Warship Race Redux

[UnLimiTeD]

Well, I read it as the K-F Adapter being the station's equivalent to a K-F Boom. My interpretation stems from p.105 IO:

The advent of the KF-boom for DropShips finally removed the weight limits imposed by internally-carried DropShuttles for interstellar voyages, and—in conjunction with the modern docking collars—paved the way for larger DropShips. This same technology, in the form of the space station KF adapter, also enabled an equally rapid deployment of space stations across the Inner Sphere.  ...

So I assume it just has a different name, but isn't automatically included.
I mean, why would it exist as an equipment option if the effect of it's use is integral to the parent entity no matter what?

[Lagrange]

Well, I read it as the K-F Adapter being the station's equivalent to a K-F Boom. My interpretation stems from p.105 IO:So I assume it just has a different name, but isn't automatically included.
I mean, why would it exist as an equipment option if the effect of it's use is integral to the parent entity no matter what?

My interpretation is that K-F Adapter and K-F boom do the same thing, it's just that K-F adapter is for a space station while K-F boom is for a dropship.  Both of these technologies enable the K-F field to envelop a docked craft and transport via jump.

But, a dropshuttle (= dropship without a K-F boom) and a normal space station can explicitly be carried via a naval repair bay.   

The advantage of the K-F Adapter / K-F boom approach is that undocking is instantaneous, docking requires 30 minutes, and it's significantly cheaper. 

The advantage of the naval repair bay is that it can assist repairs, there is no small upper bound on the scale, and it works for transport of any large craft unless it has a KF-core.

[UnLimiTeD]

 ??? Then why would stations over 100k ever have them, even though it is apparently assumed that they do?
Assembly takes longer than undocking, and a repair facility would possibly help with assembly.
Also, where can I read the part about repair facilities being able to jump with a drop shuttle?
I mean, the bays carry things through their integrated collars, after all.

[Lagrange]

??? Then why would stations over 100k ever have them, even though it is apparently assumed that they do?

My version of IO says that you can only use a KF-adaptor on a station that weighs 100K or less tons or on a larger station which is built as "modular".

Also, where can I read the part about repair facilities being able to jump with a drop shuttle?

That's just a logical conclusion as far as I know.  Able to carry space station => able to carry objects with no special KF-thingy => able to carry dropshuttle.

I mean, the bays carry things through their integrated collars, after all.

There's two definition of 'collar'.  One is the ability to dock with a large craft.  The other is the ability to transport through space. 

[marcussmythe]

The thing that (to my mind) keeps 1-arc from being the obvious to only choice is the scaling issues (as ships get larger, Fire Control issues with 1-arc boats climbs and climbs, though I doubt it ever climbs enough to counteract the advantage of not splitting your mounts), combined with flexibility issues (if nose must point at opponent to engage opponent, ability to maneuver and fire is somewhat constrained) and the much less generous nose critical table (lots of ways to get your ship crippled on nose, compared to broadsides).

I think collectively its enough to make the decision an interesting one, neither an absolute winner or an absolute stinker.

[UnLimiTeD]

My version of IO says that you can only use a KF-adaptor on a station that weighs 100K or less tons or on a larger station which is built as "modular".

Don't think they differ much - a modular station is just split into multiple parts, each of which can mass up to 100k and always uses a K-F Adapter (because why would you build it modular if you didn't want to transport it).

That's just a logical conclusion as far as I know.  Able to carry space station => able to carry objects with no special KF-thingy => able to carry dropshuttle.

The way I read it, they are not able to carry anything without a boom or adapter,

"as these systems incorporate K-F drive booms"

hinting at that they are compatible with vessels meant to fit collars. After all, it has been written that a jump-compatible dropship may not be carried internally (though the reasoning was a bit.... well).
Granted, this is a bit of historical fluff interpretation, the thought "why would they, after much thought and lamentation, develop a system to jump stations that massively increases their cost, if they could just slot the station into a repair facility and jump it without that cost attached?", but I think it is supported by:

Until the advent of the KF Boom and the corresponding “postboom” collars, DropShips weighing more than 5,000 tons could not be transported through hyperspace by any means other than as dismantled cargo. Even if the vessel possesses a naval repair facility of sufficient capacity, vessels carried within would still require a KF boom to enable transition through hyperspace.
Efforts to jump while docked with a vessel that lacks a KF boom will automatically abort the procedure

There's two definition of 'collar'.  One is the ability to dock with a large craft.  The other is the ability to transport through space.

It was my understanding that any modern collar (which we use in our ruleset) would include the "jump-ability".

But, ultimately, it doesn't matter much to me, so I may just forward a rules question over the week, and maybe one of the devs will spontaneously make something up tell us more of the intent of the rules. ^-^

But, while we're at stations and nose-only: I don't think anyone here seriously considers stations with uniform armament spread over all their facings to be a good idea?
All pure combat stations I've seen, including those I've built myself, seem to concentrate their weapons on a single arc, or maybe also the neighbouring arcs, including missiles that could potentially fire from a yet different arc. I assume (and I really haven't checked) that canon stations do not always follow this approach, but there's no logical, in-universe reason why they wouldn't. But I suppose that's like the book descriptions on warships telling us the windows making it look like decks running the length of the hull is naval hidebound-ness and inertia, when really it's just the artists not thinking about it.  :thumbsup:

Another thing: Can I pawn off my invasion ships to the army? I've found that historically, Japanese amphibious assault carriers were operated by the army. I've paid their maintance for rather long given they've been used only once.  :fine_print:
Oh, and I've been considering turning the last Block I Fubuki into a museum of sorts.

[Lagrange]

The quote seems to be from the "Primitive Large Aerospace Craft" section with a full context of:

Note, however that some rules options available to large craft will be unavailable until the advent of suitable technologies during the "Primitive" period.  These include the following: ...  Even if the vessel possesses a naval repair facility of sufficient capacity, vessels carried within would still require a KF boom to enable transition through hyperspace. Efforts to jump while docked with a vessel that lacks a KF boom will automatically abort the procedure.

So, you are absolutely right with primitives and this confirms that with nonprimitives the limitation does not apply.

 It was my understanding that any modern collar (which we use in our ruleset) would include the "jump-ability".

It was my understanding that any modern collar (which we use in our ruleset) would include the "jump-ability".

Space Stations can have a Docking Collar.

...Docking Collar...  Available To: ...SS...

My understanding is that if a space station is missing a docking collar, then large craft can't really dock with it.

The thing that (to my mind) keeps 1-arc from being the obvious to only choice is the scaling issues (as ships get larger, Fire Control issues with 1-arc boats climbs and climbs, though I doubt it ever climbs enough to counteract the advantage of not splitting your mounts), combined with flexibility issues (if nose must point at opponent to engage opponent, ability to maneuver and fire is somewhat constrained) and the much less generous nose critical table (lots of ways to get your ship crippled on nose, compared to broadsides).

W.r.t. criticals, if a fleet-to-fleet combat is all about how many warships die in a turn, criticals matter much less. 

In non-fleet combat, the extra quantity of armor helps, but the criticals certainly do matter more.  The nasty ones seem to be CIC and Sensors which are together about a 1-in-3.5.  One such hit is painful (+2 to hit), two is crippling (+4 to hit), and with three (+6 to hit), you are combat-irrelevant.   Looking at the critical avenues,

• White Shark hits on CIC/Sensors are expected at 3*36/10*36/15*36/10 ~= 93 damage.  This is super-relevant.  Even Barracuda and Killer Whale (expected 207 damage) are relevant.  For the Kuan Yin II and Pallada II, quenching missile fire via defensive ASF/Smallcraft helps quite a bit.
• Lucky hits with an NL 55 strike CIC/Sensors 5.5*36/15*36/10*36 = 1710 points of damage.  This is relatively negligible at least at current armor scales.  Maybe with massed subcaps instead it could be relevant.
• Threshold crits on CIC/Sensors happen after an expected .86 = .1*36/15*36/10 fraction of armor is removed.  This could matter if an opponent is optimized for the threshold but often will not in practice.
  
• SI hits on CIC/Sensors matter after an expected 8.6 = 36/15*36/10 hits.  This really matters.  An opponent could strip off armor with big weapons and then small weapons could finish off a nose design without needing to chew all the way through the capital SI.

W.r.t. flexibility, the nose arc is twice as wide as the broadside arc which compensates to some extent.  For example, by choosing your angle of attack, a nose design can start out taking damage in the side arc, take some damage there, rotate sides, take some damage there, and then shift to taking damage on the nose armor.   Altogether, against an enemy that is effectively stationary w.r.t. angle of attack, you can expend nearly all armor.

[marcussmythe]

Remember also for our purposes that -all- weapons have a chance of golden BB penetration critical events.  Basically rather than being magic on/off thresholds, the bigger the gun and the thinner the armor the greater the chance (with a mean around the published behavior).

Remember also that NGauss are treated as much more damaging than they are tor that purpose, as well as generating their own autocrit chances.  This is necessary, because otherwise NGauss are terrible - but an accuracy advantage, when I played with it, made them way too good.

[UnLimiTeD]

Yes, space stations can have plenty of docking collars. However, those are not automatically of the jump-supporting variety.

some rules options available to large craft will be unavailable until the advent of suitable technologies

, to me, at least, does not mean that they automatically have it after wards.
Nor does it read that once dropships with K-F Boom collars are available, Repair facilities can suddenly transport vessels without them.

I agree and concede that we're working with conjecture a bit here.
Anyways, my reading would be:

• At first, there was darkness no external jumping.
• Then, the K-F Boom was developed, and it was good. But it was also expensive. Over time, all dropships (or nearly all, to the point the remainder is irrelevant) were refitted with the new Booms and matching docking clamps, resulting in the standard dropship we have today, including its cost.
• The K-F Adapter is the Space station equivalent to the K-F boom system used for dropships.
• Hence, Space stations that are intended to jump need a K-F Adapter (I see no other potential use for them).
• Repair Facilities are external, and contain two integral, jump-supporting docking collars. Every jump performed with a vessel attached will be facilitated by those collars.

From what I read, you disagree with either point 4 or 5?

Alas, there is probably no definitive answer for now. I might get around to asking that eventually.
Regarding N-Gauss: I think the medium might need less help than the large one, and definitely less than the small. However, the light N-Gauss is also the single longest ranged weapon bar bearings only launches. That's gonna count for something. Though N-Gauss are still far better even vanilla than Mass drivers. I wonder, with the better rifles and non-discreet positioning, would the canon Soyal have a point?
Which fittingly was fielded by the capellans.

[Lagrange]

Yes, space stations can have plenty of docking collars. However, those are not automatically of the jump-supporting variety.

Right: docking collar is not equivalent to jump capacity.

, to me, at least, does not mean that they automatically have it after wards.

It's a big editing no-no to reiterate existing rules as a rules change under some condition (i.e. primitive status).  An editing error can't be ruled out though, so please go ahead and ask the devs.

Nor does it read that once dropships with K-F Boom collars are available, Repair facilities can suddenly transport vessels without them.

The Tacops text says that the K-F booms are integrated into repair facilities.  My understanding is that as soon as that happens, anything inside the repair facility without a KF-core can jump.

From what I read, you disagree with either point 4 or 5?

With both actually. 
For 4 I would say that "Space Stations that are intended to jump via a standard jumpship or warship docking collar in the same way as a dropship need a KF-adaptor."
For 5, I would say that "Repair Facilities have KF-booms built into their structure so that any unit contained within that does not have a KF-core can jump with the ship.  Repair Facilities also have 2 internal docking collars." 

Regarding Naval Gauss, I hadn't realized there is a house rule here.  I don't believe it's required. 

• LNGs have a very important range advantage when you consider defense stations.
• MNGs are something like HNPPCs on a damage/ton basis, except they are better for fire control, causing threshold crits (in the normal way), and in high speed engagements.

 
HNGs are admittedly a little bit anemic---they should do 35 capital damage.  Nevertheless, 30 capital damage at extreme range with slightly more tonnage than 2 HNPPCs is not a bad choice.  Anyways, I'm confident that Naval Gauss will be used without any special treatment.

[UnLimiTeD]

The Tacops text says that the K-F booms are integrated into repair facilities.  My understanding is that as soon as that happens, anything inside the repair facility without a KF-core can jump.

Ah, ambivalent grammar. I read it as the assumption that the unit inside is assumed to have a K-F Boom.
You know, that actually makes a certain amount of sense. Can't deny that. Would certainly help with recovering damaged ships, too. It's also closer to the phrasing used.
Curious. 
Ok, guess I wrote about it again when I said I wouldn't anymore.
Regarding Naval Gauss:
It is true, looking at our environment, that the extra range is a significant edge for the light Gauss, while the N-Gauss' biggest weakness in Battletech battles, the inability to properly bracket, isn't a factor (as far as I understood, and certainly not yet).
However, their cost is - and we do use that.
The NL/55 has just 2 less range - yes, that's two less, which is a notable difference, I admit, but it's still 2 more than HNPPCs and 4 more than Barracudas - and, ignoring it's utility against fighters for a moment, 55 of them deal about the same damage as 20 light N-Gauss (2.5 more, actually) while saving about 13000 tons mass (~14.4%), and, in a test ship I built for the purpose, costing 700m less. That's a lot of money.
The medium is indeed pretty good, just 400m more expensive than 20 HNPPC at the same damage and range and, as you say, leaving 8 slots open (though once you get above that anyways, that advantage goes out the window), which is admittedly an advantage few ships will be able to leverage.
Meanwhile the heavy...  ugh.
Another 200m more expensive, shorter ranged, and around 4000 tons heavier for the same damage.

So having them get both a crit chance like a missile and a higher chance of a penetrating crit might be a bit much. Light and heavy guns getting a missile-like chance, or the effective damage for golden BBs being raised by 10/5/15 would be absolutely justified given their enormous cost, though. And it really fits the missiles, does it not? Sort of inverted. They aren't in line, the middle one gets a better crit than the heaviest one (and slightly more fuel in the case of T-Ops).

With range brackets, I would indeed give the LNG a to-hit bonus at long and extreme range, in the same way that the Barracuda gets a to-Hit bonus in brackets because of its high short range when using actual ranges(the barracuda is arguably better in brackets). But, we aren't using those.

[truetanker]

Rumors have reached Illyria that the Marians are purchasing older Terran Hulls, but the pair of Cruisers or Lolas the Marians could afford do not concern the Palatinate Navy.

BWAAhahahhhalololololololol..... holding my sides to contain this infectious laughter in...


I so love this!

TT

[kindalas]

Second Part of Lyran turn fiction is up.

Tomorrow a veritable TRO is going up.

[truetanker]

Finished with my updated Legion-class Light Dropship.

And added more fluff...

TT

[Jester Motley]

Second Part of Lyran turn fiction is up.

Tomorrow a veritable TRO is going up.

More than I posted this turn?  Woof, that's gonna be a lot of designs.

[kindalas]

More than I posted this turn?  Woof, that's gonna be a lot of designs.

When I realized the scale of what I was doing I decided that to do it properly I would have to break it down into chunks.

Can't just say boom FC armor and LiFu Batts on everything.

Have to give each design the respect it deserves.

And I want to push the game's narrative so I can't just have smart logical designs that focus on min maxing. I need to kind of match the ERA's age of war narrative where everything starts to spiral out of control.

[UnLimiTeD]

What? Nah, I'm an advocate for peace.
The Combine has long been an advocate for mutual economic support and harmony.
Once that minor uprising on the coreward border has been squashed, the dragon'll be docile as a kitten.  O:-)
I'm with you can it comes to insane designs, though.  ;D

[Tyler Jorgensson]

Question for the masses....

So I just thought if this: a variant costs for R+D 10% of the ship cost, can’t be a change of more than 20K tonnage and 10 SI between the two.

For example the Lola I is 680K and 50 SI. Variant A can then be 700K and 60 SI.

Can Variant B then become 720K and 70 SI? Can this be done on the same turn as long as the R+D costs are paid? How many times could one do this per turn (assuming you had the money for such research). Does a variant have to built or can it simply be theoretical?

Thoughts while I’m driven crazy at work and trying to ignore the crazy customers.

[truetanker]

Conundrum I have is : Why is it called a Double U when it's clearly twin V's? ( w )

But in answering your question :

I'd allow it, if I was running this, but limit it to half the original SI so it can only go up 75 SI... any more just strains the structure. But you can triple the original tonnage, just not the SI, if you got the money.

TT

[kindalas]

Question for the masses....

So I just thought if this: a variant costs for R+D 10% of the ship cost, can’t be a change of more than 20K tonnage and 10 SI between the two.

For example the Lola I is 680K and 50 SI. Variant A can then be 700K and 60 SI.

Can Variant B then become 720K and 70 SI? Can this be done on the same turn as long as the R+D costs are paid? How many times could one do this per turn (assuming you had the money for such research). Does a variant have to built or can it simply be theoretical?

Thoughts while I’m driven crazy at work and trying to ignore the crazy customers.

Because each variant costs 10% for R&D and a brand new design costs 25% for R&D I don't think that there is a cost savings to be had.

Especially considering that a refit of an existing hull counts as a variant but is much more limited in what is possible.

[UnLimiTeD]

... So I just thought if this: a variant costs for R+D 10% of the ship cost, can’t be a change of more than 20K tonnage and 10 SI between the two.

For example the Lola I is 680K and 50 SI. Variant A can then be 700K and 60 SI.

Can Variant B then become 720K and 70 SI? ...

I've thought about this. No infinite chains for the same cost, of course, but you could potentially make a "double variant" per the rules and a new ship design close to an existing one for just 21% prototype cost.
Not sure the gains would really be impressive.

Conundrum I have is : Why is it called a Double U when it's clearly twin V's? ( w )

Because u and v were originally the same letter, I assume.

[Lagrange]

I made some minor updates to the CC turn since folks aren't finished.

(a) I added 1 BC/arc to the Deep Habwr.  This helps keeps any commercial captains from getting piratey.
(b) I added a few extra defense stations, as I realized I hadn't quite accounted for everything.  I also added a few spares so there are an even 650.
(c) I added a few spare Deep Habwr in case of loss/need so there are an even 60.

I made some adjustments to the master sheet to reflect the above.  In addition:
(1) the NL55s of the Pallada II are in the aft-side arc not the nose.
(2) It's easy to get confused between infantry bays and troops so I wrote out the full troop number.
(3) I added in the many new jumpships required to support the circuit.

Edit: a few more details
- A more optimized Heartbeat circuit (with a nifty new map).
- Added a secondary Highway network for faster warship transport (and commercial use).
- Expanded recharge stations to every world.
- Reduced Sailor's Mercy purchases to 6.
- Rearranged fleets and filled in details.
- Updated master spreadsheet to reflect the above.

[UnLimiTeD]

I just noticed I didn't update the sheet with my turn info. Sorry to move all the work your way, Smegish.  :-[

Sooo...  can I pawn up my invasion troopships to the army? I assume they'd be occasionally seen on the occasion of an actual invasion, but otherwise be out of my responsibility (and control).
Also considering turning the last Block I Fubuki into a museum- Again, I'd lose out on the scrap value, but it is the last surviving example of the first true combat design of the Combine, and it is a small price to pay for a monument to the pride of the nation.

@Lagrange
I've asked the question. I expect we might have an answer for the next iteration of the race. Carry on.  ;)

[marcussmythe]

I understand that its not fun paying for capabilities that arent being used.

A note: 
1.)  A count of invasion capability went into your land grab from the Terrans.
2.)  History indicates that the best way to discover you need a capability is to get rid of it.
3.)  If it moves in space, for this game, its navy.  If you dont do spacelift and invasion support, then the DC becomes less capable in that regard.  How you feel about that is up to you, and the Coordinator.

[UnLimiTeD]

True about that.
Though my driving force in this regard is actually that the DC military, on the Navy side, is sort of inspired by the imperial Japanese Navy - and during that time, their Army actually had their own light carriers.
But I suppose a simplification of proceedings in the context of our game makes sense, so I guess I'll keep them. Until I build something bigger, of course.

[Lagrange]

True about that.
Though my driving force in this regard is actually that the DC military, on the Navy side, is sort of inspired by the imperial Japanese Navy - and during that time, their Army actually had their own light carriers.
But I suppose a simplification of proceedings in the context of our game makes sense, so I guess I'll keep them. Until I build something bigger, of course.

Why not just say "The army will take over running the ships."?  In the game, the budget will get divided between the naval part of the army and the navy.  You can setup whatever constraint you want on how the overall budget is subdivided.

[UnLimiTeD]

Well, I'm just running the navy side.
And my budget is just the Navy's budget. That said, I would assume the DCMS has a say in where those ships go. So the abstraction marcus alludes to means it might as well, as we, as players and head of our nations admiralty, don't really have a say about what happens where, how. We just give guidelines. So whether I assume the Army runs those ships with support of a few naval technicians, or they are the Navy's, but the army fills them with purpose (troops, I mean troops) makes no apparent difference on the rules level.

[Lagrange]

Well, I'm just running the navy side.

If you think of yourself as "running the ships" rather than "running the navy", I believe you have all the flexibility needed.

[marcussmythe]

Think of it as 'being responsible for design work and budget for things that move in space or directly implicate things in space (like HPGs and Castles)'

[UnLimiTeD]

Think of it as 'being responsible for design work and budget for things that move in space or directly implicate things in space (like HPGs and Castles)'

??? But then I'd also be responsible for army dropships, and I can assure you I'm not.
Sure, an invasion warship may be in the Navy's budget, but where it goes is for the coordinator or the warlords to decide.
Meanwhile, I assume the actual Navy, the fleets, are not ordered based on the districts, and as such not under direct command of the warlords.

... wait. Does that mean we can design our own castles?
I feel a little squeamish with importing Naval PPCs from...   somewhere.  <.<