Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race

[marcussmythe]

The Lyran Commonwealth is an open society.  We encourage the free flow of goods, ideas, and information.  :)

My sense is that for management purposes, easier to keep everything public.  Also lets observers have something to observe.  I anticipate everyone will be pursuing their own doctrine, rather than trying to mirror/counter opponents moves - and if people juggle their builds turn to turn to counter one another, they risk ruining their own force’s coherence.

My unsolicited vote is to allow AA targeting for Naval Lasers - EVERY naval weapon exists in the shadow of the NAC, so Im down for helping the others any way I can.

[marcussmythe]

Nibbled to death by ducks? Londo would be so proud lol

Oh, the whole thing is just stuffed to sickness with references and nods.  If it were for any kind of offical publication, Id -have- to take 3/4ths of them out.  Here I indulge myself for my own and hopefully shared amusement.

[truetanker]

@ marcussmythe PM sent...

TT

[DOC_Agren]

I have not time to take part but this is going to be interesting to watch

[Alsadius]

We already have Barracudas with their to-hit bonus, so AAA targeting doesn't seem like anything new. Also, I don't have room for it on my tech list. So yeah, it's active now.

I'd prefer public posts for turns. It's a lot easier for me - I don't need a black ops rule set, I'm not the only one who has to double-check the calculations, and it's more fun for the observers. If you guys all feel differently I can work with PM turns, but I'll only switch this up if most of you feel strongly.

[marcussmythe]

Thought for the day - LNCSS's get EXPENSIVE... I think it may have cost me a big chunk of another ship.  :(
Oh, well.  What price initiative?

Other thoughts - upgrading crew quarters.  Steerage/Bay quarters are cheap as chips in tonnage compared to actual, and leaving your flight crews in them makes for better looking cargo hold sizes - but it may be a false economy.  When I ran the numbers on the Heimdaller, she actually had ~far~ longer legs with her infantry and flight crew in formal quarters than when they were in bay quarters, even if I devoted all of the tonnage saved into food stores!  I dont want to think about how well that recycling technology must work.

Of course, the downside is that if you arent carrying the troops and vehicles, you cant put something ELSE in that tonnage.  But everything is trade-offs.

*EDIT*
I know we cant direct our research.  But for whatever it is worth, I'd like to state that Lyran Naval Researchers are -fascinated- by computers, AI, and autonomous systems.  Better guidance systems for missiles, better targeting systems for guns, pilot aids, better autopilots, Strong General AI.  You know, stuff. :)

[marcussmythe]

Rules Question: 

For purposes of this exercise, are we using Standard or Advanced Aerospace Ranges?

I know you arent gaming out the battles, but the rules still define the weapon characteristics of the universe - characteristics of which the naval designers would be aware.

My suggestion is that the the advanced, individual ranges give us a more interesting design space and a rationale for a greater spread of weapons.  As you noted in your capital weapon analysis, the NAC/30 is king.  It reaches to long, and is just as accurate to the edge of long as a HNPPC or NL/55 - with the result that those weapons are not good choices.  (Effective attack in the extreme band is basically impossible - base THN of 10, plus EM and ECM renders extreme range fire basically meaningless). Under advanced ranges, the HNPPC not only reaches further, but has better brackets even as the range closes - such that it may have better THNs than the NAC even if both ate in range, and allow something like McKenna to use that accuracy advantage within -effective- ranges to show strongly against a NAC heavy design.

[Cryhavok101]

the NAC/30 is king

Not to derail, but the NAC/30 can only be king if you are not using weapon bays or bracketing fire. A mix of NAC/20's and /10's are better, since you can reach the 70 point max for weapon bays, and hit the full 4-weapon bonus for bracketing fire, neither of which can an NAC/30 do, making it less dangerous.

[marcussmythe]

Not to derail, but the NAC/30 can only be king if you are not using weapon bays or bracketing fire. A mix of NAC/20's and /10's are better, since you can reach the 70 point max for weapon bays, and hit the full 4-weapon bonus for bracketing fire, neither of which can an NAC/30 do, making it less dangerous.

Well, we certainly arent bracketing as Houses in 2350.  :)

Its a good point, and not a derail.  But under your conditions, Id just run 3 NAC20s and an NAC10, reach to long, bracket fully - and were still left with the NAC as king, just changed which one(s).  :)

I wanna scratch my head and go ‘hmm’, not have a clear winner choice - and I think the individual ranges (and espc accuracy based on them) helps with that.

[Smegish]

Personally I'm getting around the bracketing problem by using multiple 2-gun bays rather than making bays that do 70 damage.

One last question I swear: How would I cost additional training? Can't match the Hegemony in numbers or ship quality, but crew quality is doable. And I want my navigators to be able to nail those pirate points.

[marcussmythe]

Personally I'm getting around the bracketing problem by using multiple 2-gun bays rather than making bays that do 70 damage.

One last question I swear: How would I cost additional training? Can't match the Hegemony in numbers or ship quality, but crew quality is doable. And I want my navigators to be able to nail those pirate points.

My understanding is that better training is reflected in spending more on maintenance.  The default maintenance cost for a vessel is 1% per year (so 10% per turn).  You may choose to spend more, or less, with consequences to be determined by the GM.

I have -assumed- in my production schedule that you don't pay to maintain new builds, as they would be active for 5 of your ten years (if they were the first production out of a yard) or only leaving the slipways as the turn ends (if they were the last production out of the yard).  Rather than figure out which ship was finished when, I'm going to do maintenance each turn, for the whole turn, based on hulls in service at the beginning of the turn, unless the GM objects.

[Smegish]

Another thought occurred to me that I'll ask about before it's an issue: If we decide to stop building a certain ship class -probably due to cost of construction , but want to avoid the maintenance costs going through the roof could we dedicate a shipyard capable of building said class to making spare parts for it, during which time the yard can do nothing else?

Also, I'm assuming a yard that was built/upgraded this turn can't do anything else.

[Alsadius]

If I wanted to be gamey with my autocannon bays, I'd use two 30s and a 10. Bracketing to -2 is almost always better than doing it to -3(-3 is only better at super-high THNs), and the bay is 9000 tons instead of 9500. As for ranges more generally, I'm cool with thinking of the advanced ranges. The NAC/25 suffers less that way, for one. It won't be modelled explicitly, but I'll keep it in mind. I'll also assume that Gauss weapons do well at longer ranges compared to anything else, to make up for their anemic damage per ton.

Training and crew skill is covered in maintenance costs, yes. For super-skilled crews, make a point of over-funding your maintenance budget. And to confirm, there are no maintenance costs during the turn you build a ship, only on subsequent turns. The bookkeeping is much simpler that way, for all of us.

I've made no assumptions about spare parts for out-of-production units. I gave some thought to it, but dismissed it for excess bookkeeping. Don't worry about that. Also, I've assumed that shipyard upgrades are instant - build with them right away, if you like. It's a bit less realistic, but I want players to be able to exploit an opportunity quickly if they see the need for it.

Also, I have an updated spreadsheet that I'm testing out, which seems to have proper prices for stations. I'll post it when I have a bit more time to confirm everything, but I've used it and can thus take the UHC's turn. The UHC is looking for options that will allow it to defend its own space effectively, without the high costs and temptation to foreign wars presented by a true WarShip fleet. As such, space stations have great appeal, particularly stations that can also support their merchant fleet. Thus was born the Pratham jump point station. Carrying an energy storage battery to allow faster K-F charging for merchant vessels, the Pratham also mounts a variety of long-range weaponry and a strong fighter wing to allow for significant firepower across the vast spaces of a recharge point. A small cargo hold to allow for transshipping, a few spare passenger bunks, and small craft to move goods round out the station facilities. The first Pratham was launched at the zenith point of Panpour in 2353, and by the end of the decade a total of six Prathams were in service.

Code: [Select]

Class/Model/Name: Pratham Jump Point Station
Tech: Inner Sphere
Ship Cost: $504,500,000.00
Magazine Cost: $9,036,000.00
BV2: 26,113

Mass: 200,000
K-F Drive System: None
Power Plant: Station-Keeping Drive
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
36 Naval Laser 55
36 Capital Launcher Killer Whale
48 Machine Gun (IS)

Class/Model/Name: Pratham Jump Point Station
Mass: 200,000

Equipment: Mass
Drive: 2,400
Controls: 200
Structural Integrity: 1 2,000
Total Heat Sinks: 3114 Single 3,000
Fuel & Fuel Pumps: 5000 points 1,020
Fire Control Computers: 0
Armor: 432 pts Standard 720
Fore: 72
Fore-Left/Right: 72/72
Aft-Left/Right: 72/72
Aft: 72

Grav Decks:
Medium: 2 200
Escape Pods: 32 224
Life Boats: 32 224

Crew And Passengers:
29 Officers in 1st Class Quarters 290
56 Crew in 2nd Class Quarters 392
80 Gunners and Others in 2nd Class Quarters 560
165 Bay Personnel (See 2nd Class Passengers)
12 1st Class Passengers 120
170 2nd Class Passengers 1,190
20 Steerage Passengers 100

# Weapons Loc Heat Damage Range Mass
6 Naval Laser 55 Nose 510 330 (33-C) Extreme-C 6,600
6 Naval Laser 55 Aft 510 330 (33-C) Extreme-C 6,600
6 Naval Laser 55 FR 510 330 (33-C) Extreme-C 6,600
6 Naval Laser 55 FL 510 330 (33-C) Extreme-C 6,600
6 Naval Laser 55 AR 510 330 (33-C) Extreme-C 6,600
6 Naval Laser 55 AL 510 330 (33-C) Extreme-C 6,600
6 Capital Launcher Killer Whale Nose 120 240 (24-C) Extreme-C 900
6 Capital Launcher Killer Whale Aft 120 240 (24-C) Extreme-C 900
6 Capital Launcher Killer Whale FR 120 240 (24-C) Extreme-C 900
6 Capital Launcher Killer Whale FL 120 240 (24-C) Extreme-C 900
6 Capital Launcher Killer Whale AR 120 240 (24-C) Extreme-C 900
6 Capital Launcher Killer Whale AL 120 240 (24-C) Extreme-C 900
8 Machine Gun (IS) Nose 16 (1.6-C) Short-PDS 4
8 Machine Gun (IS) Aft 16 (1.6-C) Short-PDS 4
8 Machine Gun (IS) FR 16 (1.6-C) Short-PDS 4
8 Machine Gun (IS) FL 16 (1.6-C) Short-PDS 4
8 Machine Gun (IS) AR 16 (1.6-C) Short-PDS 4
8 Machine Gun (IS) AL 16 (1.6-C) Short-PDS 4

Ammo Rounds Mass
Capital Launcher Killer Whale Ammo 450 22,500.00
Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 7200 36.00

Number Equipment and Bays Mass Doors
1 Energy Storage Battery 100,000 N/A
60 Bay Fighter 9,000 6
9 Bay Small Craft 1,800 2
9,000 Cargo, Standard 9,000 3
To ensure the proper defense of the nation, large fighter wings have been established on each core planet, and a substantial investment has been made in DropShips that can be militarized at need.

UHC budget: $20B
Pratham prototype = $1.01B
plus 5x Pratham = $2.525B (2 in Panpour, 4 unspecified)
1,200 fighter = $6B
200 small craft = $2B
24 light DropShip = $7.2B
Research = $1.265B

[Smegish]

See how this goes...

Draconis Combine Admiralty Doctrine

Design

The High Command in the DCA agreed quickly that matching the Hegemony in numbers or size of their ship in the short term was impossible, so instead they have focused on simplifying their designs by standardising on one type of each weapon as follows: The 35cm Naval Laser, the class 20 Naval Autocannon, the Killer Whale capital missiles, with the AC-5 and Machine guns for anti-fighter and point defense work. The admiralty also decided that using multiple twin turrets over single, multiple gun turrets gave the best balance of increasing the chances of a hit without sacrificing too much striking power with each volley. Using this standard across the fleet with aid mass production, logistics and training.

The pair of docking collars typically seen on DCA ships are generally used as an aid to resupply or to transport the first wave of an invasion force, while the subsequent waves arrive on 'convential' JumpShips after the jump point has been secured.

Crews

DCA crews are trained hard and often, but their reward is better than average crew quarters – for all but the marine contingent anyway – compared to the JumpShip fleet. The admiralty came to the conclusion that while the Combine cannot match the Terrans in ship size, crew quality is a very different story. Every effort is taken to improve the fleets performance, including special privileges for the best performing officers and crew, as well as transfers to the far less luxurious confines of the JumpShip fleet for those that are not up to scratch, where many volunteers can be found to fill their place of honour. Of special note are the navigators on board, who are rigorously trained, and are required to make 5 successful jumps into 'pirate points' in a conventional JumpShip before qualifying to be assigned to a WarShip.

Usage

Captains are trained to act like a stalking tiger, waiting for the proper moment to pounce, whilst using surprise as much as possible in the emptiness of space. One-on-one engagements with an equal opponent are to be avoided as a rule, although that rule is often waived in the defense of DCMS convoys, Prefecture or District capitals or express orders from a superior. It is better to wait for the advantage in size or numbers before striking.

Chemical weapons (beyond non-lethal agents like tear gas) are strictly banned, and orbital bombardment is performed only as a response to Ground-to-Orbit fire, or against forces deploying WMDs against DCMS ground troops. If the launch site of said WMDs (whether chemical, biological or nuclear) happens to be in a populated area, then they should not have tried to use civilians as a human shield. Such bombardment is to be conducted with the fleets Naval Lasers, to both save NAC ammunition and keep collateral damage to within acceptable limits.

Nuclear weapons are issued to the fleet – typically 3-4 warheads for each launcher- but their use to be used in large fleet engagements, or if outnumbered and unable to avoid action. Normal use would be mixing nuclear warheads amongst a volley of conventional missiles (typically two launchers per volley), to both conserve warheads, and to force a shell game of sorts onto the enemy point defense, improving the odds of one of the nuclear warheads getting through.

The current deployment of the fleet is in 3 pairs, with each Fubuki escorted by a Kutai patrolling the Lyran and Davion borders -the admiralty thought that tempting the Hegemony with their brand new fleet before it was up to strength was a foolish idea- while the remaining two Kutais assist in subjugating the Principality of Rasalhague. The future plan for the fleet involves building as many 6 ship squadrons (2 Kutais, 2 Fubukis, and 2 as yet unfinished, but larger ships) as the budget will allow, deploying them at District capitals -and as sufficient numbers enter service- Prefecture capitals as a rapid reaction force to foreign aggression.

Fighters

The current fleet includes two classes of warship, both containing a wing of 36 fighters, predominately used for self-defence against enemy strike fighters and capital missiles. While the fleets fighter corps is also trained in the anti-shipping role, keeping their carrier vessel safe from the enemy is deemed a more important role.

The rest of the DCA's fighter corps not assigned to WarShips is either in training, or deployed in garrison positions on the border, or guarding important worlds such as Prefecture/District capitals and worlds with shipyards in orbit, usually assigned in individual 36-fighter wings.

JumpShips

The DCAs small JumpShip fleet is used almost exclusively to supply the fleet and act as couriers, though transporting the DCMS in offensive operations is also in their perview. Internal movements of the DCMS within the Combine however is typically done with their own tiny Jumpship fleet, or by commandeering civilian craft unless the DCA is given specific orders otherwise.

And now for the budget:

Code: [Select]

(All Costs in Millions)
Money Available 100,000

Avaliable Shipyards
Luthien 3/1/1
New Samarkand 3/1
Midway 1

Maintanence None
Prototype Cost Kutai 6,092
Fubuki 7,241

Construction # Built Price per unit Total Cost
Shipyards Luthien (Both 1's > 2's) 10,000 20,000
Warships Kutai 4 6,092 24,368
Fubuki 2 7,241 14,482
Jumpships 20 500 10,000
Dropships 16 300 4,800
Fighters 50 x 36 Wing 1800 5 9000
Small Craft 144 10 1440
Research 2 1000 2000

Total Spent 99,423
Remaining 577
And finally, the Ships themselves, designed by the DCA's master of engineering, Kouzou Fuyutsuki:

Kutai (Corvette)

Code: [Select]

Class/Model/Name: Kutai
Tech: Inner Sphere
Ship Cost: $6,091,888,000.00
Magazine Cost: $3,464,000.00
BV2: 15,629

Mass: 200,000
K-F Drive System: Compact
Power Plant: Maneuvering Drive
Safe Thrust: 4
Maximum Thrust: 6
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
10 Capital Launcher Killer Whale
48 AC 5
32 Machine Gun (IS)
24 Naval Laser 35
Designed as the fleets first line of defence, able to act as a picket ship, escort larger vessels or patrolling the Combines long borders. With it's main firepower consisting of Naval Lasers, with a handful of Killer Whales and a hefty battery of autocannons for anti-fighter duties with deep ammunition bins, the Kutai can serve in the field for some time without resupply in the most part, keeping the Dragon and his people safe from piracy and the occaisonal raid from a great house. The small NCSS system installed gives the ship a great advantage as a picket or pirate hunting ship, with very little escaping the notice of its gaze.

Code: [Select]

Class/Model/Name: Kutai
Mass:                    200,000

Equipment:                 Mass
Drive:                          48,000.00
Thrust
Safe: 4
Maximum: 6
Controls:                     500.00
K-F Hyperdrive: Compact (6 Integrity) 90,500.00
Jump Sail: (3 Integrity)           40.00
Structural Integrity: 40         8,000.00
Total Heat Sinks: 1496 Single 1,142.00
Fuel & Fuel Pumps: 40000 points 8,160.00
Fire Control Computers: 0.00
Armor: 120 pts Standard          160.00
Fore:         20
Fore-Left/Right:20/20
Aft-Left/Right: 20/20
Aft:           20
 
Dropship Capacity: 2 2,000.00
Grav Decks:
Small: 2 100.00
Medium: 0.00
Large: 0.00
Escape Pods: 0.00
Life Boats: 22 154.00

Crew And Passengers:
24 Officers in 1st Class Quarters 240.00
61 Crew in 2nd Class Quarters 427.00
54 Gunners and Others in 2nd Class Quarters 378.00
132 Bay Personnel 0.00
1st Class Passengers 0.00
2nd Class Passengers 0.00
50 Steerage Marines 250.00

Fighter Bay (36) 3 Doors     5,400.00
Small Craft (12) 2 Doors     2,400.00
Cargo             2 Doors     5,721.00
NCSS (Small)                     100.00
The luxurious quarters are fairly standard aboard DCA vessels, the admiralty having the belief that officers and crew that are given better living conditions then their JumpShip compatriots will fight harder to keep them. The engine is capable of a full 3Gs of thrust, allowing the ship to outrun most pirate vessels, and keep pace with friendly fleet elements, the 8,000 tons of fuel is sufficient to keep both the ship and its fighter complement in the field for an extended time. The armour is much thinner than the larger Fubuki-class, but there is a limit on how much can be fitted to a ship this size, so it was deemed acceptable.

As per DCA doctrine, the fighter wing is largely for self-defence, while the large contingent of small craft allow for quick resupply or aid in customs duties, along with the ships contingent of 50 Marines.

Code: [Select]

# Weapons Loc Heat Damage Range Mass
2 Killer Whale Nose 40 80 (8-C) E-C 300.00
4 AC 5 Nose 4 20 (2-C) L 32.00
4 AC 5 Nose 4 20 (2-C) L 32.00
2 MG Nose 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
2 MG Nose 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
2 Naval Laser 35 FL 104 70 (7-C) L-C 1,400.00
2 Naval Laser 35 FL 104 70 (7-C) L-C 1,400.00
4 AC 5 FL 4 20 (2-C) L 32.00
4 AC 5 FL 4 20 (2-C) L 32.00
2 MG FL 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
2 MG FL 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
2 Naval Laser 35 FR 104 70 (7-C) L-C 1,400.00
2 Naval Laser 35 FR 104 70 (7-C) L-C 1,400.00
4 AC 5 FR 4 20 (2-C) L 32.00
4 AC 5 FR 4 20 (2-C) L 32.00
2 MG FR 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
2 MG FR 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
2 Killer Whale LBS 40 80 (8-C) E-C 300.00
2 Killer Whale LBS 40 80 (8-C) E-C 300.00
2 Naval Laser 35 LBS 104 70 (7-C) L-C 1,400.00
2 Naval Laser 35 LBS 104 70 (7-C) L-C 1,400.00
2 MG LBS 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
2 MG LBS 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
2 Killer Whale RBS 40 80 (8-C) E-C 300.00
2 Killer Whale RBS 40 80 (8-C) E-C 300.00
2 Naval Laser 35 RBS 104 70 (7-C) L-C 1,400.00
2 Naval Laser 35 RBS 104 70 (7-C) L-C 1,400.00
2 MG RBS 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
2 MG RBS 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
2 Naval Laser 35 AL 104 70 (7-C) L-C 1,400.00
2 Naval Laser 35 AL 104 70 (7-C) L-C 1,400.00
4 AC 5 AL 4 20 (2-C) L 32.00
4 AC 5 AL 4 20 (2-C) L 32.00
2 MG AL 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
2 MG AL 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
2 Naval Laser 35 AR 104 70 (7-C) L-C 1,400.00
2 Naval Laser 35 AR 104 70 (7-C) L-C 1,400.00
4 AC 5 AR 4 20 (2-C) L 32.00
4 AC 5 AR 4 20 (2-C) L 32.00
2 MG AR 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
2 MG AR 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
4 AC 5 Aft 4 20 (2-C) L 32.00
4 AC 5 Aft 4 20 (2-C) L 32.00
2 MG Aft 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00
2 MG Aft 4 (0.4-C) PD 1.00

Killer Whale Missiles  150 (15 per tube)         7,500.00
AC/5 Ammo            1920 (160 Rds/bay) 96.00
MG Ammo               6400 (400 Rds/Bay) 32.00
Having all sorts of problems with formatting from that spreadsheet...

EDIT: Along with a slight adjustment/addition to the Kutai's fluff, I give you the Fubuki:

Fubuki (Destroyer)

Code: [Select]

Class/Model/Name: Fubuki
Tech: Inner Sphere
Ship Cost: $7,240,978,000.00
Magazine Cost: $21,728,000.00
BV2: 57,421

Mass: 420,000
K-F Drive System: Compact
Power Plant: Maneuvering Drive
Safe Thrust: 3
Maximum Thrust: 5
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
22 Naval Laser 35
26 Naval AC 20
64 AC 5
32 Machine Gun (IS)
8 Capital Launcher Killer Whale
Whilst the Kutai is designed as an escort or patrol vessel, the Fubuki is intended to be a ship killer, first and foremost. It keeps the bulk of the weapons of the smaller vessel, losing only a pair of missile tubes off the nose and a handful of NL 35s, whilst also packing 13 turrets mounting twin Naval AC 20s to pound the enemy into submission. Only capable of 2.5Gs at full thrust, outrunning the enemy is unlikely to be an option, but the speed was seen as acceptable for it's assigned role in the nascent DCA. A more than solid internal structure allowed the designers to fit the Fubuki with armour equal to almost any ship of equivalent size, allowing the ship to close to effective weapon range. The standard 2 drop collars, 36-fighter wing and dozen small craft allow the ship to defend itself, perform boarding actions for customs duties if needed, or lead the opening wave of an invasion, whichever role is needed.

Code: [Select]

Class/Model/Name: Fubuki
Mass: 420,000

Equipment: Mass
Drive: 75,600.00
Thrust
Safe: 3
Maximum: 5
Controls: 1,050.00
K-F Hyperdrive: Compact (10 Integrity) 190,050.00
Jump Sail: (4 Integrity) 51.00
Structural Integrity: 80 33,600.00
Total Heat Sinks: 2928 Single 2,495.00
Fuel & Fuel Pumps: 20000 points 8,160.00
Fire Control Computers: 0.00
Armor: 317 pts Standard 672.00
Fore: 53
Fore-Left/Right: 53/53
Aft-Left/Right: 53/53
Aft: 52

Dropship Capacity: 2 2,000.00
Grav Decks:
Small: 2 100.00
Medium: 0.00
Large: 0.00
Escape Pods: 0.00
Life Boats: 42 294.00

Crew And Passengers:
34 Officers in 1st Class Quarters 340.00
95 Crew in 2nd Class Quarters 665.00
72 Gunners and Others in 2nd Class Quarters 504.00
132 Bay Personnel 0.00
1st Class Passengers 0.00
2nd Class Passengers 0.00
50 Steerage Marines 250.00

Fighter Bay (36) 3 Doors   5,400.00
Small Craft (12) 2 Doors   2,400.00
Cargo   2 Doors      7769.00

Code: [Select]

# Weapons Loc Heat Damage Mass
2 Naval Laser 35 Nose 104 70 (7-C) 1,400.00
2 Naval Laser 35 Nose 104 70 (7-C) 1,400.00
2 Naval AC 20 Nose 120 400 (40-C) 5,000.00
4 AC 5 Nose 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
4 AC 5 Nose 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
2 MGs Nose 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 MGs Nose 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 Naval Laser 35 FR 104 70 (7-C) 1,400.00
2 Naval Laser 35 FR 104 70 (7-C) 1,400.00
2 Naval AC 20 FR 120 400 (40-C) 5,000.00
2 Naval AC 20 FR 120 400 (40-C) 5,000.00
4 AC 5 FR 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
4 AC 5 FR 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
2 MG FR 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 MG FR 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 Naval Laser 35 FL 104 70 (7-C) 1,400.00
2 Naval Laser 35 FL 104 70 (7-C) 1,400.00
2 Naval AC 20 FL 120 400 (40-C) 5,000.00
2 Naval AC 20 FL 120 400 (40-C) 5,000.00
4 AC 5 FL 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
4 AC 5 FL 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
2 MG FL 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 MG FL 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 Killer Whale LBS 40 80 (8-C) 300.00
2 Killer Whale LBS 40 80 (8-C) 300.00
2 Naval AC 20 LBS 120 400 (40-C) 5,000.00
2 Naval AC 20 LBS 120 400 (40-C) 5,000.00
4 AC 5 LBS 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
4 AC 5 LBS 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
2 MG LBS 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 MG LBS 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 Killer Whale RBS 40 80 (8-C) 300.00
2 Killer Whale RBS 40 80 (8-C) 300.00
2 Naval AC 20 RBS 120 400 (40-C) 5,000.00
2 Naval AC 20 RBS 120 400 (40-C) 5,000.00
4 AC 5 RBS 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
4 AC 5 RBS 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
2 MG RBS 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 MG RBS 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 Naval Laser 35 AR 104 70 (7-C) 1,400.00
2 Naval Laser 35 AR 104 70 (7-C) 1,400.00
2 Naval AC 20 AR 120 400 (40-C) 5,000.00
2 Naval AC 20 AR 120 400 (40-C) 5,000.00
4 AC 5 AR 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
4 AC 5 AR 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
2 MG AR 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 MG AR 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 Naval Laser 35 AL 104 70 (7-C) 1,400.00
2 Naval Laser 35 AL 104 70 (7-C) 1,400.00
2 Naval AC 20 AL 120 400 (40-C) 5,000.00
2 Naval AC 20 AL 120 400 (40-C) 5,000.00
4 AC 5 AL 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
4 AC 5 AL 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
2 MG AL 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 MG AL 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 Naval Laser 35 Aft 104 70 (7-C) 1,400.00
4 AC 5 Aft 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
4 AC 5 Aft 4 20 (2-C) 32.00
2 MG Aft 4 (0.4-C) 1.00
2 MG Aft 4 (0.4-C) 1.00

[Alsadius]

Smegish: For formatting the sheet's output, just copy each block of text from the spreadsheet into a single set of Code tags, and hit Enter twice after each block. It leaves them split up and fairly easy to read, and means it's more compact on our screens.


The St. Ives Mercantile League has recently decided that the wasteful duplication inherent within private industry is antithetical to the interests of the nation. To further national unity and efficient progress, the nation is taking the lead in guiding the industry of the nation. Economies of scale are being used to encourage faster and more efficient transport inside the nation's borders.

The most visible sign of the SIML's new approach to industrial operations is the Chongzhi Recharge Station. Unlike other stations designed as dual-purpose military installations, the SIML wished to keep this as a pure civilian design. Some compromises were eventually struck, giving the station batteries of light autocannons to allow self-defence, as well as armour to survive an attack from external enemies, but the focus of the station is the four gigantic energy storage batteries, which allow several JumpShips to recharge their drives at once. Large cargo-handling facilities round out the ship. Crew quarters are somewhat more spartan than other nations may be accustomed to, but the noble workers of St. Ives need no such luxuries to keep working for the good of the state.

Code: [Select]

Class/Model/Name: Chongzhi Recharge Station
Tech: Inner Sphere
Ship Cost: $338,495,000.00
Magazine Cost: $123,750.00
BV2: 12,883

Mass: 500,000
K-F Drive System: None
Power Plant: Station-Keeping Drive
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
90 AC 2

Class/Model/Name: Chongzhi Recharge Station
Mass: 500,000

Equipment: Mass
Drive: 6,000
Controls: 500
Structural Integrity: 1 5,000
Total Heat Sinks: 154 Single 0
Fuel & Fuel Pumps: 3000 points 1,224
Fire Control Computers: 0
Armor: 690 pts Standard 1,725
Fore: 115
Fore-Left/Right: 115/115
Aft-Left/Right: 115/115
Aft: 115

Grav Decks:
Medium: 2 200
Escape Pods: 40 280
Life Boats: 40 280

Crew And Passengers:
28 Officers in 2nd Class Quarters 196
117 Crew in Steerage Quarters 585
15 Gunners and Others in Steerage Quarters 75
160 Bay Personnel (See Steerage Passengers)
10 2nd Class Passengers 70
160 Steerage Passengers 800

# Weapons Loc Heat Damage Range Mass
15 AC 2 Nose 15 30 (3-C) Long 90
15 AC 2 Aft 15 30 (3-C) Long 90
15 AC 2 FR 15 30 (3-C) Long 90
15 AC 2 FL 15 30 (3-C) Long 90
15 AC 2 AR 15 30 (3-C) Long 90
15 AC 2 AL 15 30 (3-C) Long 90

Ammo Rounds Mass
AC 2 Ammo 5625 125.00

Number Equipment and Bays Mass Doors
4 Energy Storage Battery 400,000
32 Bay Small Craft 6,400 8
76,000 Cargo, Standard 76,000 7
After constructing several Chongzhi stations, the leaders of the SIML realized that JumpShip traffic was lower than anticipated, so a new effort to expand the JumpShip fleet was initiated late in the decade.

Budget: $10,000M
Prototype Chongzhi: $677M
10x Chongzhi: $3,385M
400x small craft: $4,000M
JumpShip: $500M
3x light DropShip: $900M
Research: $538M

[marcussmythe]

Smegish - I like her.  I also like how even on turn 1, we can see fleet doctrine heading out into different directions.  Will be interesting to see whst happens when thise doctrines clash.  Whats going to be -real- interesting is if someone starts nuking warships - thats going to collapse the design space metaposition into a ‘dont let one missile through and fire all zee missiles’. 

I may nudge the Archons into trying to get their heads together with the Terran Hegemony about making first use of nukes against any target a War Crime resulting in being at war with the Hegemony (and everyone else).  Given their absolute and unassailable numeric advantage, Id think the Hegemony would like ‘no nukes’ to be the rule of the day.  OTOH, if we start nuking each other (and they stay out of it), we’ll have to build for that environment, and it might end up with them being ill suited to fight a nuclear war between ships.  Well, ill suited for ten years.  Next turn they prototype and mass produce something thats better than all of us put together....

Alsasdius - I know it seems like make work, but all those stations/what nots/minor powers things are things that would exist in the universe and make it richer.  If its coolsies, could one of those recharge station designs be licensed from St. Ives or somewhere?  Would save me prototype costs and the design time, and Id reckon id pay some percentage of the prototype cost to buy the design. Something like that would go nicely with my civilian jumpship fleet and economic plans.

Similarly - as Ive more yards than money, could I build warships for other people?  I reckon build my own designs at say 10% markup, or prototype and build to suit at cost (including protitype cosr!), but in the latter case Id retain the right to build the design I prototyped for personal use.

Edit:  -whistles-  Fubuki is mean.

[Alsadius]

Licensing designs was something I was going to do myself in the Capellan zone. That's partially metagaming, as they're merging in a couple turns and it means I'll need to track fewer designs, but it's also perfectly logical.

Let's say that NPC nations will offer standard licensing terms, to keep it simple - any nation that doesn't share a border will sell a license for any design using established technology(i.e., nothing discovered in the last two turns) for half of the prototype cost. So for $169m, you can start building Chongzhi stations under license, for example. No approval required, just budget for it and write it up. If you want to license a design from a nation you do border (probably the Terrans, but others might come up), PM me - it might happen, but it'll depend on the political situation. The same goes for selling ships or design licenses to each other - your political masters won't mind as long as you're not equipping potential enemies, and if you are then PM me.

Also, I'm making a point of using different doctrines for different nations, but I'm glad to see you guys also following suit. This is pretty much exactly what I was hoping to see. :)

[Smegish]

Edit:  -whistles-  Fubuki is mean.

Likely to run into problems of not being fast enough later, also will probably need to upgun the NL turrets sometime in the future, might be able to put that off until I can swap em for N/PPCs. For now, just don't let her get close.

Wanted to avoid having ships that suited every circumstance perfectly right out of the gate when we're supposed to be running a crash building program, and also didn't want to meta-game into building weird (to me anyway) mixed-gun bays that just happened to hit the 70 damage cap.

Also, for those smaller powers that don't share a border with the Combine; whether that's the Taurians; Canopians; Marians; or various parts of what will be the Confederation, the Combine may have a little something available for export in the coming decades. Just don't tell anyone where it came from or we stop doing business with you. ;)

[marcussmythe]

Likely to run into problems of not being fast enough later, also will probably need to upgun the NL turrets sometime in the future, might be able to put that off until I can swap em for N/PPCs. For now, just don't let her get close.

Wanted to avoid having ships that suited every circumstance perfectly right out of the gate when we're supposed to be running a crash building program, and also didn't want to meta-game into building weird (to me anyway) mixed-gun bays that just happened to hit the 70 damage cap.

Also, for those smaller powers that don't share a border with the Combine; whether that's the Taurians; Canopians; Marians; or various parts of what will be the Confederation, the Combine may have a little something available for export in the coming decades. Just don't tell anyone where it came from or we stop doing business with you. ;)

Well, the Star League Navy soldiered on at 3/5 as its main fleet speed for its entire existence... heck, look at Aegis, 2/3.

The thing about speed... think of speed not in terms of lost warload, but in cost. 
IN GENERAL... if a 3/5 ship has an arbitrary combat load of 100Kt split between SI and Guns, its 4/6 cousin has 80Kt, and a 5/8 version has 60Kt.  You can retain that 100Kt combat load by upping your total size... this has the knock on effects of making your ship larger, and as a result 25% more expensive.  You also eat it in SI, assuming your going for a balanced build.. youll have about the same armor points, maybe a bit more, but your more fragile under the shell.  This could get bad in big fleet engagements, where the real measure of ships lifespan is not total armor, but 'facing+2xSI', since in big fleet engagements, ships will die before they can roll ship.

Thus you get roughly 4x4/6 ships for the cost of 5x3/5 ships.  If your going for 5/8, the size goes much bigger, and your now getting about 3 ships instead of 5.  What price thrust, when thrust gives no operational or strategic mobility, purely tactical?  My gut feel is that a 4/6 fleet may have an advantage over a 3/5 fleet (can choose engagement range), but will have the same disadvantage against a 5/8 fleet.  Whereas the 5/8 fleet is basically helpless in front of the 3/5 fleet.. it can run freely, but if it stands, an 5v3 advantage in firepower and armor means that the fast fleet will die, and wont accomplish much along the way.

Another consideration is cargo space.  I've chosen to go for a 5-7% mass fraction in cargo.. amusingly, about as much as a point of thrust.  So my fleet 'costs' like a 4/6 fleet, only its a 3/5 with on board cargo.  I think its worth it to not fiddle fart with collars and droppers, but Your Mileage Will Vary.

PS:  Regarding Costs... just wait till LF Batteries come along.  It goes nuts fast.

PPS:  I notice we are all loving to build things that dont cost upkeep early.  Recharge stations, fighters, droppers, jumpers, whatever fits - and avoiding going into massive warship production until the battle reports start saying what works and what doesnt.

[Alsadius]

A speed advantage only has tactical value if you use it to either force a beneficial engagement range, or to avoid poor fights entirely. So if you're loaded to the gills with NAC/40s and move at 5/8, that can have real value by letting you force a close-in knife fight. Ditto if you go with bearings-only missile launches from more-than-extreme range, later in our setting. But if you and your opponent are both using vanilla multi-range designs, then the ability to dictate engagement range doesn't matter much, because you don't have a useful range to dictate. Options are good in combat, of course, and it's not totally worthless(after all, maybe your opponent is going to bring some NAC/40 ships and you can keep him from closing with you), but speed by itself isn't all that decisive unless it lets you do something you couldn't otherwise do. This is not a Mech fight (or a Fisherian wet dream) where speed is actually a real form of armour.

I tend to think of WarShip fights in terms of the RL battleship era - not exclusively, but more than any other obvious comparison. The 3/5 fleet is basically the American "Standard Battleship" design - not terribly fast, because the assumption is that you don't need to be terribly fast if you can attack him at a point he needs to defend, and that if you can force such a decisive engagement you'll be the one carrying the most guns and armour to the fight. Conversely, the British battlecruiser designs(and to some extent the Queen Elizabeths) were designed to give the fleet a "fast wing" to allow for flanking maneuvers in a battle, and if Jutland had gone a bit differently it may have worked very well for them. The differences in cargo/fuel capacity that were needed(based on the expected distance between the fight and the nearest base) also map very closely to the relative cargo sizes for SLDF and House ships. And in that era, just consider the doctrinal differences implied between a Scharnhorst, a Yamato, an Iowa, and an un-modernized Royal Sovereign, or even between armoured carriers and unarmoured carriers.

Also, while I'm mostly cranking out light units and stations so far, remember that I haven't actually resolved any nations with shipyard space except the UHC, and the UHC never built any WarShips at all in canon. The Terran Hegemony is going to be building a lot of ships, I promise you, and all of you seem to be going for ships as well. We're going to get a couple fights this round(the Sarna Supremacy attack on the Tikonov Grand Union is coming up, and there's all the usual pirate suppression and general skirmishing to worry about as well), so you can see how that works out.

[marauder648]

One thing I don't think we should fall into is OTPing. At the moment, folks are designing missile boats and there's NOTHING to defend against them. 

[Alsadius]

One thing I don't think we should fall into is OTPing. At the moment, folks are designing missile boats and there's NOTHING to defend against them.

1) OTP?

2) In game rules, non-AMS weapons can be used for anti-missile work. I'm making them a bit better, so that missiles(and particularly, nuclear-armed missiles) aren't overwhelmingly powerful, but anti-missile work will still be tough until the AMS comes out. Right now in a naval context, the AC/5 is the primary anti-fighter weapon, the machine gun is generally used against missiles, and the AC/2 is something of a dual-purpose weapon - not great at either role, but it can at least try at both.

[Starfox1701]

What kind of weapons moding is going to be allowed? Can the players try and make their own guns?

[Alsadius]

What kind of weapons moding is going to be allowed? Can the players try and make their own guns?

Nah, that just gets crazy for something like this. Either I try to keep them from getting too powerful, in which case they're boring, or they get too good and obsolete all the canon stuff(as well as making the spreadsheet we're all using for design useless). If you want to play with the fluff a bit, go for it, but no new stats blocks for weapons will be added aside from canon techs getting unlocked.

[marcussmythe]

One thing I don't think we should fall into is OTPing. At the moment, folks are designing missile boats and there's NOTHING to defend against them.

Weve seen ship designs from 2 major powers.    Out of 3 designs, there's one real missile boat in there (mine).

For defending against missiles?  I recommend Armor.  Seriously.  Missiles are terrible in damage per ton, and their extreme engagement range advantage evaporates once you look at the numbers.  Extreme is 10, plus ECM - automiss.  Long is 11 with ECM, 12 on a nose shot, 13 on a passing shot.  Maybe not quite automiss, but you cant afford to fire many missiles at those ranges.  (note that the NAC boat has the ammo to take any shot on a 12 or less, because NAC ammo is trivial.  Laser ammo is less than trivial).

So much for long and extended range.  Now, there is some interesting room for decisive engagement at medium.  Decisive engagement is possible at medium range because target numbers start allowing significant hits, though barely.
 (9 after ECM, so 10/11s).  You've got a window of advantage for a missile design vs. a NAC design - the missile design hits medium sooner (espec. the barracuda) but its a half-dozen hexes or less.  If the missile boat goes ammo light, it can try for an advantage against the NAC boat while its in medium and the NAC is still making showy useless fireworks at long, but thats a small window of space and time.  Once the NAC boat hits medium, a 'full ammo' Missile boat loses its firepower advantage, and a 'light ammo' missile boat better hope to win in a turn or two - because its going to be dry soon.

If point defense meaningfully reduces large missile launches, it will make large missile launches objectively worse than NLs or (as always) NACs.  And they will thus not be used.  Small launches will be eaten alive by any PDS that can threaten a large one.

A couple of things change this paradigm:
1.)  Waypoint and Bearing Only:  Lets the Missile boat engage effectively at range 50-plus-a-little.  Cryhavock suggests that any missile may perform as if it were at short using bearing only launches - my geometry suggests id rather set my missiles for medium against a canny opponent with even a 3/5 drive.  5/8 ships are going to make the missile users head hurt.. but still, weve got the -possiblity- of effective engagement out to range 50 plus a little.  That's not nothing, and Id consider a manticore style fleet once Waypoint and Bearing Only hits.  But Id be willing to fight against it, too.

2.)  Nukes.  Once the Nukes start getting used, the warship era ends in pyrotechnics.  Its all missiles and ASFs with nuke missiles.  Mostly ASFs with nukes, because they have more range, and everyone can kill anything they can get in range.  We can put our NACS and NPPCs and Armor away, because everything dies in nuclear fireballs long before those things matter.  Suggested force composition is warships that carry fighters and also dropships that carry fighters, so you can keep the enemy nukes as far away as possible.

Closing Thought:  Naval ECM really collapses the design space to 'medium range'.

[marcussmythe]

Crew Training:
If 10% of build value is default, whats the sense of where, budget wise, ships stat behaving like Veterans or Elites?  Is it unknowable?

Also, whats the upper limit if meaningful expenditure on such training?  Do we have a sense of where we hit ‘throwing away money’?

[Starfox1701]

Nah, that just gets crazy for something like this. Either I try to keep them from getting too powerful, in which case they're boring, or they get too good and obsolete all the canon stuff(as well as making the spreadsheet we're all using for design useless). If you want to play with the fluff a bit, go for it, but no new stats blocks for weapons will be added aside from canon techs getting unlocked.

That's ok based on sticking close to the fluff right now all I got are plasma cannons which are years away and a couple of ac tweeks but neither of those are complete yet. Long barrels/reinforced breach for longer range and enhanced autoloader double rof.

[Alsadius]

Crew Training:
If 10% of build value is default, whats the sense of where, budget wise, ships stat behaving like Veterans or Elites?  Is it unknowable?

Also, whats the upper limit if meaningful expenditure on such training?  Do we have a sense of where we hit ‘throwing away money’?

Expect diminishing returns, but remember that a lot of those costs are on things like large-scale exercises, live-fire training for your troops, establishment of command schools, increased pay to attract better people, and so on. Those are big expenses, and much more than the "baseline" for maintenance, but you can spend quite a lot on them without being wasteful if crew skills are your goal. The big concern is starving your construction budget too far, because one ship commanded by Horatio Nelson and crewed by the best in the fleet probably still loses to ten equal ships commanded by a moderately competent midshipman.

As a rough guideline, a ship at 10% of baseline maintenance is in mothballs with a skeleton maintenance crew, a ship at 50% of baseline maintenance is good breeding grounds for a mutiny, the Terran Hegemony will always keep their units at 100% of baseline maintenance(seems like a good way to have it be a true baseline), and when you get much above 200% of baseline maintenance the admiral running the training programs starts to think that live-fire nuclear weapon exercises for every fighter pilot might be a good way to use up his annual budget.

[marcussmythe]

Thank you for the timely response!

I was looking at whether its worth spending dough trying to train gunnery, specifically, because of the terrible things EWar does to THNs in space between warships.

Im not even joking - I was running numbers and kept getting answers like 'this ship literally cannot kill itself at extreme or long range, and might well run out of ammo before it can kill itself at medium range'

And yeah, since maintenance is a % function, its a hard limit on fleet sizes.

[Alsadius]

Remember a few things.

- ECM is a tech on the tech list. There are EW systems in use right now, but they're not very good, and they'll get better when ECM tech comes out. As a result, it has less of an effect on long-range firepower in this era than you might expect from game rules.

We're using fluff rules, not exact combat rules - extreme-range engagements have low hit chances, but they aren't going to be literally zero within the weapon's effective envelope, even if the StratOps math says it's a 13+ to hit.

- Maintenance costs are a softer limit than you might be worried about. Economies grow over time, and over time old ships will go into mothballs or be retired entirely. It's still a real and important limit, and from a gameplay point of view it creates an incentive to either upgrade or trash your old ships, but it's not hard-and-fast - it's a soft cap.

- We're building up to something called "the Age of War" right now. What makes you think that long-term logistic growth functions are going to be the true limit on your fleet's size?  >:D