Canonical Squadron/Fleet Actions with Interesting Details

[rancke]

Has anyone thought about the Zhodani Pre-Cog Artifact?

As little as possible. Except in time-travel campaigns, I dislike causality violations intensely. It always puzzles me when people balk at piddling violations of physical laws but blithely accept causality violations without a murmur.

Maybe Zho High Command "saw" a battle at Two Suns and thus sent an appropriate force to the calibration point that the Imperials are on the way to destroy having received info about it from the Federation of Arden intel community.

Still doesn't explain why the Imperium sent the bulk of its operational forces in the Regina subsector to destroy a calibration point.

See problem solved and even get to work in the Arden intel weenies too.

I'm afraid I don't see the problem solved. :nonono:


Hans

 

[rancke]

357,628,220,000cr cost of Tigris 500,000t

1,345,210,000cr cost of Kinunir 1,200t

So do you want 350 Kinunir or 1 Tigris, Admirals?

Tigress, not Tigris. They're named for female great cats, not rivers.

Those aren't the only two options. I might want 109 Sloans or 20 Gionettis or 13 Ghalalks or 7½ Atlantics or 3 Plankwells.

Or even an assortment of well designed ships.


Hans

 

[rancke]

All that is true, but her size makes her easy to hit with our battery fire, her fighters will have to deal with the same AA fire as we will and her batteries are so tightly connected as to leave large holes till they give each secondary local control, and last we have umpty-thousand battle hardened Drop Marines who are about to make an Assualt for The Books.

"On the other hand, the Tigress' sheer bulk gives it a survival advantage that enables it to stand in the line of battle against ships mounting spinals of their own, much less lesser ships. It and its fighter wings will be destroying our pitiful Kinunirs by the scores and hundreds without getting much more than scratched itself.

Gentlemen, RUN AWAY! It's every ship for itself!"

(That's my story, and I'm sticking to it. :devil


Hans

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Skirting the edge, so naming no names...

"On the other hand, the Tigress' sheer bulk gives it a survival advantage that enables it to stand in the line of battle against ships mounting spinals of their own, much less lesser ships. It and its fighter wings will be destroying our pitiful Kinunirs by the scores and hundreds without getting much more than scratched itself.

Gentlemen, RUN AWAY! It's every ship for itself!"

(That's my story, and I'm sticking to it. :devil


Hans

Trying to stay out of Pit territory, I think I can safely say that some recent real world navy exercises proved my theory out, which is why I picked lots of little ships. I didn't just look at numbers, I meant those points I made, she (the Tirgress) is vulnerable to defensive overload by lots of incoming stuff. :smirk:

 

[rancke]

I think I can safely say that some recent real world navy exercises proved my theory out, which is why I picked lots of little ships.

I don't see how anything relating to TL7 wet navy warfare can prove anything about TL9+ space warfare.

I meant those points I made, she (the Tirgress) is vulnerable to defensive overload by lots of incoming stuff. :smirk:

I'm not well versed in HG combat. Perhaps a Tigress is vulnerable according to the rules, but the rules contradicts the setting material, which is the point I was making. According to the rules, seven Atlantics can mission kill a Tigress for the loss of one or at most two Atlantics. According to Fighting Ships, battleships are tough enough to stand in the line of battle and cruisers are not. Obvious contradiction there. Unless bulk provides an undocumented defensive advantage all of its own.

Which is what I meant by 'that's my story'. I'm not claiming that it doesn't contradict canon. I'm just claiming that canon contradicts itself.

(Speaking of canon, didn't someone say that MgT or T5 gave big ships some sort of advantage? More hit points or something?)


Hans

 

[Condottiere]

I'm thinking trench run.

But in general, a balanced force should be able to beat an unbalanced one four out of five times.

The exceptions tend to be ambushes and when one force is heavily adapted to local environmental conditions.

 

[Reban]

I don't see how anything relating to TL7 wet navy warfare can prove anything about TL9+ space warfare.

Swarm tactics.

They don't just relate to surface navy actions but can be applied to ground and air combat and also appear in the natural world.

 

[robject]

Oooh, we need Tigris and Euphrates-class ships.

 

[Condottiere]

And de Nile stealth ships.

 

[rancke]

Swarm tactics.

They don't just relate to surface navy actions but can be applied to ground and air combat and also appear in the natural world.

I guess that's why the few line-of-battle ships that were built during the Age of Sail were so often swamped by the multitude of brigs and sloops that were the mainstay of navies in those days.


Hans

 

[Condottiere]

If you can isolate a Man'o'War.

You tend to have to approach lines of heavily armed warships, who have plenty of time to aim their cannons in your direction.

 

[Xerxeskingofking]

(Speaking of canon, didn't someone say that MgT or T5 gave big ships some sort of advantage? More hit points or something?)


Hans

the MgT rules give ships a hull and structure points, which are directly tied to their tonnage (1 point of each for every 50 tons), so a bigger ship is better able to absorb damage. Plus, it my understanding that the critical tables are much less savage.

the intent, as I understand, was to shift form the classic traveller "unhurt...unhurt...crippled and out of combat" paradigm to one where a ship could take a pounding, but still be a effective combatant (or at least not be killed on the first solid hit)

the MgT rules tend to inform a somewhat different set of design choices. missles, even nukes, are effectively useless due to piddling damage and many addition modifiers on top of those for energy weapons. the best bang for tonnage is particle beam turrets, which give you 4d6 for a 1 ton weapon, appear at a stupidly low tech level (TL8, in fact), and give you 99 tons to do something else with (call it 95 if you account for the gunners stateroom).

the "optimum" ship under MgT rules, in my opinion, would be something like the reimaged Battlestar Galactica, a heavily armed carrier that can launch large numbers of strikecraft, and back them up with a significant main battery of meason bays and particle turrets. the fighters would be also armed with particle weapons (maybe the 5 ton barbette version), which when massed (using MgT's fighter squadron and barrage rules), let them pose a genuine threat to capital ships.

 

[TheDS]

I recall something I read about when they were designing a battleship. I don't remember which battleship, or even which era (WW1 or 2), just that it was post-dreadnought. The impression in my mind was that they were going to put ONLY 16-inch guns on it. But some simulation or something they ran had only 3 destroyers being able to defeat the ship, and so they decided to also put several 5-inch batteries on it.

More recent thinking about this combined with more recent readings of early 20th century combat leads me to believe that torpedoes were the weapon that caused the most concern to the designers. Being able to blast the destroyers before they could get close enough to launch torpedoes with a much higher rate of fire was the solution they chose.

Caveat being that I can't remember further details or where I read it.

The point being that "quantity has a quality all its own".

 

[Orr]

The point being that "quantity has a quality all its own".

I believe you're referring to the jeune ecole theory. The French were it's first proponents and many nations, including Britain who the theory was aimed at, adopted it either in whole or part.

Jeune ecole depends on there being a weapon which A) is dangerous to large ships and B) can be carried by small(er) ships. Historically, that weapon was first explosive shells and finally torpedoes. In the OTU, that weapon is the meson gun. (Which hasn't stopped people from attempting and failing over 30+ years to "reinvent" the torpedo for OTU ship combat.)

As TLs increase, meson guns pack a bigger punch for the same volume while power plant improvements allows small(ish) vessel to carry them. The torpedo-armed "fighter" people have been wanting for thirty years is actually a meson gun-armed rider.

 

[Condottiere]

One concept is called the streetfighter, where a whole bunch of small ships team up to destroy a more valuable one, and even if you lose nine out of ten, you still win.

There are a number of problems with it, including not everyone is keen to go on a one way mission, logistics tend to suggest short range, and coordination would imply training, which should make the crew rather more valuable than just being thrown away.

As with secondary armament, experience indicates that a fly swatter solution is likely to be found.

 

[aramis]

As TLs increase, meson guns pack a bigger punch for the same volume while power plant improvements allows small(ish) vessel to carry them. The torpedo-armed "fighter" people have been wanting for thirty years is actually a meson gun-armed rider.

And, under TNE, one can build meson armed Battle Dress by TL14. Doesn't do a lot of damage, but...

Which exemplifies part of why no one really wants to integrate what's doable under TNE to the OTU, because if one does, it becomes rather unrecognizable.

 

[pendragonman]

One concept is called the streetfighter, where a whole bunch of small ships team up to destroy a more valuable one, and even if you lose nine out of ten, you still win.

There are a number of problems with it, including not everyone is keen to go on a one way mission, logistics tend to suggest short range, and coordination would imply training, which should make the crew rather more valuable than just being thrown away.

As with secondary armament, experience indicates that a fly swatter solution is likely to be found.

To you, I give Taffy 3 and the Battle off Samar.

 

[Orr]

To you, I give Taffy 3 and the Battle off Samar.

That encounter is too screwy to use as an example for anything other than How Reality Can Be Much More Screwy Than Fiction.

Let me suggest 2014's The World Wonder'd: What Really Happened Off Samar by Robert Lundgren.

 

[Condottiere]

I believe I have included all the pilots which made attacks during the surface battle and the story ends October 26th. If people are truly interested or like what I have written I was thinking of asking Tony to put up on the web site those sections cut out of the original manuscript which included Palawan passage, Sulu Sea, Sibuyan Sea, and Cape Engano. For most people what they may find interesting is the details on the Japanese side. I don't think anyone has gone into as much detail of what they all documented including damage reports and in some cases how their ships sank.

I believe in what I wrote to be as accurate as it can be. The footnotes are extremely important as they give additional information as well as document the sources.

Thanks again,

Rob

 

[mike wightman]

I recall something I read about when they were designing a battleship. I don't remember which battleship, or even which era (WW1 or 2), just that it was post-dreadnought. The impression in my mind was that they were going to put ONLY 16-inch guns on it. But some simulation or something they ran had only 3 destroyers being able to defeat the ship, and so they decided to also put several 5-inch batteries on it.

More recent thinking about this combined with more recent readings of early 20th century combat leads me to believe that torpedoes were the weapon that caused the most concern to the designers. Being able to blast the destroyers before they could get close enough to launch torpedoes with a much higher rate of fire was the solution they chose.

Caveat being that I can't remember further details or where I read it.

The point being that "quantity has a quality all its own".

The destroyer - or torpedo boat destroyer to give it its full designation - was the class of ship built to counter the torpedo boats. It was later realised that the destroyer could carry a few torpedo tubes of their own and be a threat to the big ships.

Its a rock paper scissors thing - torpedo boat vs BB, destroyer vs torpedo boat, BB vs destroyer.