Freedonian System Defense Boat
- Thread starter Hal
- Start date
Don't you need a Model/1 to perform jump-1?
I'm sorry, but I don't understand the logic behind NOT requiring a Model/1 for the lowest bound of hull sizes.
Hans
Actually, I don't think anyone is saying that. I think we're saying that the requirement for such doesn't come from this table, which indicates the minimum computer required based on hull tonnage.
Perhaps let's rephrase this clarification:
Computer Models, p. 26: The “Ship” Column is poorly explained as “the ship requiring this computer as a minimum”, which leads to the question: “Is a Model/1 computer required for all hulls from 0 to 699 tons, or for hulls from 600 to 999 tons?” In addition to the requirements from this table, the Computer rule on page 28 requires that all vessels 100 tons and over have a central computer, and that the computer model indicates what size jump the computer can control. Interpreting the table to allow for larger hull sizes at lower TLs gives us the following result:
Code:
[FONT=Courier New]Minimum[/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]Computer Code[/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]Required Tonnage Range Range[/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]None 0 to 99 0[/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]Model/1 100 to 999 1-9[/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]Model/2 1000 to 3999 A-C[/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]Model/3 4000 to 9999 D-J[/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]Model/4 10,000 to 49,999 K-N[/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]Model/5 50,000 to 99,999 P-Q[/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]Model/6 100,000 to 999,999 R-X[/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]Model/7 1,000,000+ Y[/FONT]Thoughts?
Last edited:
System ships, my friend, System ships.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
The logical interpretation of the table is (imo of course):
ship hull 600-999tons minimum model/1
ship hull 1,000-3,999tons minimum model/2
ship hull 4,000-9,999tons minimum model/3
ship hull 10,000-49,999tons minimum model/4
ship hull 50,000-99,999tons minimum model/5
ship hull 100,000-999,999tons minimum model/6
ship hull 1,000,000-???tons minimum model/7
The implications being that ships less than 600tons don't need a computer* and that ships over 1,000,000 tons may be built with no more than a model/7 computer.
* except for jump and weapons
Of course some of that is a holdover to the B2 design rules not having more than a model/7 computer. And B2 didn't really require a computer at all for a ship to fly (the bridge or helm took care of that), or for sensors (ditto B5, that was part of the bridge and depended on being mil or civ), it was just nice to have for the programs, required for Jump programs, and for firing weapons.
At the very least to maintain some compatibility with B2 the B5 required computer should start at model/1 for ships over 5,000tons. But I think the best correction is to ignore and drop the minimum computer model idea entirely. There's too much to fix it.
As an example, a 50,000ton ship with a model/5 (minimum) computer takes a "Computer-1" hit in combat. Is it now unoperational? After all it's now a model/4 (effective) computer which is not enough for a 50,000ton ship, right? Of course in B2 combat that isn't an issue, it's still a model/5 computer, it just might go offline at any time after a hit.
You asked
ship hull 600-999tons minimum model/1
ship hull 1,000-3,999tons minimum model/2
ship hull 4,000-9,999tons minimum model/3
ship hull 10,000-49,999tons minimum model/4
ship hull 50,000-99,999tons minimum model/5
ship hull 100,000-999,999tons minimum model/6
ship hull 1,000,000-???tons minimum model/7
The implications being that ships less than 600tons don't need a computer* and that ships over 1,000,000 tons may be built with no more than a model/7 computer.
* except for jump and weapons
Of course some of that is a holdover to the B2 design rules not having more than a model/7 computer. And B2 didn't really require a computer at all for a ship to fly (the bridge or helm took care of that), or for sensors (ditto B5, that was part of the bridge and depended on being mil or civ), it was just nice to have for the programs, required for Jump programs, and for firing weapons.
At the very least to maintain some compatibility with B2 the B5 required computer should start at model/1 for ships over 5,000tons. But I think the best correction is to ignore and drop the minimum computer model idea entirely. There's too much to fix it.
As an example, a 50,000ton ship with a model/5 (minimum) computer takes a "Computer-1" hit in combat. Is it now unoperational? After all it's now a model/4 (effective) computer which is not enough for a 50,000ton ship, right? Of course in B2 combat that isn't an issue, it's still a model/5 computer, it just might go offline at any time after a hit.
You asked
I can't do that... this is a clarification...
I don't think so, since you can repair it.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Understood
That was mostly all in the vein of "thoughts" you asked for, though I probably went beyond what you expected.But until (if) you get it repaired you're dead in the water right? As dead as Maneuver 1 hit for Maneuver -1 would leave you dead in the water. Or more appropriately as dead as Computer Destroyed would be...
...and guess what? That's not as dead as one would expect from the minimum hull size rule:
"Computer Destroyed: The USP computer factor is reduced to zero; the ship may not jump, although it may continue to fire weapons and maneuver."
Talk about internal inconsistency. I hardly know where to begin? Why do we have minimum hull computer requirements if all you need it for is Jump? That's already covered under the rules. Why do small craft need a computer to fire a single turret when big ships don't need a computer to fire spinal weapons, multiple bays, and hundreds of turrets?
o:I'm sure there's more but I tire of this line of thought
Again, the minimum computer by hull is easiest fixed by ignoring it. And I know you can't.
I think at the very least HG needs a clarification there as to what happens when the computer model is reduced (however temporarily) below the minimum required for the size of hull. A new(ish*) Achilles' heel for some of the really big ships perhaps?
* I'm not the first to wonder about this...
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
It's how I've long done it, for small craft too if they have a bridge.
Defensive DM? (Going from memory, HG not to hand...)
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Sure but then shouldn't it be "effective" computer rating :smirk:
Say I have two ships, a 10Kton (required minimum computer 4) and a 100Kton (required minimum computer 6). They are equal in everything that counts including both sporting a Model/6 computer. By HG each has a computer DM of 6.
The problem is that 100Kton ship has just enough computer to run the ship (apparently, or whatever the minimum means*) while the 10Kton ship has computer power to spare.
* nothing as far as I can see, hence my suggestion to ignore it and drop it, it's usually a moot point anyway as everyone tends to put the most computer they can in every ship, limited only by TL, if that was the intention of the hull rule then it might have been better stated as a TL break to build certain hull sizes and been left at that, it would have better mirrored B2 and made more sense imo
Rationally imo any computer DM should be the difference between the minimum required (if it means anything) and what is actually installed. In the example above the 10Kton ship would have a computer DM of 2 while the 100Kton ship would have a computer DM of 0. Advantage to the ship with more "effective" computer power.
But, I'm dragging this off topic, sorta
Computer "Agility" -- assuming that the difference between a Model/2 and a Model/1 is the same kind and magnitude of difference as that between a Model/7 and a Model/6?
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Fair point (I think I understand your meaning). One I'll concede as making a difference, though it does seem to be applied linearly in the rules.
Just a thought, but really since "Agility" already has a precedent I think it's reasonable to apply the same idea to computers.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
It may be a reason to install more than one computer (forbidden by the rules except for back up).
A computer to run the ship based on hull size and then a dedicated tactical computer for combat DMs.
A computer to run the ship based on hull size and then a dedicated tactical computer for combat DMs.
Sigh... I don't think that's an option. I think a clarification for the table that the minimum should be considered for design and construction but has no combat effect if damage causes the effective computer factor to fall below the minimum is in order. I'll see what Marc thinks.
Any other odd sticky wickets in the HG rules to deal with?
I'd be inclined to mention the minimum 10tn loss from a fuel hit, just to keep the clarification consistent with the rule its clarifying.
And perhaps a mention that total fuel loss from fuel-n hits (eg: fuel-n hits on small craft) has the same result as a "fuel tanks shattered" result. This note may also be worthwhile for other systems that may be reduced to 0. (computers, MD, JD & PP).
Power Plants destroyed or reduced to 0. Logic dictates that no power plant = no EP in a manner similar to no fuel. Perhaps worth clarifying, currently a strict reading means all systems work despite not having a functioning power plant.
Some discussion was made a while back on the scenario of (for example) 2 beam & 1 sand. Must all three be seperate batteries, or may (must?) the 2 beam be a single battery.
Last edited:
Possibly outside the scope of your project, but a summary of bk2 crew requirements would aid clarifying ship construction for HG ships under 1000tn.
Launch facilities and carried craft. Is there assumed to be a period before combat is joined, when small/carried craft may be launched? Or are all craft carried and only released in the first battle formation step. Meaning fighters in particular are limited by the launch facilities.
Boarding. The definition of 'disabled' includes, "not capable of maneuver". That means MD-0. What of PP-0?
Breaking off. Can a ship break off by Jumping when the JD, PP or computer are damaged to a point no longer capable of supporting the jump.
Battle Control & Repair. The section relates mostly to damage control during battle. Currently if you have had crew casualties, your ship is un-repairable, even after the battle when time is not so pressing. Can you repair a broken (not destroyed) JD after a battle to facilitate limping to the nearest port.
Hmmm, I should stop picking up the rule book...
Launch facilities and carried craft. Is there assumed to be a period before combat is joined, when small/carried craft may be launched? Or are all craft carried and only released in the first battle formation step. Meaning fighters in particular are limited by the launch facilities.
Boarding. The definition of 'disabled' includes, "not capable of maneuver". That means MD-0. What of PP-0?
Breaking off. Can a ship break off by Jumping when the JD, PP or computer are damaged to a point no longer capable of supporting the jump.
Battle Control & Repair. The section relates mostly to damage control during battle. Currently if you have had crew casualties, your ship is un-repairable, even after the battle when time is not so pressing. Can you repair a broken (not destroyed) JD after a battle to facilitate limping to the nearest port.
Hmmm, I should stop picking up the rule book...
Bk2 sub 1KTd crew
Pilot: 1 if ship ≥100Td
Navigator: 1 if ship >200 Td *
Engineer: 1 per 35 Td of Drives (PP, MD, JD)
Steward: 1 per 8 HP, minimum 1
Medic: 1 per 120 passengers; minimum 1 if ship ≥200 Td
Gunner: Option for 1 per turret or small craft, if felt needed.
Pilot: 1 if ship ≥100Td
Navigator: 1 if ship >200 Td *
Engineer: 1 per 35 Td of Drives (PP, MD, JD)
Steward: 1 per 8 HP, minimum 1
Medic: 1 per 120 passengers; minimum 1 if ship ≥200 Td
Gunner: Option for 1 per turret or small craft, if felt needed.
Probably...
Interesting question. I think it would depend on the scenario, but it sure does seem like the rules intend for the launching to start with that first battle formation step.
Someone already mentioned that one
Check...
I've got something about that somewhere...
Nope -- that's the kind of stuff I'm wanting...
Similar threads
