Chrysanthemums and Fer-de-Lances

[aramis]

Two key systems have major impacts of TL under HG... power plants and armor

Breakpoint TL's
15 PP (1Td/EP)
14 Armor (1%)
13 PP (2Td/EP)
12 Armor (2%)
10 Armor (3%)
9 PP (3Td/EP)
7 both (initial stage) (4% armor, and 4Td/EP)

The TL14 hull is disadvantaged by only one point of maximum armor over the TL15 one... but it cuts the PP size in half.

Bay Meson guns also massively improve - half the size! (A factor 5 meson gun is a 100Td bay at TL14, and a 50Td bay at TL15).

No other weapons have significant improvements at TL15.

Of course, Jump drives... but it isn't like the JD installed is any the better. There's no TL improvement on a J4 drive built at TL 15 vs 14 vs 13.

 

[shadowcat20]

The Crys hull design is a much older design really.

Look at the Destroyer counters in Imperim. That hull shape was before the fall of the first Imp.

 

[rancke]

The Crys hull design is a much older design really.

Look at the Destroyer counters in Imperim. That hull shape was before the fall of the first Imp.

The hull shape is undoubtedly old. The destroyer type is old. But the Chrysanthemum is a class that was designed after the Imperium started building TL15 ships. The TL14 class that it replaced would have been a Gymnomenia Class or a Shambaugh Class or something.


Hans

 

[Ulsyus]

The Crys hull design is a much older design really.

Look at the Destroyer counters in Imperim. That hull shape was before the fall of the first Imp.

The broad hull shape may be old, but that could be a function of it being effective. The details would change as new building techniques and materials were developed, internal structure would be modified to better suit the intended mission, and the layout of components would alter as technology marched on.

Could it be said that up until the advent of contemporary 21C stealthed naval ship designs that the broad hull shape of vessels hadn't changed much between the 60's and the 90's?

 

[martletsquire]

I think the issue with this forum is that it has become a clear case of Vilani vs Solomani. Now, before I get flamed, just cool yer jets, drink some of your favorite beverages, and eat some food. Hey, you Vilani fellows over there might try something the Sollies invented called flavoring....

Seriously. Think about it.

Vilani - Everything must match, no deviations, Tab A goes into Slot B, subordinate yourself and the universe to the Imperium.

Solomani - If you cheat and it works, then it ain't cheating. Or, in Southern, "Hey, Lookie Here! You can fit a Jet Engine ina Ford Fiesta..."

Seriously.

I mean, the Vilani want everything to match correctly, the TL11 curtains matching the TL11 rods matching the TL11 house matching the TL11 family.

The Sollie will stick TL11 curtains on the TL5 rods attached to the TL3 wall façade that he put in his TL12 Admiral's cabin aboard his TL12 Flaghip.

Or consider the following scenario... Called "Defense of the Harbor"

Vilani -
"Lieutenant. Why did the harbor defenses fall? We sent you 4 of the recent shipments of autocannon, which should have been able to smash those Sol bastards to flinders when they came into the basin!"
"Noble Sir, the instructions said to mount them on the ZsquiggleBd17 mount, and we only had the -14a mount, and we sent for a technical manual that would cover it, but by then the Sols were HERE!"

Solomani -
"Lieutenant. Why is there a Chinese copy of an American 0.50BMG HMG mounted on that Roman trireme, with that brand new Russkie MRL? And what is all that floating in the harbor?"
"Sir, we didn't have anything covering the harbor, so Stevens brought out his pet Browning and Maximos had the natives whip up a trireme to prove his point about Roman naval power with Chun from the Asian delegation, and we had that MRL just sitting around and it doesn't make a good poker table anyways, and then a bunch of Zirkis showed up with their floaters and we pasted them into flinders. Sir."
"That's all the answer you have? Dammit, where's my coffee shipment?"

Okay, longwinded, but CT needs to evolve a bit. The original books were very basic, and even High Guard was a wash over the wonders of space tech. I mean, how many 5x8 pages in HG vs 8x11 in FF&S?

And in an imperium where it takes almost a year to get from the center to the edges, a good design, from TL11 could easily be updated and built at higher tech levels. I mean, look at the Type S and all its variants. We have TL11 Scouts right alongside modern, TL15 advanced naval scouts and they all look like, well, a TYPE S!

Its a game. Use your Sollie brain! Quit channeling some slope-headed vilani. AAAAAAHHHHHHHRRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

I mean, if it works, then why not? Just saying...

I'll be standing over against this wall waiting for your replies.

 

[rancke]

I'll be standing over against this wall waiting for your replies.

I'm afraid I don't get your point.


Hans

 

[martletsquire]

Firing squad...

Okay, musta been the box of weirdies I ate for dinner. Just being weird.

 

[rancke]

Firing squad...

No, the point before that. The substance of your post. I don't understand what you're trying to say.


Hans

 

[martletsquire]

Ah...

Well, it all relates to Shipbuilding, and to philosophies of production that are tied into cultural issues. So let's remove some of my epic weirdness and we'll see.

Vilani method. Very classic HG. Hull built at TL14, so must be TL14. Hull built at TL15, so must be TL15. So that TL14 AHL with the TL15 Meson Gun and updated power and jump systems is still a TL14 ship.

Solomani method. Slap that TL13 weapon system into a TL10 hull with a TL11 power system and a TL12 jump with a TL9 toilet and we'll call it TL12ish. Think of an Iowa class battleship with harpoons and a gatling CIWS. TL6 ship with TL8 weapons.

I just find it hard to stick to the hard and fast TL due to Hull rule, due to what I see happening in the real world with real military equipment. (thus the vilani-solomani comparison above and the subject of my previous diatribe.)

As to the Chrissies, I see no problem with the basic class being introduced at TL14 under different stats, and the design being so successful that a TL15 version being produced. It is why IMTU I have the Chrysanthemum-14 as a naval reserve or as a sector or system navy design, while the Chrystanthemum-15 is an ImpNavy design. (It screws with the mind of pirates, too).

Does that make sense? It isn't a version of "the glass half-full/half empty", but more of "the glass half full of rum, half empty of cola".

 

[rancke]

Vilani method. Very classic HG. Hull built at TL14, so must be TL14. Hull built at TL15, so must be TL15. So that TL14 AHL with the TL15 Meson Gun and updated power and jump systems is still a TL14 ship.

Except that the AHL with the TL15 meson gun doesn't have updated power and jump systems. Indeed, the computer isn't even a TL14 computer, much less a TL15 one; it's a 6bis (TL12). So it's perfectly reasonable, by Vilani and Solomani logic, to consider it a TL14 ship with a TL15 spinal.

Solomani method. Slap that TL13 weapon system into a TL10 hull with a TL11 power system and a TL12 jump with a TL9 toilet and we'll call it TL12ish. Think of an Iowa class battleship with harpoons and a gatling CIWS. TL6 ship with TL8 weapons.

But a TL6 ship with TL8 weapons isn't a TL7 ship. That's not fresh and bold and progressive; it's just muddleheaded.

As to the Chrissies, I see no problem with the basic class being introduced at TL14 under different stats, and the design being so successful that a TL15 version being produced.

Nor do I. What I have a problem with is the TL14 version being considered the same class as the TL15 version.


Hans

 

[Ulsyus]

Perfectly, both the cultural and TL elements.

There would be the consideration of time-in-service. The hulls would be subject to stress and wear, so like modern aircraft could have components replaced, sometimes many, to zero-time them for continued use.

Plus, upgrading the sensors and such in a TL14 hull to TL15 standard makes a lot of sense. The players in my campaign have done that when they were able to get their hands on them.

 

[Carlobrand]

...But a TL6 ship with TL8 weapons isn't a TL7 ship. That's not fresh and bold and progressive; it's just muddleheaded. ...

But it's a very dangerous and well armored muddle.

I think what ultimately speaks to the tech level of a ship is what happens when it shoots those guns or starts taking fire. Muddle or not, if Missouri had state of the art electronics and state of the art missiles that would send ships to the bottom as well as any contemporary cruiser, and it had state of the art defenses that could stop inbounds as well as any contemporary cruiser, then it's fair to call it a TL8 ship regardless of when the keel was laid - unless there's something specific about that keel or the other legacy parts that marks it as inferior in combat to its TL8 cousins. As with many things, the proof is in the performance.

Now, AHL with a TL12 computer and TL15 meson weapons - I would call that a chimera.

 

[rancke]

But it's a very dangerous and well armored muddle.

No, no. Calling it a TL7 ship is muddleheaded. Calling it a TL6 ship would be justified; calling it a TL8 ship might be justified. But calling it a TL7 ship is incorrect whatever way you look at it.

I think what ultimately speaks to the tech level of a ship is what happens when it shoots those guns or starts taking fire. Muddle or not, if Missouri had state of the art electronics and state of the art missiles that would send ships to the bottom as well as any contemporary cruiser, and it had state of the art defenses that could stop inbounds as well as any contemporary cruiser, then it's fair to call it a TL8 ship regardless of when the keel was laid - unless there's something specific about that keel or the other legacy parts that marks it as inferior in combat to its TL8 cousins. As with many things, the proof is in the performance.

But evidently it's not what FS would call it. And since I'm using FS as evidence, what it would call it counts for quite a lot, wouldn't you say?

Now, AHL with a TL12 computer and TL15 meson weapons - I would call that a chimera.

But FS calls it a TL14 ship.


Hans

 

[Carlobrand]

No, no. Calling it a TL7 ship is muddleheaded. Calling it a TL6 ship would be justified; calling it a TL8 ship might be justified. But calling it a TL7 ship is incorrect whatever way you look at it.

...

But evidently it's not what FS would call it. And since I'm using FS as evidence, what it would call it counts for quite a lot, wouldn't you say?

...

Oh, I agree. They can call a horse a duck, but at the end of the day, it's still eating hay. If FS wants to call it a TL14 ship, some poor sap's going to be very disappointed when he tries to take it into combat against another TL14 ship. That beast is neither lion nor goat.

 

[martletsquire]

Okay, the AHL was a bad example, due to it not getting new drives (maybe not). And I never said the upgraded Iowa class is TL7. It is a TL6 hull with TL7 and TL8 components added on. And it can still kick the carp out of any other ship out there, not to mention being the only vessels afloat that have a built in emp hardened main fire computer (Check out the info on the main gun computer on this class. It’s wild what you can do with gears, levers, do-hickeys and thing-a-ma-jigs). So, in that case, its not muddleheaded. Its practical (Solomani). Muddleheaded would be not upgrading and modifying and keeping a good design in production just because its old (Vilani)

What I guess I am saying is that the HG/CT system is flawed in comparison to the real world. Maybe listing a vessel at a particular TL only is handy, but it is also inflexible, and lacking in wiggle-room.(Vilani) It is nice to know what TL a ship is introduced at, but in the grand scheme of things, that may not be the TL it will end up at, so to speak (Solomani).

Seeing as the main cost of a ship is hull and drive, it is not inconceivable that all the other parts will be upgraded as new stuff comes out, with new sensors, bridge, crew accommodations, fuel processors, weapon systems and so forth being added on to the ship over its lifetime. To keep the ships relatively similar, the upgrades should be done in programmed upgrades, with some upgrades coming early to individual ships in a class as major damage is fixed (from accident or battle) as needed. And if a new drive comes along that is better and fits, why not replace an older drive. Save money that way, and get a new/improved model.(Solomani). Heck, it may be cheaper to gut a hull and put all the tasty drives and such into a new hull than to build a whole new vessel, depending on how yards work IYTU.

Then there is the wear factor. Ships on the edge will “wear out” quicker than ships in the interior. Stresses due to combat, relief missions, lower standards of maintenance and - especially - more operational time vs down time will stretch a frontier vessel more than a coreworld hull of the same age. So what do you do? Frontier ship wears out after 10 years. Interior ship wears out after 40-100 years. Unless a program of cycling vessels from the interior to the exterior and back is implemented, then within 20 years, a class will be “out of service date” on the frontier, while basically starting to get worn in just right in the interior. When is the cut-off for the class? When do you stop producing a good design? Do you build new versions of the same design? Do you replace with something totally new and unfamiliar? Is your fleet built of new hulls only, or do you have hulls that “your grandfather/mother sailed on”? (Real World Example: a reason that big ticket items tend to be rated in hours of use for operational life expectancy. That 1972 Cessna 172 may be considerably “newer” than that 1992 Cessna 172 due to hours of use. The 1992 may be chronologically newer but used a lot while the 1972 may have only a few hours on it.)

Also, to take a tangent here, there is the Soviet construction method, which is to create a class and make good versions for themselves, and sell “chimp” models to others. (one of the many reasons the Iraqi tanks did not stand a chance – they were not up to the top level of achievement available to Soviet/Russian front-line MBT of the same chassis.) Thus, an example would be a dumbed-down Chrissie sold to a client state. Same hull, same drives, no cool top-level imperial stuff aboard. (like selling a Gazelle to mercs – remove the PAWs and replace with missiles or more lasers to conform to “only the IN can have PAWs” rule)(Or sell the Chrissie-TL14 design to a lower tech world/yard for cold-hard credits, much like the Soviets did with many of their designs.) (Western Powers do this too, as nations can buy dumbed down F-15s and such)

There is also fiscal/political aspect of large scale expenses such as what is involved in navy ships. There may not be money “available” for a new ship or class of ships, but there is money “available” to upgrade old ships. (You don’t think this is possible? Go to a major business that pays lots of overtime, and you will most likely find out there is money in the OT budget but no money in the regular hour budget, so you can pay people to work overtime, but you can’t hire new people at regular hours to work the same job. (Eventually you will burn out your OT workers and end up losing key personnel that way)). It is a big decision that your politicos must make: is it more sensible to upgrade existing ships from your upgrade budget (Solomani) than to wait a decade or more or never for a new ship class “down the line”(Vilani)?

So, which pattern of behavior is YTU? Fixed rules, all ships must match, new classes replace old classes (Vilani pattern); or keeping old classes updated and building new classes as needed (Somonani pattern)? Or is it a mix of new classes produced at a reasonable rate, but good classes kept in production or service and updated (The Imperial pattern IMTU)?

 

[martletsquire]

And you guys with your short posts can type so much quicker than my long-winded ones that I import from Word. Darned you short posters...:rofl:

 

[shadowcat20]

Beginning to get the point a bit.

The term tech lev is the issue here.

A tec lev 14 destroyer is just a Chrys class DD. The tec 15 version is the same Chrys DD with a mod pack A. Pirates will not be concerned weather it is a Tec 14 or 15, they will be concerned if it has the new refits yet or is a reserve ship.

With the distances covered and the different shipyards building hulls look at it like Soviet tanks from WWII. They all look alike and have roughly the same parts but every factory had things they did a little different in building them.

Upgrades made as new hulls are produced and upgrades made during repairs from battle damage will make them all different. Not all are going to be perfect copies of each other.

Good short version???

 

[Ulsyus]

So if something's going to be given a TL rating, should it be the most advanced components, the majority of the components, or be just arbitrarily picked as somewhere between those two?

 

[rancke]

A tec lev 14 destroyer is just a Chrys class DD.

No, it's the destroyer class that was the predecessor of the Chrysanthemum class.

The tec 15 version is the same Chrys DD with a mod pack A.

No, it's a 1000T destroyer designed with a TL15 power plant and PA turrets and whatever changes the extra space allows. The predecessor is a 1000T destroyer with a TL14 power plant (twice as big) and PA barbettes and some other unspecified differences due to the smaller space left over for other things. Oh, and a factor 8bis computer instead of a 9bis.

With the distances covered and the different shipyards building hulls look at it like Soviet tanks from WWII. They all look alike and have roughly the same parts but every factory had things they did a little different in building them.

No doubt there are small differences. But the key word there is 'small'. It's not like one shipyard puts in a 20T¹ power plant and another puts in a 40T¹ power plant. It's not like one shipyard puts in a factor 9 power plant and another a factor 10 power plant. It's not like one shipyard puts in PA turrets and another PA barbetters. And so on and so forth.

¹ I didn't look up the actual size, but a TL14 PP is twice the size of a TL15 PP with the same output.​

Hans

 

[rancke]

So if something's going to be given a TL rating, should it be the most advanced components, the majority of the components, or be just arbitrarily picked as somewhere between those two?

It's not a question of 'should'. It's a question of what FS does, which is giving it the TL rating that it was built at.


Hans