I promised DonM that I would get a thread started on this, so here we go......
I think it is safe to say that FSoSI is the worst product ever developed for MT. A 3.4 rating from the Official Guide to Megatraveller says it all.
That being said, I still feel that it could be rescued. Unlike the DGP folks, I like big ships. I have always felt that FSoSI showed the true scope of the Imperium. About those ships however...
I feel the way to fix this is as follows:
1. Some minor changes to the craft design.
A. Change Tech Level on pg 61 of the Referee's Manual to read "The Tech Level of the building shipyard determines the Tech Level of the HULL being constructed...." This will make it possible to upgrade/reconstruct ships and it opens up a myriad array of possibilities for ship design.
This also ties with with how the Imperium collapsed in Hard Times. If worlds are dependent on both raw materials and finished products, why should a shipyard be any different. This also allows adventures like "The Spinward Marches Campaign" to take place under MT rules.
B. Rather than base power requirements on 30 days in the charts, change the power requirements to 1 day. Looking at FSoSI, I think this was attempted in a rather hapazard way. This will also allow the ship designer more leeway into what systems go into a ship.
2. Design for Effect.
On page 56, one of the questions under Designing a Craft is "What is it's purpose?" This question was never answered for any of the ships in FSoSI. It is obvious that the person who wrote the Fighting Ships chapter of FSoSI had no contact with the person that designed the ships.
After watching all of the contortions people have gone to convert CT ships to MT, I have to ask, why?
The ship design sequences are completely different. Rather than try to shoe-horn a CT ship into the MT craft design sequence, why not just adjust the ship to meet the design sequence.
In CT most naval ships are built around a J4 6G standard. In MT the standard is J4 4G. How many ships meet that? Not very many. (7 total - CA-13,14,15, ED-13,14, 15, and EF-15)
For example: If you look at the Megatraveller ship design sequence, the Regal goes from a J4 6G maneuver Battle cruiser to a J3 1G battle cruiser. This design is slow both strategically and tactically. It can't run down smaller cruisers, nor does it have extended endurance to stay on station. If we take the Regal design & keep the functions of a BC it probably won't fit on 75k.
So what if it doesn't.
I would rather have a bigger ship that meets the design requirements than worry so much about whether it can fit on X tonnage. This would also fit the FSoSI book itself. Unlike supplement 9 from CT, all of these ships in FSoSI are big.
So how does this all tie together?
The first decision must be to define what are the technical requirements of the Imperial Fleet.
We already have a little information:
BBs 200k+, TL 13+ J4 with 4G acel Agility - 0
Spinal mount part Acel - R or higher, Meson - P or higher
Def - Sand, Nucl Dampers & Meson Screens
Cruisers - 30 - 100K TL 13+ J4 with 4G acel Agility - 1
Spinal Mount - PA - or Meson (Smaller than what is on equivalent BB)
Def - Sand, Nuc Damper & possibly Meson Screens
Escorts - 10K and below - TL 13+ J4 with 4G acel
100 or 50 bays - Missile, PA or Meson
Def Sand, Nuc Damper & possibly Meson Screens
Carriers - Depends - less useful at higher tech levels - still working this one. Question for the audience: What good are TL 15 fighters in fleet actions? I suspect that as tech levels progress, they become less and less useful at the squadron & fleet level.
Auxiliaries (to include Battle Tenders) - 100k - 700k TL 13+ J4 with 1 - 4G acel
Off: bays or turrets
Def: Sand Nuc Damper & Meson Screens
Battleriders - 30k - TL 13+ BB size spinal mounts 5 - 6G accel, reduced endurance?
Def: as BB
Battlerider Escorts - 5K - TL 13+ Cruiser sized armaments and defense. Primary purpose is to guard auxiliares.
I think it is safe to say that FSoSI is the worst product ever developed for MT. A 3.4 rating from the Official Guide to Megatraveller says it all.
That being said, I still feel that it could be rescued. Unlike the DGP folks, I like big ships. I have always felt that FSoSI showed the true scope of the Imperium. About those ships however...
I feel the way to fix this is as follows:
1. Some minor changes to the craft design.
A. Change Tech Level on pg 61 of the Referee's Manual to read "The Tech Level of the building shipyard determines the Tech Level of the HULL being constructed...." This will make it possible to upgrade/reconstruct ships and it opens up a myriad array of possibilities for ship design.
This also ties with with how the Imperium collapsed in Hard Times. If worlds are dependent on both raw materials and finished products, why should a shipyard be any different. This also allows adventures like "The Spinward Marches Campaign" to take place under MT rules.
B. Rather than base power requirements on 30 days in the charts, change the power requirements to 1 day. Looking at FSoSI, I think this was attempted in a rather hapazard way. This will also allow the ship designer more leeway into what systems go into a ship.
2. Design for Effect.
On page 56, one of the questions under Designing a Craft is "What is it's purpose?" This question was never answered for any of the ships in FSoSI. It is obvious that the person who wrote the Fighting Ships chapter of FSoSI had no contact with the person that designed the ships.
After watching all of the contortions people have gone to convert CT ships to MT, I have to ask, why?
The ship design sequences are completely different. Rather than try to shoe-horn a CT ship into the MT craft design sequence, why not just adjust the ship to meet the design sequence.
In CT most naval ships are built around a J4 6G standard. In MT the standard is J4 4G. How many ships meet that? Not very many. (7 total - CA-13,14,15, ED-13,14, 15, and EF-15)
For example: If you look at the Megatraveller ship design sequence, the Regal goes from a J4 6G maneuver Battle cruiser to a J3 1G battle cruiser. This design is slow both strategically and tactically. It can't run down smaller cruisers, nor does it have extended endurance to stay on station. If we take the Regal design & keep the functions of a BC it probably won't fit on 75k.
So what if it doesn't.
I would rather have a bigger ship that meets the design requirements than worry so much about whether it can fit on X tonnage. This would also fit the FSoSI book itself. Unlike supplement 9 from CT, all of these ships in FSoSI are big.
So how does this all tie together?
The first decision must be to define what are the technical requirements of the Imperial Fleet.
We already have a little information:
BBs 200k+, TL 13+ J4 with 4G acel Agility - 0
Spinal mount part Acel - R or higher, Meson - P or higher
Def - Sand, Nucl Dampers & Meson Screens
Cruisers - 30 - 100K TL 13+ J4 with 4G acel Agility - 1
Spinal Mount - PA - or Meson (Smaller than what is on equivalent BB)
Def - Sand, Nuc Damper & possibly Meson Screens
Escorts - 10K and below - TL 13+ J4 with 4G acel
100 or 50 bays - Missile, PA or Meson
Def Sand, Nuc Damper & possibly Meson Screens
Carriers - Depends - less useful at higher tech levels - still working this one. Question for the audience: What good are TL 15 fighters in fleet actions? I suspect that as tech levels progress, they become less and less useful at the squadron & fleet level.
Auxiliaries (to include Battle Tenders) - 100k - 700k TL 13+ J4 with 1 - 4G acel
Off: bays or turrets
Def: Sand Nuc Damper & Meson Screens
Battleriders - 30k - TL 13+ BB size spinal mounts 5 - 6G accel, reduced endurance?
Def: as BB
Battlerider Escorts - 5K - TL 13+ Cruiser sized armaments and defense. Primary purpose is to guard auxiliares.
