Author Topic: Wars of Reaving: Samarkand-class carrier Yorktown  (Read 4341 times)

BrokenMnemonic

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1447
Wars of Reaving: Samarkand-class carrier Yorktown
« on: 27 March 2013, 07:38:41 »
In the Wars of Reaving Clan Star Adder reactivate a Samarkand-class carrier, the Yorktown, from their MKSC-2 reserve in 3072 (page 113) and the Yorktown subsequently takes part in the battle between the Burrocks and Star Adders over Priori in 3073 (page 131). That's the last mention of the Yorktown - it's not listed among the active Star Adder vessels as at 3085 (page 168).

What happened to the Yorktown? Was it one of the unnamed ships destroyed during the Steel Viper Annihilation, perhaps?

Given that the Yorktown is described as "an older Samarkand-class carrier" does this signify that it was one of the original Block I Samarkands?

And, on a seperate note, was this Samarkand-class Yorktown the same ship as the SLS Yorktown listed as winning the 2664 Martial Olympiad?

It's more interesting than optimal, and therefore better. O0 - Weirdo

GhostBear

  • Minister of Assimilation, TOG Empire
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2793
  • And....out.
    • One world at a time...
Re: Wars of Reaving: Samarkand-class carrier Yorktown
« Reply #1 on: 27 March 2013, 08:31:02 »
In the Wars of Reaving Clan Star Adder reactivate a Samarkand-class carrier, the Yorktown, from their MKSC-2 reserve in 3072 (page 113) and the Yorktown subsequently takes part in the battle between the Burrocks and Star Adders over Priori in 3073 (page 131). That's the last mention of the Yorktown - it's not listed among the active Star Adder vessels as at 3085 (page 168).

What happened to the Yorktown? Was it one of the unnamed ships destroyed during the Steel Viper Annihilation, perhaps?

Safe to say yes.

Quote
Given that the Yorktown is described as "an older Samarkand-class carrier" does this signify that it was one of the original Block I Samarkands?

No. Yorktown is unlikely to be a Block I Samarkand. TRO 3075 is pretty clear that the only Block Is were Samarkand, Benjamin, Dieron, and Alshain. No more Block Is appear to have been constructed, and all of the Samarkands built when production was restarted were Block IIs. (I attribute the correction to Weirdo, who corrected my initial off the cuff answer with a bit of digging.)

Quote
And, on a seperate note, was this Samarkand-class Yorktown the same ship as the SLS Yorktown listed as winning the 2664 Martial Olympiad?

Unless/until contradicted otherwise, sure, why not?
« Last Edit: 27 March 2013, 09:37:04 by GhostBear »
Eh.

BrokenMnemonic

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1447
Re: Wars of Reaving: Samarkand-class carrier Yorktown
« Reply #2 on: 27 March 2013, 09:44:38 »
Unless/until contradicted otherwise, sure, why not?
Thank you for the responses, they've helped clear things up for me :)

Unfortunately, if the Yorktown is a Block II Samarkand I don't think it can be the Olympiad winner - if I'm reading the TRO correctly, the Block II Samarkand's weren't authorised for construction by Urizen Kurita until 2668, which means the Yorktown couldn't have been in service to win the 2664 Olympiad. Which is a shame, really - it'd be nice to see a Combine-designed ship winning the Olympiad in the face of all those McKennas and the like.

It's more interesting than optimal, and therefore better. O0 - Weirdo

HABeas2

  • Grand Vizier
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6211
Re: Wars of Reaving: Samarkand-class carrier Yorktown
« Reply #3 on: 27 March 2013, 10:34:36 »
Hello,

Then I guess you proved that it was contradicted. So the SLDF's Yorktown was a different ship of the same name. It happens.

Thanks,

- Herbert Beas

BrokenMnemonic

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1447
Re: Wars of Reaving: Samarkand-class carrier Yorktown
« Reply #4 on: 27 March 2013, 12:39:07 »
Then I guess you proved that it was contradicted. So the SLDF's Yorktown was a different ship of the same name. It happens.
It does - I think the most confusing case of that happening is the Cold Hunter, which is apparently the name of both a Lola III class destroyer in the Ice Hellion touman and the name of a Lola-class destroyer in the Snow Ravens. I think they did that deliberately to confuse people, though ;)

It's more interesting than optimal, and therefore better. O0 - Weirdo

Øystein

  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3053
Re: Wars of Reaving: Samarkand-class carrier Yorktown
« Reply #5 on: 27 March 2013, 13:28:50 »
It does - I think the most confusing case of that happening is the Cold Hunter, which is apparently the name of both a Lola III class destroyer in the Ice Hellion touman and the name of a Lola-class destroyer in the Snow Ravens. I think they did that deliberately to confuse people, though ;)

Actually, the CSR Cold Hunter was ruled an duplication error a while back.

With regards,
Øystein

BrokenMnemonic

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1447
Re: Wars of Reaving: Samarkand-class carrier Yorktown
« Reply #6 on: 27 March 2013, 16:55:48 »
Actually, the CSR Cold Hunter was ruled an duplication error a while back.

With regards,
Øystein
I did a search for the Cold Hunter here a little while ago, and didn't find anything in the Ask The... forums or the Errata forum - is it something I should add to the FM: Updates / FM: Warden Clans errata threads? Was the CSR Cold Hunter a Snow Raven Lola that simply had the wrong name, or should the ship not exist at all in their touman under any name?

It's more interesting than optimal, and therefore better. O0 - Weirdo

Øystein

  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3053
Re: Wars of Reaving: Samarkand-class carrier Yorktown
« Reply #7 on: 27 March 2013, 18:23:24 »
I highly doubt we have errata threads for books from previous publishing companies. This merely falls into the "new trumphs old" situation.

It was posted by me before the last board crash, IIRC.

No CSR Cold Hunter ever existed, it was duplicated by a mistake. (And no, no warship 'took it's place').

Øystein

BrokenMnemonic

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1447
Re: Wars of Reaving: Samarkand-class carrier Yorktown
« Reply #8 on: 28 March 2013, 03:06:50 »
Thank you for clearing that one up for me - I only joined the forums with this particular iteration of the board, so I think I've missed out on a lot of clarifications and corrections like this over the years.

It's more interesting than optimal, and therefore better. O0 - Weirdo