Like most so-called carrier vessels in BattleTech, the Quetzalcoatl, too, is hamstrung by a prohibitive lack of fuel reserves. BT fighter carrier vessels, much like the 'Mech carriers, are really just deployment vessels designed to deliver a bunch of fighters into a combat zone. They are essentially incapable of serving as motherships. The Leopard CV is the least bad of the bunch imho; and the Titan tries to be too many things at once.
I'll agree on that-we don't have designs that could logically do the job they're supposed to be doing in the canon.
hence why I made my list in my first post on this, and why I argued what I did in my second and third-the Naval side of the game suffers enormously from "quick toss something up there we need to make page count" instead of anything resembling a dedicated idea of WHAT to fill that page count with...which may be why Battlespace and subsequent efforts to highlight space-naval have failed commercially while the ground game's done little but prosper in the same hands.
I kind of think we almost need to find a way to divorce the two while having them coexist in the fiction. Different focus, not just terrain and tech, but
focus for it.
I had this idea before, but didn't go anywhere with it, but...
With the ground game, we have 'traits' and "quirks"-special rules for certain units reflected in their fluff. Since Naval is really more Strategic than Tactical, maybe "Doctrines" unique to established factions that alter the tables, not reflecting the tech, so much as how the people using it are taught and trained to use it?
[Insert Clan name] faction forces have Harjel in the hull, while [insert Sphere faction] depressurizes theirs before combat, each alters a different part of the critical hits table and has their own drawbacks (depressurized ops don't apply to transport/landing ships while Harjel applies to everything but fighters, the trade being that ships running depressurized don't have fires but cost more to man, while Harjel protection invalidates blowouts, but leaves the user vulnerable to internal fires.)
You know, like Faction "A" gets a bonus for fighting in groups, while faction "B" gets a bonus for soloing.
because that's how they trained.
Ideas for a general list:
1. Damage Control doctrines differing between factions where one faction has 'Everybody does damage control' while another 'only specialized teams do damage control'. each giving a different bonus for how to handle damage to the ship.
2. Formation vs. Group vs. solo bonuses to initiative or gunnery
3. This faction trains to absorb damage, that faction trains to avoid damage.
*I don't have all the answers, I'm not a game developer.
