the mechanics and fluff need to support each other, or it loses me. Both are equally important. I did already get an answer to those questions.

And to be clear, I am okay with far longer games than 24 turns, I just don't finish them in one sitting. I am also okay with 4-6 turn games, that I want to complete the same day I start them. Both have a place in my gaming.

[I am Belch II]

Who cares about DropShips.

A little thought exercise.
A Leviathan II has 6000 points of armour and a broadside of about 500. Assume 50% accuracy so 250.

So 24 turns for a Leviathan to strip a Leviathan.

Do you want a game 24 turns long?

Even longer if you talk about structures.

Obviously a Leviathan is at the extreme end. A McKenna takes about 6 turns to strip itself. The questio  becomes what number in between is adequate?

[Fireangel]

I am not really sure where your 'single digit' figure is coming from. Are you talking about the cobbled-together-out-of-desparation piles of junk from the Jihad, or actual purpose build PWSs?

Capital scale equivalent; the Aesir/Vanir has 25 points of standard-scale SI, which translates as three whole points of capital-scale SI (single digit).

Isegrim? 21 standard = 3 Capital, Taihou? 30 standard = 3 capital. Single digits.

Besides the Castrum, what PWS has double-digit capital-scale equivalent SI?

Compare to warships in the modern environment; the Fox has 100 capital points of SI, the equivalent of one thousand points of standard-scale SI; it has more SI than most PWS have in both SI AND armor.

As I have pointed out in other threads, any ship that closes with a capital warship needs to be able to take it out in one turn and survive return fire. Range is a big thing; if the warship can engage your PWS before you can engage it, you are in trouble. Only the smallest, weakest, and/or demonstrably obsolete warship designs are vulnearable to the most powerful PWS that can be fielded (Vinnie, Zec, Carrack), anything larger has at least parity, and even larger classes can eat Castrums for breakfast.

[Ruger]

As I have pointed out in other threads, any ship that closes with a capital warship needs to be able to take it out in one turn and survive return fire. Range is a big thing; if the warship can engage your PWS before you can engage it, you are in trouble. Only the smallest, weakest, and/or demonstrably obsolete warship designs are vulnearable to the most powerful PWS that can be fielded (Vinnie, Zec, Carrack), anything larger has at least parity, and even larger classes can eat Castrums for breakfast.

Not sure I'm seeing the issue...pocket warships are the fast attack boats (like the PT and E boats of WW2, or the Pegasus-class hydrofoil or Komar or Osa-class missile boats of the 60's, 70's and 80's)...can they take out, or at least heavily damage, destroyers, cruisers or other warships? Yes...if they get lucky, or have overwhelming numbers...but one on one, there's no contest...

Nor should there be...

Ruger

[Fireangel]

Looking at the small assault dropships in 3057 is enough to cause head-scratching. The Avenger is a 1400T dropship with 23/20/18 capital-scale armor, 81 total. The Claymore at 1400T has 25/20/15, 80 total. If you look at a warship in that same book that is 100 times its mass, the armor isn't much different: The Tracker at 140kT is 18/15/15/15, 93 total. The Vigilant at 140kT is 16/16/14/13, 92 total. The Mako at 200kT is 38/31/31/38, 200 total, which is a lot more armor, but the weight difference is around 150 times the dropships!

Warships use capital scale armor and SI, dropships (even PWS) use standard-scale armor and SI.

Capital scale is x10 standard scale, so the Tracker is 930 at standard scale, Vigilant 920, and Mako 2,000.

Now, the fact that they can do so little to actually hurt a warship...that is a different problem, and one I don't think you should have to make 100kT dropships to fix!

100kt PWS are not the solution; beyond 64,900 tons, the tonnage required per SI, combined with reduced coverage or armor by ton, really eats into the usable tonnage of the ship, making it extremely inefficient.

Some time back, I designed a 100kt PWS, then realized that I could get exactly the same thing, with marginally less less armor, for only 64,900 tons. Some time later, I designed a significantly smaller version, with similar (although abridged) capabilities for only 19,900 tons.

The bigger the DS, the less efficient it is. Seriously, canonically we have not even scratched the surface of the potential of PWSs... but they are still eggshells with hammers when facing true warships (Vinnies, Zecs, and Carracks need not apply).

[Fireangel]

Not sure I'm seeing the issue...pocket warships are the fast attack boats (like the PT and E boats of WW2, or the Pegasus-class hydrofoil or Komar or Osa-class missile boats of the 60's, 70's and 80's)...can they take out, or at least heavily damage, destroyers, cruisers or other warships? Yes...if they get lucky, or have overwhelming numbers...but one on one, there's no contest...

Nor should there be...

Ruger

You are thinking of the traditional PWS missile boats, we are discussing assault dropships that are surrogate warships.

You should read this thread from 2011: Have PWS's rendered lighter warships obsolescent?

Yes, it is somewhat long, but discusses the issues surrounding using super-large PWS against warships, both pro and con.

[Cryhavok101]

Capital scale equivalent; the Aesir/Vanir has 25 points of standard-scale SI, which translates as three whole points of capital-scale SI (single digit).

Ah thanks for clarifying that you were talking about single digit SI, because your first post said armor:

The armor, yes, but not the SI; since PWS SI is still at standard scale, they rarely have more than single-digit capital scale armor equivalent. Since they also have only four armor facings (versus the six of a warship), their armor will not last as long either.

I thought you were saying that because of their low SI they had single digit capital scale equivalent armor, which just wasn't true.

Isegrim? 21 standard = 3 Capital, Taihou? 30 standard = 3 capital. Single digits.

Besides the Castrum, what PWS has double-digit capital-scale equivalent SI?

Compare to warships in the modern environment; the Fox has 100 capital points of SI, the equivalent of one thousand points of standard-scale SI; it has more SI than most PWS have in both SI AND armor.

As I have pointed out in other threads, any ship that closes with a capital warship needs to be able to take it out in one turn and survive return fire. Range is a big thing; if the warship can engage your PWS before you can engage it, you are in trouble. Only the smallest, weakest, and/or demonstrably obsolete warship designs are vulnearable to the most powerful PWS that can be fielded (Vinnie, Zec, Carrack), anything larger has at least parity, and even larger classes can eat Castrums for breakfast.

The fox is probably the most heavily armored light warship, definitely not the average. But lets look at SI and armor values together and compare them to the damage those ships dish out:

Fox-240,000
SI: 100 capital
Heaviest Armor Facing: 70 capital
Max attack (FR/RBS/AR): 60 capital damage
Max with optional waypoint and bearings only capital missile rules: 64 capital damage

Castrum-100,000
SI: 15 capital
Heaviest Armor Facing: 131 capital
Max Attack (Nose/FR):  110
Max with optional waypoint and bearings only capital missile rules: 171
+Naval C3 and Quirks giving it more bonuses at range.

I would put my money on the castrum winning that matchup more often then not. Not only will the castrum be hitting SI on turn one, and getting the resulting crits, but the capital missiles will also be getting crits as well. The Fox would take 270 damage to destroy utterly, and that would take the castrum two turns to achieve, meanwhile the fox would need three turns to do the same to the castrum (without optional rules involved, it would be even at three turns each for total destruction). And the fox is the most heavily armored of the small warships.

Lets look at some other designs, other than ones you called out:

Impavido-490,000
SI: 50 capital
Heaviest Armor Facing: 55 capital
Max attack (FR/RBS/AR): 113 capital damage

Fredesa 180,000
SI: 40 capital
Heaviest Armor Facing: 40 capital
Max attack (Nose/FR): 82 capital damage

Inazuma-200,000
SI: 46 capital
Heaviest Armor Facing: 30 capital
Max attack (FR/RBS/AR): 87 capital damage

And some Pocket Warships:

Isegrim-8,500
SI: 2.1 capital
Heaviest Armor Facing: 67 capital
Max Attack (Nose/RW/LW): 52 capital damage

Tiamat-36,000
SI: 7.5 Capital
Heaviest Armor Facing: 81 Capital
Max Attack (Nose/FR): 107

The 8500 ton Isegrim is a little worse, but comparable to the Inezuma and Fredesa, ships twenty times it's size. A Tiamat would hammer those same two warships, with a mutually assured destruction in two rounds.

As it stands light warships should fear big pocket warships, and big warships should fear small pocket warships, but there is definitely a place for both types.

Of course if more ships took high SI or maxed out their armor (or even came close to it) like the fox does, this might be a different story.

[Ruger]

You are thinking of the traditional PWS missile boats,

Actually, I'm really not...

Ruger

[sadlerbw]

I'm not going to try to argue that all the PWS are on-par with warships for damage output. I mean, they pretty much fall into the category of 'things that are a Tiamat or Castrum' and 'everything else'. None of the 3075 stuff is all that dangerous unless it is being sneaky with nukes. '85 is slightly better, but can be a bit too reliant on missiles. The poor Vanir has to be be all but toothless in the Dark Age. The '85 ships generally have enough sub-capital weapons that they can hit back at warship ranges, but can't put up the same sort of numbers that real naval guns can. Standard weapons just don't have the range to respond equally, and even if you do manage to get into a decent range band for standard-scale weapons, well then the Warship can start adding its standard-scale weapons as well.

The Tiamat and Castrum have the capital range, and can put out the damage of a well-armed corvette, plus the armor to survive more than one turn of fire from a real warship. They actually have a legitimate shot at hurting smaller or lightly-armored warships. However, even these two don't compare to the firepower of anything but the lightly-armed corvettes. a Whirlwind or a Tatsumaki would wipe the floor with them.

It's just so strange to me that, in virtually every other way, Dropships are a noticable step down from warships...except armor. For whatever reason, canon dropships get to be tough little buggers, and many of the light and medium warships are pretty thin-skinned.

[Fireangel]

I am familiar with these comparisons.

From: A thread embedded in the discussion I cited:

Smaller than a heavy cruiser:
(A=capital armour, SI=capital SI, Dmg=capital damage potential into one target in one turn)

Fox (A: 70/67/54/64, SI: 100, Dmg: 60+)
Impavido (A: 50/55/54/50, SI: 50, Dmg: 116+)
Suffren (A: 80/63/60/70, SI: 60, Dmg: 158+) + 5/8 thrust
Kyushu (A: 140/90/70/110, SI: 60, Dmg: 265+)
Fredasa (A: 40/30/30/35, SI: 40, Dmg: 79+) + 5/8 thrust
Vincent (A: 16/19/19/16, SI: 40, Dmg: 24+)
Whirlwind (A: 100/70/65/80, SI: 55, Dmg: 164+)
York (A: 120/100/100/120, SI: 60, Dmg: 192+)
Essex (A: 37/37/37/35, SI: 60, Dmg: 140+)
Lola III (A: 48/48/48/48, SI: 50, Dmg: 112+)
Zechetinu (A: 24/21/20/20, SI: 15, Dmg: 55+) + 5/8 thrust
Inazuma (A: 28/30/30/25, SI: 46, Dmg: 91)
Tatsumaki (A: 70/70/70/60, SI: 50, Dmg: 103+)
Dante (A: 100/90/90/70, SI: 50, Dmg: 250+) + 5/8 thrust
Eagle (A: 39/36/33/33, SI: 45, Dmg: 259+)
Carrack (A: 10/8/6/9, SI: 15, Dmg: 71+)

GI (A: 82/72/62, SI: 7, Dmg: 66+) + 5/8 thrust
Lak I (A: 101/101/101, SI: 17, Dmg: 173+) + 5/8 thrust
Lak II (A: 70/70/70, SI: 9, Dmg: 173+) + 5/8 thrust

Note: Only four armour facings on the PWS.
Thrust is mentioned because the ship with the higher thrust can dictate range.

I do not have my books with me, so I will cite you for the Castrum:

Castrum-100,000
SI: 15 capital
Heaviest Armor Facing: 131 capital
Max Attack (Nose/FR):  110
Max with optional waypoint and bearings only capital missile rules: 171
+Naval C3 and Quirks giving it more bonuses at range.

Keeping in mind that the Castrum has just 3/5 thrust, most warships have either parity or superiority.

We need 161 points of capital damage in one facing to kill a Castrum in its strongest facing (131 armor plus double SI, since SI damage is halved).

Kyushu, Whirlwind, York, Dante, and Eagle can potentially one-shot a Castrum. The Suffren gets an honorable mention, falling just thee cap short of the one-shot goal.

On the other hand, the Castrum can potentially one shot (with missiles): Impavido, Fredasa, Vinvcent, Essex, Lola III, Zec, Inazuma, Tatsumaki (just barely), Eagle, and Carrack.

Without capital missiles, the list is much smaller: Vincent, Zec, and Carrack.

These numbers do not take ranges into account, or maneuvering; if the battle is in a tiny board, there is not much difference, but when the combattants start the engagement 100 hexes apart, there is room to maneuver and keep ranges open.

Add to it the number of armor facings, and any PWS is at a distinct disadvantage against any moderately designed warship.

I love super-class PWS, but no matter how powerful, they will always have to take a back seat to real warships; a lot of mention is made that they produce savings since they do not have a jump drive, but you still need a jumpship to transport a Castrum, and unless it is a warship, it will be the weak point in the equation.

[sadlerbw]

Yeah, I admit PWS aren't warships. That list was interesting. It got me thinking, which warships are easier to one-shot than a castrum? It takes 146 capital-scale damage to burn through the toughest facing and SI on a castrum. The following warships take LESS damage to get through their toughest facing and SI, even with their SI halving damage:

Fredasa
Vincent
Tracker*
Vigilant*
Pinto*
Mako*
Bonaventure*
Sylvester*
Carrack*
Baron*
Carson*
Wagon wheel*
Eagle
Inazuma
Zechetinu

* extinct designs from tro3057

Now, three or four of those are transports or surveillance vessels and not really combatants, but most are, or were, legitimate warships. Furthermore, these ships are only tougher than the castrum on their best facing by 11 points or less:

Agamemnon
Lola *I, II*, and III
Naga*
Davion block I*
Nightwing*
Whirlwind (star league version)
Impavido
Essex

I know toughest-facing-plus-SI is not the whole story by far, but I still find it interesting. Of course, the castrum is the only dropship with enough armor to make these comparisons. The Tiamat is the next best armored, and it is only tougher than the transports and the Zec. Don't get me wrong, I'd take a real warship over a PWS if given the choice, I just think they are tougher than they get credit for.

[Cryhavok101]

These numbers do not take ranges into account, or maneuvering; if the battle is in a tiny board, there is not much difference, but when the combattants start the engagement 100 hexes apart, there is room to maneuver and keep ranges open.

Range favors the Castrum over the other designs listed, thanks to it's design quirks, and possibly naval C3 (if it has appropriate allies). Note the list of small warships it can one shot is a lot larger than the list of small warships that can one shot it.

I love super-class PWS, but no matter how powerful, they will always have to take a back seat to real warships; a lot of mention is made that they produce savings since they do not have a jump drive, but you still need a jumpship to transport a Castrum, and unless it is a warship, it will be the weak point in the equation.

If you are saying the "real warships" are the larger ones, then I completely agree. The Castrum matches or overpowers the small ones, but the larger ones wouldn't be bothered too much by a single Castrum. Castrums themselves are super expensive because of the massive dropship cost multiplier, so I wouldn't really want to field a force of multiple castrums against the larger warships, I would want smaller dropships, as you suggested, against the big ones. Dropships small and cheap enough that I wouldn't care that half of them are gonna die, because I would rather they die than the extremely expensive castrums.

As soon as the warships get big and powerful enough to one shot the castrums is the line where I would rather have the tiny dropships... or better yet, swarms of aerospace fighters. The castrums through, I would happily use to bully the small warships 2-3 times it's size. I'd love to be the captain of a Fox who was assigned a mix of castrums and titans for my six collars.

However, I wouldn't want to use the swarms of smaller dropships against things a single castrum could handle, simply because I would rather those crews not die taking down small warships that a castrum could have taken without nearly as much loss of life. Human waves of dropships have their place, but wastefully dying when they didn't need to isn't it.

[Hellraiser]

And do not underestimate the Aggie; its armor may be criminally thin, but properly used, it can be quite surprising; anybody remember the Aggie v. Fox + 5x Grand Inquisitor (PWS) battle some time back?

Edit: Found it.

Glad you found it, I was going to quote that battle.
I thought it was 5 Tiamats v/s a non-canon design, but still it goes to show that even a Glass Cannon large warship will make you pay dearly.


As for comparing the Castrum v/s canon WS. 
Honestly its just not a fair comparison.
The Castrum is one of the better designed dropships, not to mention the largest combat dropship ever.

Can it take out a Vincent, sure.
Can it take out a Vincent that someone redesigned intelligently with real cargo space instead of "support a SL Division from orbit" cargo space.
Unlikely.

IE.  There is only so much you can improve a DS, but canon WS can ALL be improved on a LOT.

[Fireangel]

The point is, that the single most powerful canon PWS barely has parity with the weakest canon warships, and the only three designs that it completely pwns are either not considered true warships (Carrack), are obsolete beyond the bounds of reason (Vinnie), or are extremely poorly designed (Zec).

[Cryhavok101]

and the only three designs that it completely pwns

I don't think this statement is accurate. There are at least fifteen warships a Castrum can destroy in a single turn (see sadlerbw's list). At least five of those are not extinct ships, and of those five only two are on your list of poorly designed warships. The number increases quite a bit if you add in warships that would put up a fight, but still probably lose to a Castrum.

[Jellico]

Has anyone tried those fights? Every time someone tries the practical example the WarShip surprises.

[Cryhavok101]

I've done about 5 Warship vs Castrum fights, and the Castrums won 3 of them. 5 is hardly a good sample size for it though. It's hard to get people to do anything other than 'Mech fights. And as you've said others get the warships winning. The two I lost my Castrum to were a Tatsumaki which mostly I lost to areospace and small craft support rather than the warship itself, and a Fredesa that got close... and had a lot of fighter support. Despite my screens and AMS, they were able to hit me with a few EWAS missiles, and that made a huge difference. The Fredesa itself spent most of it's time clearing my small craft from the field to make way for the fighters. Personally I don't think the Castrum's small craft make a very good screen against enemy fighters.

[sadlerbw]

First, I want to clarify, the list I made was of things that are easier to kill by coring through it's toughest armor facing than a Castrum, not things a Castrum can kill in one shot. That would have been a much shorter list! The Castrum isn't actually as crazy as you might think in terms of the damage it can put out in a turn. If you get the best angle from it, and the best range, you are putting out 76 capital damage. That isn't enough to one-shot much of anything but the super-weak transports. It stands out because of that massive armor, and the fact that it can put that 76 damage out in two different directions at once.

I have been messing around with these things in MegaMek, but I would hardly call it real testing. One bot spins around making evasive maneuvers and doesn't seem to know how to fire weapon bays, and the other can shoot, but never moves. So, I've been tossing some ships (both dropships and warships) on both sides, seeing how long it takes me to wipe them out, then switching the forces and doing it again. It is only minimally informative since point defense doesn't seem to work and the bot is brain dead, but is OK as a pure damage simulator. There is a definite gap between the Tiamat and Castrum, and everything else. They have enough armor to survive a couple hits from real capital weapons bays, whereas most everything else is lucky to survive one round of attention at medium capital range. They also hit hard enough to actually matter, even one-on-one, before they become clouds of expanding vapor. Against corvettes like Inazumas, Foxes, and Fredasas, the corvettes were often loosing all the armor on at least one facing before the big PWS went down. When going up against Destroyers though, the combined damage was just too much, and nothing could really take more than a turn of focused hate at medium range unless it plain got lucky. Of course, pitting two Destroyers against each other wasn't much less deadly!

In dropship vs. dropship combat though, the two big PWS's really stood out. They could take a serious beating and keep throwing out damage that would wilt other dropships. I imagine this only gets more obvious when Point Defense is actually doing something, as many of the next tier of assault dropships rely on missiles. The Vanir and Isegrim really, really need you to not shoot down their swarms of missiles to stay effective! Honorable mention goes to the Taihou. It was deadlier than I would have expected. That 28-capital-scale punch was a killer, and 600 points of nose armor was enough to let you stay pointed at whatever you needed dead.

[Cryhavok101]

First, I want to clarify, the list I made was of things that are easier to kill by coring through it's toughest armor facing than a Castrum, not things a Castrum can kill in one shot. That would have been a much shorter list!

Fair point. I didn't look at all of those myself.

The Castrum isn't actually as crazy as you might think in terms of the damage it can put out in a turn. If you get the best angle from it, and the best range, you are putting out 76 capital damage.

You seem to be discounting the improved heavy gauss rifle bays that hit a bit harder than the light subcapital cannons. Their long range is just shy of the start of capital scale medium range. They make a difference. With the castrum's improved long range targeting, they actually have an okay chance at that range. That adds 26 more capital damage to that 76. If you are like me, you use a lot of the optional rules, and when you add both waypoint launches and bearings only launches to the capital weapons, the other 8 AR-10s can fire at the same target, for another 32 capital damage (my figures earlier in the thread were off, for some reason I keep thinking killer whale missiles do 5 damage).

It is possible the scenarios I played in favored capital missiles too much. The other person also disregarded having small craft that could cover his warship as far as AMS goes, and that would make a large difference as well. With how common AMS has become, at least in the fluff, I suppose it is entirely reasonable that all 16 killer whale missiles could get shot down, and that would put the castrum at a serious disadvantage, it gets a lot of it's power from those. I guess I can see why it wouldn't match up as well, and file my victories with it under favorable conditions/inexperienced opponent.

[Jellico]

In dropship vs. dropship combat though, the two big PWS's really stood out. They could take a serious beating and keep throwing out damage that would wilt other dropships. I imagine this only gets more obvious when Point Defense is actually doing something, as many of the next tier of assault dropships rely on missiles. The Vanir and Isegrim really, really need you to not shoot down their swarms of missiles to stay effective! Honorable mention goes to the Taihou. It was deadlier than I would have expected. That 28-capital-scale punch was a killer, and 600 points of nose armor was enough to let you stay pointed at whatever you needed dead.

Really? I don't mean to insult here but I am amazed  a Taihou can be underestimated. It is a far more effective ship killer than a Castrum and wears its heart very much on its sleeve.

Vanirs are AA platforms.

Isegrims should try and get into short range to use their missiles. Don't confuse heavy sub capital missiles for stand off capital missiles. The main risk is AMS throwing the missiles off target rather than destroying them outright.

I am curious about the use of the Fredasa against small craft. Seems a waste of its capital weapons.

[Cryhavok101]

I am curious about the use of the Fredasa against small craft. Seems a waste of its capital weapons.

I thought so too, but I think he just wanted to keep it alive, so he was trying to keep it out of the fight with he Castrum. He loaded down all of his aerospace fighters with ordnance, so they were hitting harder than one might have guessed. He used the naval lasers in AA mode though. I don't think he ever fired the NAC 40. The NAC 10s missed a lot, but he got lucky with them a couple times. He didn't destroy all of my small craft, but he did disrupt them enough that they were ineffective at countering what he was doing with the aerospace fighters.

[sadlerbw]

Yeah, I tried to leave the non-capital armaments out of things. Those iHGauss rifles are a good extra chunk of damage, but the other, smaller droppers weren't too far behind when you combined their best two facings. The way the Castrum has the secondaries laid out, you can't get more than one facing of those iHGauss on a target at the same time. With a Vanir, you can get two facings on the same target, and when add up all the large lasers, HAG's and ATM's, two facings on a Vanir is putting out a minimum of 16 cap-scale damage at long range. Admittedly it takes more bays so you won't threshold as much, and the Castrum is putting out 26. Ten capital damage is not a rounding error for sure, but I doubt it would make or break a fight. The capital-scale damage the Castrum puts out tended to erase most dropships before the gauss rifles really mattered.

Now, if the Isegrim gets you in the front quarter, it can lob out 20 cap-scale at long standard range from its secondaries, and if it lines you up right on the nose, it can put out 32, which is more than the Castrum. A Taihou could manage at least 24, but only at medium range. The Tiamat falls behind at only 13, but it doesn't matter much with the primary armament it has! Beyond that when you get down into stuff like Nagasawas, Nekohono'o's, and Arondights, you are looking at a different class of ships, and the just don't compete.

No insult taken about the Taihou. I just expected its range limitations to cause more of a problem than they did in PWS vs PWS fights. That nose armor and the speed gave it the ability to close without getting softened up too badly at long range. Also, I was running these things against the other big PWS's, so that 28-point punch was something you could survive for a couple turns with rolling and the amount of armor in play. Put it up against a Union or an Overlord, and it's a whole different story.

Anyway, I've been having fun just running through little exercises in MegaMek, but I really wish I had a better way to model PDW bays. I thought about looking at the combat logs and rolling things myself, but it slowed things down a ton. I know missiles are more powerful than they should be in these little mock battles, but don't really have a feel for HOW over-powered they are.

[Jellico]

And there we learn a valuable lesson. In space you can close to any range you like at near will with 5/8 thrust or more. You can't block someone. All you can do is trail them and make their life uncomfortable.

Ships like the Taihou and Isegrim are all about getting very close. See those big MRMs on the Combine assaults? That's more than regional flavor. That's recognition that you won't hit an evading target at 20 hexes.

Nagasawas, Nekos, Arondights, and even Noruffs and Avengers are all part of the equation. A SCL Neko is essentially a Castrum at a fraction of the weight. Regular Nekos are about boarding spam. Arondights and Vanirs are AA. Noruffs, Avengers, and Achilles are pound for pound the most efficient assaults in the game.

From the perspective of the Republic the Castrum is simply fire support. Tiamats are the block of armour and SCCs to shove down someone's throat for ship kills with Dragus providing ECM and targeting data.

[sadlerbw]

Yeah, I did try a couple fights with the unholy trinity of Castrum, Tiamat II, and Dragau II. That was scary-effective. The Dragau didn't even need to shoot anyone, it just sat behind them and provided targeting data. Even a group of C3's Nekos didn't keep up. The two big boys pretty much wiped a Neko off the map each turn their guns connected.

When I originally read this thread and started messing around with fights, I was mostly looking at Dropships vs. Warships, but ultimately I think the Dropship vs. Dropship stuff has been more interesting. Even with light warship-level armor, the warships just start to pump out crazy amounts of damage that even other warships can't stand up to. The dropship-only fights, at least with jihad-or-later units, made much more sense and were more interesting. Now, the 3057 stuff is a bit wimpy, but in the TRO's since then there have actually been a nice mix of assault and PWS units that feel like they would really work without needing a huge swarm of fighters to back them up.

One thing that has been annoying the heck out of me though has been RAC bays. I don't know if I'm just having the worlds worst luck or what, but I can't seem to get more than about three turns out of one before it jams. Statistically, I should be able to make it four turns before my odds of a jam are over 50%! It makes Nagasawas a little bit risky. Actually, are you supposed to be able to un-jam RAC's on a dropship? I was never quite clear on that.

[Cryhavok101]

Actually, are you supposed to be able to un-jam RAC's on a dropship? I was never quite clear on that.

As far as I know you can, but I have no idea if you can in MegaMek, since I don't actually use it.

[Jellico]

Yeah, I did try a couple fights with the unholy trinity of Castrum, Tiamat II, and Dragau II. That was scary-effective. The Dragau didn't even need to shoot anyone, it just sat behind them and provided targeting data. Even a group of C3's Nekos didn't keep up. The two big boys pretty much wiped a Neko off the map each turn their guns connected.

Hehe. Change your balance. The DC builds Nekos, Taihous, Achilles, Okinawas, and Vengeances. They have nothing that matches the mass of the Castrums and Tiamats but have very much superior ASF capacity.

Over a fleet squadron I would run a single Neko (SCL). It is your Raven equivalent. Support Swiss Army knife.
Two Taihous, two Achilles, and a Vengeance.

This is not equal to a Castrum squadron but it is more effective per ton. Keep similar ratios until you have a force that is equal. Add in some Roses for fluff.

Tactically you drown the baddies in fighters. Unleash the aerodynes on the Tiamats. Keep the Neko oit of SCC range in AA support. Keep the carriers and fuel trucks out of combat. With their thust rates the only threat should be Dragaus and they will be plastered in ASF. Have all Oozes out threatening boarding. That is a lot of chances to put troops on board and the DC has some good marine types.
With the Tiamats gone the Republic will have lost most of its bite. The chances of the support DropShips being run down by the Castrum are minimal so sit back and let the ASF do the work.

[sadlerbw]

two reasons I didn't do that: One, I found out I somehow got the development build of MegaMek and there is a bug that was crashing it every time a fighter squadron took damage...and I was NOT going to run that number of units individually! Two, I have some philosophical issues with the Zap Brannigan method of overloading the enemy's kill-counters with wave after wave of my own men! It just felt like the aerospace version of Savannah master spam. I actually thought about loading up a massive pile of Sholgar's with Anti-Ship missiles for a minute, but it just felt a bit cheesy. This isn't REAL war after all, so I'm only willing to put up with so much in the way of numbers imbalance. I don't debate the effectiveness of bringing something like 50-60 fighters and 10 or 12 small craft, which should be about what your fleet squadron has. It would certainly work. I just don't much like the idea of letting one side bring 70+ units and the other only gets less than 30, from a purely game perspective.

[marauder648]

Basically the 3057 Warships (the SLDF ones) need to be re-done so they are not just monstrous amounts of cargo with guns and engines attached. The 'lost' ships at the back are fine but the earlier ones they need a complete re-working. 

I'd like to think I did a bit of that with http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=55756.0  thanks to the amazing art from Plog and Shimmering sword, but the designs themselves need work. A lot of it.

[SCC]

I think WarShips with low armor might just be one of those things in BT, like DropShips having little to nor cargo space or the lack of scout/skirmish 'Mechs with long range weapons early on.

[Weirdo]

Out of curiosity, how many people in this thread have looked at low-armor ships and assumed them to be deathtraps, and how many have actually tried using them in a game, coupled with things like angle-of-attack modifiers, evasive movement, ECM, bracketing fire, bearings-launched missiles...to say nothing of how truly TERRIFYING a shop loaded with nothing but NACs and other cap weapons really is when facing fighters?

I'm honestly curious here.

[Cryhavok101]

I have used most of those things, but my opponents have often been using older designs for fighters and small craft, which can drastically effect the effectiveness of capital missiles. And I've only done about 5 games with cannon ships in the current ruleset, so some of my experience is out-of-date. Another large portion of my experience comes from whole games where neither side is using a single cannon unit, so that isn't really as useful when looking at canon vs canon stuff.

I haven't applied this though:

Code: [Select]

how truly TERRIFYING a shop loaded with nothing but NACs and other cap weapons really is when facing fighters Fear isn't something that effects everyone the same, so I tend to leave it out, or leave it up to role playing.

[Hellraiser]

Out of curiosity, how many people in this thread have looked at low-armor ships and assumed them to be deathtraps, and how many have actually tried using them in a game, coupled with things like angle-of-attack modifiers, evasive movement, ECM, bracketing fire, bearings-launched missiles...to say nothing of how truly TERRIFYING a shop loaded with nothing but NACs and other cap weapons really is when facing fighters?

I'm honestly curious here.

I think a lot of people just see armor facing & compare it to broadside firepower of bigger ships & think something is useless because it will die quickly.
That Aggie fight that was done a while back & referenced above really changed my outlook on how nasty a gunboat can be if its not facing off against a McKenna.

[Hellraiser]

Fear isn't something that effects everyone the same, so I tend to leave it out, or leave it up to role playing.

I don't think he meant it as in you "fear" the ship.
He's pointing out what a big AC gunboat might not hit every time but when it does, whole squadrons disappear.

[Weirdo]

Exactly that. I'm not talking about psychological fear, I'm talking about crushing fighters within the fist of an angry god.

BE THE ANGRY GOD.

[Cryhavok101]

Exactly that. I'm not talking about psychological fear, I'm talking about crushing fighters within the fist of an angry god.

BE THE ANGRY GOD.

The times I fought my warship against fighters, it felt like trying to swat a swarm bees with a stick. Sure I could destroy a whole squadron if the capital weapons connected, but with how few times they connected, it didn't help much. Especially once they started getting EWAS missiles on me.

[Fireangel]

Basically the 3057 Warships (the SLDF ones) need to be re-done so they are not just monstrous amounts of cargo with guns and engines attached. The 'lost' ships at the back are fine but the earlier ones they need a complete re-working. 

Some time ago, I wrote an article titled: “Common sense fixes for the SLDF fleet”

Sadly, my hard drive crashed as I was writing it, so all the calculations were lost. All I have left are some basic notes.

In this article, I simply added conventional anti-fighter and AMS/PD weapons, along with fire control tonnage (if needed), paid for with tonnage from the stupid-grade gigantamungus cargo holds.

I am not talking about a redesign; it was simply adding standard guns and AMS/PD (and in some cases, massive fire control tonnage), along with additional quarters for the extra gunners and their officers (and extra supplies, if you calculate that).

These are simple things (that sadly, are not so simple to calculate), that can actually make these warship designs relevant in the post-Helm era.

In a very real sense, I am shocked that this has not been done in canon, or by other fans.

[Weirdo]

The times I fought my warship against fighters, it felt like trying to swat a swarm bees with a stick. Sure I could destroy a whole squadron if the capital weapons connected, but with how few times they connected, it didn't help much. Especially once they started getting EWAS missiles on me.

Do you devote full broadsides to the task, use bracketing fire to improve the odds, missiles to score hits from very long range, AA lasers at all ranges, and ECM to ensure that most of your shots are free because they can't even think about hitting you until standard-medium range?

Shooting fighters is very much a case of Go Big or Go Home.

[Jellico]

The times I fought my warship against fighters, it felt like trying to swat a swarm bees with a stick. Sure I could destroy a whole squadron if the capital weapons connected, but with how few times they connected, it didn't help much. Especially once they started getting EWAS missiles on me.

At 14 hexes you are looking at 11 for a NAC. You are not going to hit much. A conventional weapon will need an 8 but do much less damage. At that point it gets complex and depends very much on how many capital weapons you want.

[Cryhavok101]

Do you devote full broadsides to the task, use bracketing fire to improve the odds, missiles to score hits from very long range, AA lasers at all ranges, and ECM to ensure that most of your shots are free because they can't even think about hitting you until standard-medium range?

Shooting fighters is very much a case of Go Big or Go Home.

The only one of those I don't do often is bracketing fire, but that is only because of how few weapons bays can actually use it. I use it when I can. A question though, can a bay of multiple lasers use both AA mode and bracketing fire at the same time? I'm not very clear on that, and if they can, then that is what I am missing.

[Daryk]

No, I'm pretty sure StratOps specifically prohibits using those two modes at the same time in two places.  I'll check the page references when I get a chance unless someone else beats me to it...

EDIT: It was easier to find than I thought: pages 99 and 100 in StratOps.

[Weirdo]

Yeah, AA mode and bracketing are an either/or thing. I think the numbers work best for a large bay to bracket down through medium range, then switch to AA at short.

The only one of those I don't do often is bracketing fire, but that is only because of how few weapons bays can actually use it. I use it when I can.

You'll note that the ships most often derided for low armor and lack of conventional guns(you know, the ones belonging to the empire that ruled all of human space with an iron fist) are the ones that often have very bracketable bays. :)

[Weirdo]

Going back a little bit...

The times I fought my warship against fighters, it felt like trying to swat a swarm bees with a stick.

Really, this means you're doing it right. Given how many fighters WarShips have to deal with in most games, any shot that wouldn't outright kill a fighter is a waste of time. The only exceptions are those times when you can score a crit that degrades an entire squadron.

[Cryhavok101]

You'll note that the ships most often derided for low armor and lack of conventional guns (you know, the ones belonging to the empire that ruled all of human space with an iron fist) are the ones that often have very bracketable bays. :)

Would you name a few? The ones I have looked at only have bays of 1-2 capital weapons. While you can bracket with only 2, you don get only a small bonus from it. I'm mostly looking at the lighter warships. The Sovestkii Soyoz does have 3-weapon bays, but I can't find many poorly armored ships that have full 4-weapon bays.

I wonder how dangerous some of those star league warships would be if all their capital weapons were in bays of 4, even the smaller ones. If I understand it right the successor states didn't have bracketing tech back then, so it's understandable why their ships were at a disadvantage, and bracketing certainly gives a major advantage in range, enough even to be taking down threats before they can take you down, in some cases. The successor state ships also see to be behind star league ships in terms of armor type, in that many of them from that era are using standard armor, and only build ships with better armor long after the star league did, for the most part.

For the FWL's more modern designs, I kind of wonder if the Eagle and Agamemnon both used standard armor because they already had a ready supply for it (standard armor being ferro-aluminum, the same thing they use on aerospace fighters) and they planned on upgrading it to better armor as supplies became available... putting them in line for better armor well after the Thera, and possibly waiting for surplus to be achieved after Thera production used what it needed of the better armors..

[Weirdo]

I'm not at my TROs right now, but off the top of my head, there's a reason the Lola III was the king of the Star League-era destroyer classes, instead of the Davion II.

For reference, what's your threshold for 'low armor' The Aegis is a true AA monster, but I don't know if that qualifies.

[Cryhavok101]

I'm not at my TROs right now, but off the top of my head, there's a reason the Lola III was the king of the Star League-era destroyer classes, instead of the Davion II.

For reference, what's your threshold for 'low armor' The Aegis is a true AA monster, but I don't know if that qualifies.

I can see why both the Aegis and Lola III would be good in that role.

Went through my TRO 3057 and 3067s to find examples of what low armor ships for me would be:

Corvettes: Vincent, Zechitinu, and even Inazuma is pushing it in my opinion
Destroyers: Essex or Whirlwind
Frigates: all seem fine to me
Cruisers: all seem at least okay to me
Heavy Cruisers: Agamemnon, Sovetskii Soyuz (also seems under-gunned for the Heavy Cruiser designation, not sure why this isn't designated a transport or cargo vessel)
Battlecruiser: Cameron seems a bit light on the armor for a battlecruiser, but I've never used it, even in previous rule sets
Battleship: Mckenna (and pretty much all the "Lost" battleships) The McKenna is a good ship, but it has less than half the armor tonnage it could have without changing it's speed or SI... I think that is a poor choice for a battleship design... even if it has the firepower to not need to worry about that too hard against most ships.

[Ruger]

Heavy Cruisers: Agamemnon, Sovetskii Soyuz (also seems under-gunned for the Heavy Cruiser designation, not sure why this isn't designated a transport or cargo vessel)

I still wish that the stats on the Sovetskii Soyuz-class heavy cruisers would be errata'd to include the additional 18 NL-45's (24 total) that the initial data block of the WarShip in TRO 2750 stated it possessed (I personally would be these in additional triple turrets on the aft-quarters and 6 gun batteries on the broadsides)...this would go a long way to making the fluff text make sense (given how the Essex-class destroyer has almost the same armament otherwise on a smaller ship with greater acceleration)...

Of course, when I do my retcons of the ship, I also tend to upgrade the NPPC's from mediums to heavies, and add triple or quad turrets of light naval gauss rifles (which were not a thing when TRO 2750 was first released)...You loose about half the cargo tonnage, but you gain so much throw-weight...but that's just me...

Ruger

[sadlerbw]

Couple things:

I have played around with warships, dropships and massed fighters, but it has always been really hard to get other people to play. So, for better or worse, most of the warship battles I've ever played (or space battles in general) have been in megamek either against the bot or playing both sides myself. I freely admit those aren't the best ways to gain experience, but such is life.

I've tried bracketing and some of the advanced capital missive rules, but they just made stuff die even faster, so I don't use them much anymore. I don't know that I've ever played much with AA targeting, ECM, or sensor shadow rules. Partly because no one has ever wanted to play any of the SO stuff in person, which I can understand, and partly because some of that stuff didn't feel real well balanced when I did take a look at it.

For me, warships with less than 50 armor per facing are fragile. Even at long range, that just seems to disappear after one or two turns. However, I don't actually use lots of the optional rules, so that may contribute.

I try to be careful not to suggest how to make it better because I think it is a bit of a mess on multiple levels, and I'm honestly not sure where you would even start. I just like the setting, and megamek makes it accessible and cheap to play with. Besides, in many eras there are few or no warships to even play with!

EDIT: forgot to add, Marauder, I absolutely LOVE the fan PDF with all the new art for the 3057 ships. Those pictures are fantastic and deserve to be the official art for these warships. In fact, they already are in my head!

[Kit deSummersville]

Some time ago, I wrote an article titled: “Common sense fixes for the SLDF fleet”

Sadly, my hard drive crashed as I was writing it, so all the calculations were lost. All I have left are some basic notes.

In this article, I simply added conventional anti-fighter and AMS/PD weapons, along with fire control tonnage (if needed), paid for with tonnage from the stupid-grade gigantamungus cargo holds.

I am not talking about a redesign; it was simply adding standard guns and AMS/PD (and in some cases, massive fire control tonnage), along with additional quarters for the extra gunners and their officers (and extra supplies, if you calculate that).

These are simple things (that sadly, are not so simple to calculate), that can actually make these warship designs relevant in the post-Helm era.

In a very real sense, I am shocked that this has not been done in canon, or by other fans.

Has there been an issue of WarShips dying to fighter swarms in the Star League or Jihad eras?

[Cryhavok101]

Has there been an issue of WarShips dying to fighter swarms in the Star League or Jihad eras?

I've managed it a few times, in aerotech 2. I haven't actually tried to kill a warship with nothing but fighters in the current ruleset. I have been hurt badly by fighter swarms though. Typically we call it a loss on the fighters part if all their carriers are dead and we aren't near a planet.

[Weirdo]

Corvettes: Vincent, Zechitinu, and even Inazuma is pushing it in my opinion
Destroyers: Essex or Whirlwind
Frigates: all seem fine to me
Cruisers: all seem at least okay to me
Heavy Cruisers: Agamemnon, Sovetskii Soyuz (also seems under-gunned for the Heavy Cruiser designation, not sure why this isn't designated a transport or cargo vessel)
Battlecruiser: Cameron seems a bit light on the armor for a battlecruiser, but I've never used it, even in previous rule sets
Battleship: Mckenna (and pretty much all the "Lost" battleships) The McKenna is a good ship, but it has less than half the armor tonnage it could have without changing it's speed or SI... I think that is a poor choice for a battleship design... even if it has the firepower to not need to worry about that too hard against most ships.

First off, anything designed after the Succession Wars has to be looked at with the understanding that everybody that knows what they're doing has been dead for three hundred years. Hideously flawed designs are the expectation, not the exception.

Vincent: You should check out the WSotW article down in Fan Articles. It's a corvette, which means its job is to be a wide-ranging early-warning platform that might be called on the intercept or harass light forces approaching your real combatants. Engaging other WarShips is not in the job description, thus there is no need for it to be armored as such. Moreover, it's actually one of the toughest corvettes of the pre-Clan eras, obviously ignoring anorexic destroyers like the Mako. The TRO can say what it wants, that ain't a corvette.

Inazuma: I'm not seeing the issue here, that thing may not be a brick, but it's plenty tough for a corvette, especially one that's designed solely for high-speed engagements.

Zechetinu: Another ship whose job description doesn't really call for fighting other WarShips. On the other hand, I will grant that in the ages of genuinely scary assault droppers, PWSes, and XL-ed heavy fighter wings, the Zech is kinda thin-skinned. Oh well, somebody has to be on the bottom of every totem pole. Best advice I ever saw about the Zechetinu came from its WSotW thread:

An important lesson there for everyone.

Use a unit how it works. Not how you think it should work.

It saves a lot of heartache.

Really, that should be applied to all WarShips.

Whirlwind: Again, not seeing a problem. The Davions saw them as a failure, so flaws are to be expected. They're actually pretty tough by SLDF standards, and one look at the weapons loadout tells me this ship is another built solely for high-speed engagements, not the extended slugging matches that call for a thick hide.

Essex: Yeah, this could be tougher, though it compensates with a fairly high SI.

Agamemnon: Definitely could be tougher. See the recent "Talk to me about..." thread about it down in Fan Articles. Remember again, WarShip design experience was completely lost for three hundred years, leading to the same mistakes people made in real life. The Agamemnon is a WWI British battlecruiser in every way that counts, with all the strengths and weaknesses thereof.

Sovetskii Soyuz: You know the bit about most naval stations being assigned a couple garrison fleet destroyers, and occasionally a cruiser? Pretty sure those cruisers are almost always SovSoys. Built when the SLDF felt the need to massively expand the number of hulls in the fleet, but likely had to do it on the cheap(relatively). SLDF battlecruisers are meant to be third-rate battleships, and in the same way I see the SovSoy as a third-rate cruiser, meant to give you a hull big enough to make the Houses and pirates think twice about shenanigans, but cheap enough to be deployed in places that don't merit a Luxor or Aegis, or even an old Avatar. Quite literally, it is quantity over quality.

Cameron: This class is an explicit failure, with all ships related to transport duties. With that background, I'd say it's actually a surprisingly potent design.

McKenna: It could mount more armor, but does it need to? It's a broadside fighter, so nose and aft about only need to keep you alive long enough to shoot the helmsman and replace him with someone competent. As for the sides, consider this: By and large, the gold standard for a heavy capital bay is the quad HNPPC turret. It can do a LOT of damage with a normal shot, but can also be bracketed down for very good accuracy at extreme ranges. The McKenna is designed with in mind, built to fight at ranges where other ships cannot respond. If they don't have big bracketing bays, they're missing shots too often to kill this ship before its own guns pick them apart. If they do have the ability to bracket like a McKenna, then those quad heavy peeper bays are doing 24 damage. The McKenna's broadside armor belt is too thick for a 24-point hit to threshold. Coincidence? Real-world, certainly. In-universe, I highly doubt it. :)

The Battletech universe makes a lot more sense if you assume that in one way or another, spacecraft armor is by far the most expensive part of the ship, and that shipwrights only ever put just as much as they think the ship needs, and no more.

(Disclaimer: I don't care one whit about C-bills.)

[Cryhavok101]

The Battletech universe makes a lot more sense if you assume that in one way or another, spacecraft armor is by far the most expensive part of the ship, and that shipwrights only ever put just as much as they think the ship needs, and no more.

(Disclaimer: I don't care one whit about C-bills.)

Well they do make it out of magic and dreams, with a little bit of paper mache, so I can imagine it is difficult to produce.

Reading the rest of your comment, I guess you could say I think those designs are over-specialized and not as well prepared for unexpected circumstances as I would have liked.

[Weirdo]

That I believe wholeheartedly. Niche units thrive in large armies and navies, who can afford to run them alongside complementary units(or generalists) in order to maximise each rule and minimize weaknesses. If you're looking at things from a post-Amaris perspective where the word 'navy' is a cruel joke and the word 'fleet' may as well be an expletive, everything needs to be a generalist.

Try setting up scenarios that showcase these niche roles. For example, try this for a corvette picket scenario:

The attacker is a Vincent corvette(plus whatever it is carrying), that has detected a force moving towards the core of whatever task group the Vincent is a part of. The defender is that force, composed of...whatever you want really, ranging in strength from roughly equal to the Vincent, up to vastly outgunning it. The Vincent wins a major victory if it actually manages to kill the defenders. It wins a victory by staying relatively close to the defender's biggest unit(the distance is up to you, 50-60 hexes sounds good off the top of my head) for...however long you want the scenario to last. If it lasts this long, it has succeeded in either drawing the defenders off course for a fleet intercept, or has gathered and relayed sufficient course and force strength data for the main fleet to vector in an appropriate interception. Any other result is a defender victory, as they have destroyed or evaded the picket quickly enough that their attack on the main fleet will effectively be a surprise.

[sadlerbw]

I try to cut the corvettes some slack, and assume they aren't really meant to be line units fighting other warships so much as big fish in a pond full of dropships. Actually, I try not to get hung up on classes in general. I mean, if the Volga and Potemkin are transports, then so are the Congress and the Sov Soy, but if the star league feels like calling them cruisers or frigates, I won't get too bent out of shape.

Anyway, my threshold of 50 points or armor seems a bit arbitrary, and I guess it is, but it's based on the fact that the majority of warships bigger than a corvette mount at least one weapon bay that puts out 50+ damage. Aside from a couple goofy units, most everything that is designed to be able to fight another warship has at least one bay with 50+ damage. So, if 50 points is all the armor you have on any given facing, it becomes real easy to start taking crits. Sure you wont blow up from a single hit, but having one shot clean off your armor means every little bit of damage on that facing is going to start rolling for crits: fighters, standard-scale bays, little naval lasers. All that stuff that probably couldn't meet the threshold when you had armor is now going start hitting the power switches on your systems. Plus, if your opponent is smart and fires their 50+ bay first, they get an increased chance for crits on every other bay that fires that turns since that first shot is the only one that needs to get lucky to open up a facing. After that, any amount of damage to that facing gets a crit roll.

I'm not saying 50 armor is a death sentence, but when most warships have one or more bays that can open you up to crits with a single lucky hit, it seems to become a noticeable disadvantage. Rolling and doing end overs can usually help spread damage, but when everyone can core through your freshest armor with a single NAC bay, it is much harder to protect yourself while still being in a position to do some damage back. So, for me 50 armor is something of a magic point on the scale of capital armor.

For that matter, 500 points of standard scale armor is just about my threshold for a PWS that can fight warships as well. Anything less, and you are in serious danger of being erased by a lucky shot. A PWS with less armor is fine against other dropships, but if you actually want to attack a warship with something other than a tele-operated missile from way out of range, you need to be able to survive at least 50 points of cap-scale damage. maybe not on every facing, but at least on the one you plan to present to the enemy while you close. That or start adding optional rules to throw the to-hit numbers into orbit!

Sorry for the novel, I just thought that number deserved a little explanation.

[Fireangel]

Has there been an issue of WarShips dying to fighter swarms in the Star League or Jihad eras?

In my group? Yes.

Not in the SL era, but in the post-helm era. We game primarily in the capital realm.

It is simple: you see that ships in the new era have to work on their own without the massive fleets of the SLDF, so you design ships that can provide their own anti-fighter defense. Why not do the same for the SLDF ships in the FWLM, or C*/WoB? Clearly C* was aware of this issue, or else they would have designed the Dante differently; they operated SLDF era ships without any consideration for built-in AAA or AMS/PD; even the clans had the same issue: canonically, they completely redesigned SLDF ships from the keel up (2750 v. 3057) without making any real difference except HarJel and some minimal changes, not even adding a single AMS in the process, yet new designs do have these weapons.

Without criticizing, it has not happened in canon because of the low-tier status of major naval combat among the developers. I know this and accept it, but what I find shocking is that it has not been done by other fans.

[Jellico]

Because the construction rules are pretty loose and clearly not fully exploited in game yet. Any fool can build a competent WarShip. The challenge is to build an appropriate WarShip. It is actually one of my bugbears with TRO3057R. Some of the ships fit poorly. eg Kimagure doesn't feel like a SLDF ship, and I dont mean its thrust.

So it goes beyond "how do I make this ship better? to ""how do I use this ship better?". Once you have a doctrine as to how to use a ship better you ask what can I add to make this doctrine work better. For example, if ever we get a TRO3057U (write to your local congressmen people) I won't be adding point defence to the WarShips, but I would be pushing hard for an AMS variant of one of the Small Craft in the 2600s.

The tech exists to put a Leviathan in 2650. Arguably it is called a New Syrtis. Then you have to explain why everyone else isn't doing it. 


I have attached some AA stuff.

[Cryhavok101]

I have attached some AA stuff.

Thanks for the document. I've seen people reference it before, so it's nice to have it myself.

[Fireangel]

Because the construction rules are pretty loose and clearly not fully exploited in game yet. Any fool can build a competent WarShip. The challenge is to build an appropriate WarShip. It is actually one of my bugbears with TRO3057R. Some of the ships fit poorly. eg Kimagure doesn't feel like a SLDF ship, and I dont mean its thrust.

So it goes beyond "how do I make this ship better? to ""how do I use this ship better?". Once you have a doctrine as to how to use a ship better you ask what can I add to make this doctrine work better. For example, if ever we get a TRO3057U (write to your local congressmen people) I won't be adding point defence to the WarShips, but I would be pushing hard for an AMS variant of one of the Small Craft in the 2600s.

The tech exists to put a Leviathan in 2650. Arguably it is called a New Syrtis. Then you have to explain why everyone else isn't doing it. 

That is specifically not what I am talking about.

I am talking about the SLDF ships operating singly or in very small groups in an environment when the doctrine under which they were designed is impossible to implement.

Comstar (pre-schism) and the Clans both realized this and developed ships to address this issue, but they did not upgrade their SLDF ships to adjust to this new doctrine. Ships designed after the fall of the SLDF have plenty of AA, but SLDF ships were not so adapted, even when the clans apparently took some SLDF ships apart, rebuilt then from the keel up (changing their appearance so completely that nobody would ever imagine that they are the same class), yet in all this remodeling, nobody thought of putting AMS or AA on them?

If they could recognize the need for AA and AMS when designing new ships, why not do it for the older ships?

[Kit deSummersville]

Any fool can build a competent WarShip.

Hey, I'm proof of that statement!

[sadlerbw]

If they could recognize the need for AA and AMS when designing new ships, why not do it for the older ships?

I don't know if this fits the fluff based on timelines, but the simplest explanation is the rise of trial-based combat. Given how massively deadly warship fights can be to any smaller units that get involved, it would be unusually wasteful of the clans to include them in combat trials where large numbers of pilots and fighters could be blown to useless bits by a massively larger opponent. I would imagine that, in clan combat, warships were meant to duel each other. This fits with the mentalities of both the one-on-one style of combat the Clans prefer, and also with their desire to minimize the resources committed to a battle. I could easily see clan captains bidding away their fighters and dropships to make it a one-on-one contest between two warships.

[Jellico]

Okay then.

Firstly SLDF ships are not lacking in AA (though they are weak at the destroyer level.)

TRO3057 saw a massive ignoring of capital missiles, the forgetting of small craft, and an actual set of construction rules which immediately saw a jump in armour.
Despite this AA went backwards. A Liberator is literally  half the gunboat of an Avatar. A Conqueror is better than a Kimagure, but it would want to be with half the engine.  Besides a Kimi is built like a 3057 House ship.
Likewise for the York/Riga II which are functionally identical. Heck. All SLDF derived destroyers are functionally equal. The Fredasa is better than the Vincent I guess. The Leviathan family is in a world of its own. It is worth noting that the transport is directly comparable to the Thera while the battleships have more than double the AA capacity. Shows the value of the capital weapons as AA right there.

The dirty secret is that armour is the best way of improving survivability in the face of fighters. The 10 most survivable platforms are battleships excepting the Mjolnir, Avalon, Thera, and Quixote which are noted bricks other than the missile boat.

So what does that have to do with anything? Frankly none of the canon ships can operate independently outside of noncombat patrols. They are all dependent on whatever escorts they can bring along whether themselves or on JumpShips. If the Houses think that they can do it they are dreaming.
In the end it comes back to figuring out how to use these ships and getting the escorts to do it.

[Maingunnery]

but I would be pushing hard for an AMS variant of one of the Small Craft in the 2600s.

Don't forget a standard PD Small Craft for the 2300's. And a primitive version!!

[Jellico]

Don't forget a standard PD Small Craft for the 2300's. And a primitive version!!

AMS doesn't exist. Absorbing a single missile salvo is pretty pointless.

[Maingunnery]

AMS doesn't exist. Absorbing a single missile salvo is pretty pointless.

Just get enough Small craft, those were the fleet days after all.