Fleet Production

[mike wightman]

Back in the day we only considered FFW counters.

We should have taken a look at the IE counters too. But that raises a question.

Can you just move a counter from FFW to IE and vise versa, or is some conversion required since they are different games with different design intentions from the outset.

 

[Garnfellow]

Back in the day we only considered FFW counters.

We should have taken a look at the IE counters too. But that raises a question.

Can you just move a counter from FFW to IE and vise versa, or is some conversion required since they are different games with different design intentions from the outset.

I think the differences could be as simple as they are different games and the counters aren't supposed to be interchangeable, although they certainly seem compatible. The old formulas have put us in the same ballpark.

But perhaps the counters are more-or-less interchangeable, but simply reflect different scenarios: FFW is a short TL 15 v. TL 14 conflict with fairly fresh forces; IE is the end of a long TL 14 v. TL 13 conflict with (presumably) fairly spent forces.

If you just change the assumption that each squadron contains 8 capital ships of the same class to each squadron contains 4 or 6 capital ships of the class plus 2 to 4 ships of a "lesser" class, the Attack Ratings at the higher end fall into line with IE. This change would more closely model the orders of battle presented in Fighting Ships of the Solomani Confederation, and also fits better with the squadron organization in Fighting Ships of the Shattered Imperium, which usually has only 3 or 4 battleships in a BatRon. Both IE and FSotSI reflect navies at the end of a brutal war, so maybe they should be in alignment.

Of course, less number of capital ships per squadron doesn't explain why the IE Defense Ratings would be higher. Maybe the IE squadrons have many more escorts than assumed by the formula. Perhaps the Rim campaign took a huge toll on Imperial capital ships; depleted BatRons were consolidated into new units with less battleships but many more escorts per squadron. The overall effect is lower Attack Ratings but higher Defense Ratings.

I find it a little curious that the two squadrons with the highest Attack Rating (6) are Solomani: the 390th and 375th FleetRons.

 

[Condottiere]

I don't know how or if Solomani naval units were canonically organized, but as described, the Confederation organizes it's combat ships in that era into task groups of two or four primary units with supporting ships, the elite formations would have four and/or latest commissioned vessels.

 

[Garnfellow]

I don't know how or if Solomani naval units were canonically organized, but as described, the Confederation organizes it's combat ships in that era into task groups of two or four primary units with supporting ships, the elite formations would have four and/or latest commissioned vessels.

Fighting Ships of the Solomani Confederation is canonical, and probably provides the most detailed description of naval organization in all of Traveller: we have the specific composition of squadrons at the start of the Rim War and this description lines up with other canonical sources. Like the Imperium, ships are organized into squadrons (though with slightly different terminology); in peacetime these are assigned to subsector fleets that are organized into sector fleets. The big difference is, as you note, that during war the squadrons are grouped into mission-specific task forces. Solomani member-states can maintain their own navies, but these train with the regular navy and are seconded to the Confederation during wartime.

 

[mike wightman]

Two quotes stand out for me:

A squadron represents a group of (usually) 2 to 8 large warships, together with their supporting craft. Such squadrons comprise the main fighting elements of interstellar fleets.

and

The Solomani squadrons in the game are incapable of making interstellar jumps (these squadrons are non-starships left at Terra for repair while their transports were pressed into service elsewhere, and they were abandoned to their fate when the operating remnants of the Solomani Grand Fleet withdrew from the region).

Then there are the counters themselves, all tf the SN squadrons are BR and all of the IN BatRons are likewise BR rather than BB.

 

[Garnfellow]

Two quotes stand out for me:

and

Then there are the counters themselves, all tf the SN squadrons are BR and all of the IN BatRons are likewise BR rather than BB.

That is a great point. Missed the quote about the Solomani ships.

 

[Garnfellow]

Here is another pass, showing the squadron ratings depending on the number of main capital ships present. (I have excluded the carrier squadrons, since those are noticeably different in composition.) With four or five capital ships, we seem to be closer to the IE counter ratings; the Defense Rating is still low but these numbers do not yet account for escort ships, which could add anywhere from +0 to +3 to Defense.

Al	TL	Jump	kdt	Ship Class	Type	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
Im	13	3	50	Huron	bombardment cruiser	0-0-2	0-1-2	0-1-2	0-1-2	0-1-2	0-2-2	0-2-3
Im	14	5	60	AHL	fleet intruder	0-0-2	1-1-2	1-1-2	1-1-2	2-2-2	2-3-2	2-3-2
Im	14	4	90	Effendi	heavy cruiser	1-1-2	1-1-2	1-2-2	1-2-2	1-2-2	2-3-3	2-3-4
Im	13	4	100	Arlumer	heavy cruiser	0-0-2	1-0-2	1-0-2	2-0-2	2-0-2	2-0-2	3-0-2
Im	14	4	70	Zahvat	strike cruiser	1-0-2	2-0-2	2-0-2	3-0-2	3-0-2	4-0-3	4-0-4
Im	14	4	200	Inkaalur	light battleship	1-0-2	2-0-2	2-0-2	3-0-2	3-0-2	4-1-3	4-1-4
Im	14	4	75	Atlantic	heavy cruiser	1-1-2	2-1-2	2-1-2	3-2-2	3-2-2	4-2-3	4-2-4
Im	13	3	30	Timarin	battle rider	2-0-2	2-0-2	3-0-2	4-1-2	4-1-3	5-1-4	6-1-5
Im	13	3	350	Tiananmen	battleship	2-1-2	3-1-2	4-1-2	4-1-2	5-2-2	6-2-3	7-2-4
Im	14	4	30	Quiquilat	battle rider	2-0-2	3-0-2	4-0-2	5-1-2	6-1-2	7-1-2	8-1-3
Im	14	4	400	Perisher	fast dreadnought	2-1-2	3-1-2	4-1-2	5-1-2	6-2-2	7-2-3	8-2-4
Im	14	4	500	Triton	heavy battleship	2-0-2	3-2-2	4-2-2	5-2-2	6-2-2	7-4-3	8-4-4
Im	14	4	700	Dlan	dreadnought	2-1-2	3-3-2	4-3-2	5-4-2	6-4-2	7-5-2	8-6-3
So	13	0	30	Valiant	monitor	0-0-2	0-0-2	0-0-2	0-0-2	0-0-3	0-0-4	0-0-5
So	13	3	60	Minsk	heavy cruiser	1-0-2	1-0-2	2-0-2	2-0-2	2-0-3	3-0-4	3-0-5
So	14	4	40	Beijing	deep strike cruiser	1-0-2	2-0-2	2-0-2	2-1-2	3-1-2	3-1-2	4-1-3
So	14	4	70	Normandy	heavy cruiser	1-0-2	2-0-2	2-0-2	3-1-2	3-1-2	4-1-3	4-1-4
So	13	3	50	Yamamato	strike cruiser	1-0-2	2-1-2	2-1-2	3-1-2	3-1-3	4-1-4	4-2-5
So	13	3	130	Victory	battlecruiser	2-0-2	2-0-2	3-0-2	4-0-2	4-0-3	5-0-4	6-0-5
So	13	3	150	Zeus	battlecruiser	2-0-2	3-0-2	4-0-2	4-0-2	5-0-3	6-0-4	7-0-5
So	14	4	250	Prometheus	fast dreadnought	2-0-2	3-0-2	4-0-2	5-0-2	6-0-2	7-0-3	8-0-4

 

[mike wightman]

I really like this format of rating by capital ship number from 2-8.

 

[sfchbryan]

Back in the day we only considered FFW counters.

We should have taken a look at the IE counters too. But that raises a question.

Can you just move a counter from FFW to IE and vise versa, or is some conversion required since they are different games with different design intentions from the outset.

They are also different TL levels.

The FFW took place over a century after IE

 

[Garnfellow]

I really like this format of rating by capital ship number from 2-8.

In theory these are additive and one could use this to create mixed squadrons -- four heavy battleships, two strike cruisers, four destroyers = rating of 5-2-8.

 

[Garnfellow]

Adding squadrons: squadrons can be combined. Each individual rating stacks, but no value can exceed 8. For each unit added, subtract 1 from the combined Defense Rating.

Example: The 1st Solomani FleetRon “Old Ironsides”: 4 Prometheus class fast dreadnoughts (4-0-2), 2 Normandy-class heavy cruisers (1-0-2), 1 Madrid-class light cruiser (0-1-2) and 14 Tau Ceti class Destroyers (0-0-3) and (0-0-3) plus support ships. This gives the squadron a total Attack Rating of 4 + 1 + 0 + 0 + 0 = 5, Bombardment Rating of 0 + 0 + 1 + 0 + 0 = 1, Defense Rating of 2 + 2 + 2 + 3 + 3 - 4 = 8.

The final squadron rating of 5-1-8 fits well with Invasion Earth.

 

[Garnfellow]

For each attack by a group of squadrons upon a group of SDB wings or by a group of SDB wings upon a group of squadrons, their bombardment factors are totaled. The total bombardment factor of a group determines which column of the space combat table: bombardment is used to resolve the attack.

What is the Bombardment rating here modeling? Using Bomb for space units against ground units is obvious, but what does this mean to use a BatRon's Bombardment against a SDB wing, and vise versa?

 

[McPerth]

What is the Bombardment rating here modeling? Using Bomb for space units against ground units is obvious, but what does this mean to use a BatRon's Bombardment against a SDB wing, and vise versa?

Just my take, so take it with a huge grain of salt, but I think bombardment represents secondary weaponry, that is the one used both against small ships (SDBs) and for ground support (at least in MT, i guess in striker too, modst those weaponry, be them lasers, missiles or high energy weapons are quite useful as ortillrey. Mesons and nukes are sure good, but, again my take, are less used for political reasons. PAs are useless in atmosphere, but quite useful in vacuum planets).

 

[Garnfellow]

Just my take, so take it with a huge grain of salt, but I think bombardment represents secondary weaponry, that is the one used both against small ships (SDBs) and for ground support (at least in MT, i guess in striker too, modst those weaponry, be them lasers, missiles or high energy weapons are quite useful as ortillrey. Mesons and nukes are sure good, but, again my take, are less used for political reasons. PAs are useless in atmosphere, but quite useful in vacuum planets).

I think that's about right. With Oz's formula the Bombardment Rating is calculated by the number of fighters and missiles carried by the squadron; given that an SDB wing (in IE at least) represents a swarm of 50 SDBs, fighters and missiles seem like much more effective weapons than a meson spinal.

I'm not quite sure I understand why ScoutRons have such high bombardment ratings, but there you go.