The Compleat Battleship

[rancke]

The traditional multirider tender combo has serious mobility issues unless deployed as a unit.

So deploy it as a unit. A tender plus its riders will cost roughly as much as a battleship. One Lurenti and seven Nolikans costs MCr87,939. You can get roughly one and a half for the cost of a Kokirrak or a Plankwell and four for the cost of one Tigress.

The psychological aspect? The main peacetime role of capital ships (talking historical wet navies here) has been "showing the flag". You provide a visible reminder of the power of the navy to reassure allies and deter enemies.

Yes, but a Gorodish will do that just as well as a Tigress. Twice as well if you really believe that size is directly proportional to impressiveness.

That capital ships spend 90%+ of their life in peacetime duties?

No, that you can't afford to have a lot of them [tenders+riders]. The entire 154th BatRon costs 1/12th of what a BatRon of Kokirraks costs (escorts not included).

Perhaps poorly phrased, battleships do not need the same strategic mobility as riders. Riders are an offensive weapon, battleships operate on interior lines with established support facilities. Thus they can afford to have a lower jump rating.

Another insteresting theory. If I can have twelve BatRons of riders for the price of one BatRon of battleships and their combat effectiveness is roughly equivalent, I can afford to use them for defensive purposes as well as offensive. In fact, I can't afford not to. The discrepancy in firepower is just too great.


Hans

 

[rancke]

Supp 8 Library Data calls a Battleship 100k tons in the caption for the picture of the Sylea Class

I've already answered that in a recent post. The Sylea class may not be contemporary.


Hans

 

[aramis]

You're missing the power requirements for the Meson Screen. That's another 3.6% less for your payload capacity (essentially halving it).

Wrong. I've included them in the meson screen tonnage. the screen itself is only 40 tons...

 

[AndreaV]

So deploy it as a unit. A tender plus its riders will cost roughly as much as a battleship. One Lurenti and seven Nolikans costs MCr87,939. You can get roughly one and a half for the cost of a Kokirrak or a Plankwell and four for the cost of one Tigress.

Okay, all the designs in The Spinward Marches Campaign are seriously broken (worse even than those in S9). Trying to take costings from them is distinctly misleading (will point out here I am NOT suggesting Hans is in anyway being deliberately misleading, simply mislead himself by some unbelievably broken designs). When correctly designed the 154th comes out closer to MCr 315,000 and the Plankwell around the MCr 120,000, the Kokirrak about MCr 133,000.

Its far better IMHO not to try to base comparative costings on any published design (you'll struggle to find one that's not badly broken). For my part I've spent time designing a range of deliberately comparative vessels (Hi and Lo at each jump number between TL10 and 15). The results were very interesting. I posted the files on the CT-starships list about a year ago. I'd be more than happy to forward them to you.

...big snip...

Another insteresting theory. If I can have twelve BatRons of riders for the price of one BatRon of battleships and their combat effectiveness is roughly equivalent, I can afford to use them for defensive purposes as well as offensive. In fact, I can't afford not to. The discrepancy in firepower is just too great.


Hans

If you work off the figures of published designs, yes you get these kinds of figures. However as I pointed out, these published designs are badly (in the case of the 154th, unbelievably so) broken. When you go back and properly design ships according to the rules, a different picture emerges.

Assuming TL15 (this is when the riders advantage is at its greatest) assuming Hi end ships, the riders are indisputably ascendant at J4 and above (at least a 6 to 1 advantage). However when you drop below that the numbers get a whole lot less clear. At J3 the riders advantage dramatically drops to 2 to 1. The riders still have the advantage but its not quite that simple.

If you pit J3 ships (such as a frontier holding fleet acting on interior lines) against J4 riders (such as an invading fleet) you find the riders advantage has dropped to a little below 3 to 2, a point where the ships superiority in secondaries becomes a significant factor. If the fleets role is to inflict damage, slow the advance and fall back, then the J3 ship has significant advantages. They can refuel far quicker (one pass through a GG as against 5 to 10 for the riders). They don't need escorts to cover them when entering or exiting a system. They can absorb more damage than the riders. They can hide, wait for the advance to pass them by and then cut loose...

I'd agree that the IN as presented in canon designs is not reflected in the design system. But then again none of these canon designs are actually legal according to the same design system .

I stand by my argument that the J3 battleship is a viable part of the fleet. The offensive edge will be J4+ riders, backed by J3 ships guarding the frontier and slowing down till your riders get into action.

Andrew

 

[AndreaV]

Wrong. I've included them in the meson screen tonnage. the screen itself is only 40 tons...

Yes but it then needs 1.8EP per 100 tons of ship to run it. This is another 3.6% of your ship (almost equal to an extra 2 factors of Power plant)

When designed the 175Kton armour 15 agility 6 ship has a payload of 3352 tons once the meson screen is installed. The 130Kton armour 15 agility 5 ships payload of 9085 tons, and the 90Kton armour 15 agility 4 ship payload of 10841 ton.

 

[rancke]

Okay, all the designs in The Spinward Marches Campaign are seriously broken (worse even than those in S9). Trying to take costings from them is distinctly misleading (will point out here I am NOT suggesting Hans is in anyway being deliberately misleading, simply mislead himself by some unbelievably broken designs). When correctly designed the 154th comes out closer to MCr 315,000 and the Plankwell around the MCr 120,000, the Kokirrak about MCr 133,000.

It's what I had to work with. I'm quite happy to accept corrected figures.

If you work off the figures of published designs, yes you get these kinds of figures. However as I pointed out, these published designs are badly (in the case of the 154th, unbelievably so) broken. When you go back and properly design ships according to the rules, a different picture emerges.

Well, that's good news. MCr315,000 is certain a much better price for a BatRon than 88,000. But it't's still 2.7 times less than seven Plankwells. Still, it sounds like it may begin to make sense.

Assuming TL15 (this is when the riders advantage is at its greatest) assuming Hi end ships, the riders are indisputably ascendant at J4 and above (at least a 6 to 1 advantage). However when you drop below that the numbers get a whole lot less clear. At J3 the riders advantage dramatically drops to 2 to 1. The riders still have the advantage but its not quite that simple.

Do they drop to J3 though? The three batleships from FS are all said to be J4. Apparently the Imperial planners don't agree with you that battleships can make do with jump-3.

The Voroshilef is J3, but then it's a TL13 design.

I'd agree that the IN as presented in canon designs is not reflected in the design system. But then again none of these canon designs are actually legal according to the same design system .

I agree that that certainly complicates discussions quite a lot!

I stand by my argument that the J3 battleship is a viable part of the fleet. The offensive edge will be J4+ riders, backed by J3 ships guarding the frontier and slowing down till your riders get into action.

Now how about the canonical jump-4 battleships? How do they stack up? Also, how does the J3 battleship stack up agianst the J3 heavy cruiser?


Hans

 

[Matt123]

Do they drop to J3 though? The three batleships from FS are all said to be J4. Apparently the Imperial planners don't agree with you that battleships can make do with jump-3.

The Tigress carries 150k of fuel, for a J3 and the USP gives it a J3. The text is incorrect.

The Plankwell is correct in being J4.

And the Kokirrak also only has sufficient fuel (60k) for a J3 And the USP gives it a J3. The text is incorrect.

So 2 out of 3 are J3. Despite Imperial doctrine being J4.

 

[Matt123]

Plus, no asteroid can be a standard design, as the tunnels have to be custom, even if 2 are identical performance.

The logic of that seems blindingly obvious now that you mention it.

I could be reading more into your statement than you intend though, I'm immediately asking myself whether class discounts should apply to planetoids but I don't recall (& I just checked HG & TCS) reading anything in canon that implies they don't.

Is this what you are implying, or is it my overactive imagination?

 

[rancke]

So 2 out of 3 are J3. Despite Imperial doctrine being J4.

Um, is that irony or do you have a reference that says Imperial doctrine is J4?


Hans

 

[Dragoner]

Of course a Plankwell has an advantage over a Gionetti. But can it take out six Gionettis? (You can get six (and a half) Gionettis for the price of one Plankwell).

Maybe it can. I don't know how much less effective factor-J spinals are. But according to the Eurisko experience, the winner of a battle is the one who brings the most spinals to the fight. I expect that the size of the spinals makes some sort of difference, but once your ship is big enough to carry the best available spinal, anything bigger is contra-indicated.

Can the Gionetti's survive swarms of fighters and other small craft to reach the Plankwells in the line? I'm familiar with the Eurisko designs, but it used tactics as well, such as scuttling it's damaged ships.

Look at the numbers though, most of the Crusiers carrying the best spinal are coming in in Battleship range of 125-175kt.

The Sylea class may not be contemporary.

Or it might be the wave of the future.

 

[rancke]

Can the Gionetti's survive swarms of fighters and other small craft to reach the Plankwells in the line? I'm familiar with the Eurisko designs, but it used tactics as well, such as scuttling it's damaged ships.

Yes, I read that. It puzzled me no end. What advantage does it give (in a TCS battle) to abandon any of your assets? But that's by the way.

Fighters are extra for both sides of that particular fight.

Or it might be the wave of the future.

Sure. My point is that we can't tell for sure.


Hans

 

[jawillroy]

What advantage does it give (in a TCS battle) to abandon any of your assets?

IIRC, that particular abuse of the rules was to destroy ships whose agility had been lowered to prevent them from reducing the fleet's agility.

 

[Dragoner]

Yes, I read that. It puzzled me no end. What advantage does it give (in a TCS battle) to abandon any of your assets? But that's by the way.

Because it was losing the ships that had taken m drive hits, and had become a liability initiative wise (don't quote me though, it's been 30 years).

Fighters are extra for both sides of that particular fight.

And the unarmored Gionetti's can only be considered the fare much worse against them than Plankwells. Fufilling the canonical statement.

Sure. My point is that we can't tell for sure.

While Battleship's aren't given a size, cruisers are given between 20k-100kt, so the point is, that a 100kt Cruiser is different from a 100kt Battleship in name only for Traveller. In real life, when naval terms such as these were relevant late 19th to mid 20th century, a Cruiser had longer range and a Battleship had heavier armor.

Here is an interest thing about riders: in the rules, how does the tender stay out of combat? Nowhere does it state ships have the ability to hang back, you only have the two lines, so does the Battle Carrier get destroyed everytime? It would seem to make the victories for the Riders a bit pyhrric. If the rules are that way, then Tigresses as Carriers make more sense.

 

[skyth]

Stuff in reserve can't be targetted in High Guard. Likely in 'real' combat, you would have flankers, etc making an end run for them. That is a disparity between HG and TU though.

 

[Dragoner]

Stuff in reserve can't be targetted in High Guard. Likely in 'real' combat, you would have flankers, etc making an end run for them. That is a disparity between HG and TU though.

Correct, except if you breakthrough the 1st line. I will agree that HG is rather limited, except that is what most ships are designed around for the OTU, even TCS (but TCS doesn't apply to the 3I).

 

[jawillroy]

That's a question I don't think I've seen addressed: isn't the tender an albatross for the rest of the fleet?

True, ships in the reserve can't be targeted. But they're still part of the fleet, and if you've got a line of riders with agility 5 and you've got a tender in reserve with agility 1, doesn't that defeat a lot of the riders' advantage? Wouldn't a tender have to be just as fast as her riders to make the whole exercise worthwhile?

 

[Dragoner]

That's a question I don't think I've seen addressed: isn't the tender an albatross for the rest of the fleet?

True, ships in the reserve can't be targeted. But they're still part of the fleet, and if you've got a line of riders with agility 5 and you've got a tender in reserve with agility 1, doesn't that defeat a lot of the riders' advantage? Wouldn't a tender have to be just as fast as her riders to make the whole exercise worthwhile?

That's my thoughts, how do the tenders actually work? To make things worse, if battle does reach their line, because of their greater tonnage, they are put up for attack before their riders.

 

[skyth]

The only problem with the lower agility of the tenders is that a side composed of ships will all AG 6 will get a +1 to the initiative roll which determines range. This is countered by the side with the most ships (Likely the rider group) getting a +1.

And unless you destroy everything in the line, you cannot target anything in the reserve.

So yes, if you have one 10 ton fighter in the line that you don't destroy, you can't touch the 100 500k tenders in the reserve.

It's a mechanical problem with High Guard and the thing that makes riders the king of the battlefield.

 

[Dragoner]

The only problem with the lower agility of the tenders is that a side composed of ships will all AG 6 will get a +1 to the initiative roll which determines range. This is countered by the side with the most ships (Likely the rider group) getting a +1.

And unless you destroy everything in the line, you cannot target anything in the reserve.

So yes, if you have one 10 ton fighter in the line that you don't destroy, you can't touch the 100 500k tenders in the reserve.

It's a mechanical problem with High Guard and the thing that makes riders the king of the battlefield.

Not destroy, only their offensive weapons incapacitated.

 

[skyth]

Minor technicality, but still reinforces the point. One fighter can prevent 10,000 ships from firing anything at the reserves.

Or put it another way, you have 1 TL 15 Rider going against a force composed of 5,000 1k ton TL 12 SDB's. The SDB's cannot destroy/disable the rider thus the Tender and 500 freighters it is escorting are untouchable.