The Imperial 74

[AndreaV]

Well was playing with the idea of magazines and designing to test it. Well just couldn't resist

Ship: Implacable
Class: Duguay-Trouin
Type: Third Class Battleship
Architect: Andrew Vallance
Tech Level: 14

USP
         B3-P1358HZ-E96608-999H9-0 MCr 82,986.565 74 KTons
Bat Bear             X   4 11119   Crew: 650
Bat                  Y   6 1111C   TL: 14

Cargo: 98.500 Passengers: 10 Crew Sections: 74 of 9 Frozen Watch (x37) 
Fuel: 28,120 EP: 5,920 Agility: 5 Shipboard Security Detail: 74
Craft: 2 x 30T Launches, 4 x 20T Ships Boats
Fuel Treatment: Fuel Scoops and On Board Fuel Purification
Backups: 1 x Model/8fib Computer 1 x Bridge
Substitutions: X = 38 Y = 48 Z = 74

Architects Fee: MCr 829.866   Cost in Quantity: MCr 66,389.252

With Drop Tanks

         B3-P1236HZ-E96608-999H9-0 MCr 82,986.565 96.2 KTons
Bat                  Y   6 1111C   TL: 14
Bat Bear             X   4 11119   Crew: 650
Agility: 3
Drop Tanks Cost: MCr 22.200


Detailed Description
  (High Guard Design)

HULL
74,000.000 tons standard, 1,036,000.000 cubic meters, 
Needle/Wedge Configuration

CREW
62 Officers, 588 Ratings

ENGINEERING
Jump-3, 5G Manuever, Power plant-8, 5,920.000 EP, Agility 5

AVIONICS
Bridge, Model/8fib Computer
1 Backup Bridge, 1 Model/8fib Backup Computer

HARDPOINTS
Spinal Mount, 7 100-ton bays, 12 50-ton bays, 500 Hardpoints

ARMAMENT
Meson Gun Spinal Mount (Factor-H), 1 100-ton Particle Accelerator Bay 
(Factor-9), 12 50-ton Missile Bays (Factor-9), 10 Triple Beam 
Laser Turrets organised into 1 Battery (Factor-9), 10 Dual Fusion 
Gun Turrets organised into 1 Battery (Factor-9)

DEFENCES
6 100-ton Repulsor Bays (Factor-8), 480 Triple Sandcaster Turrets organised 
into 48 Batteries (Factor-9), Nuclear Damper (Factor-6), 

Meson Screen (Factor-6), Armoured Hull (Factor-14)

CRAFT
2 30.000 ton Launches (Crew of 2, Cost of MCr 0.000), 4 20.000 ton 
Ships Boats (Crew of 2, Cost of MCr 0.000)

FUEL
28,120 Tons Fuel (3 parsecs jump and 28 days endurance)
On Board Fuel Scoops, On Board Fuel Purification Plant, 22,200.000 ton drop 
tanks

MISCELLANEOUS
338 Staterooms, 333 Low Berths, 10 Middle Passengers, 98.500 Tons Cargo

USER DEFINED COMPONENTS
48 Sand Magazines (6.000 tons, Crew 0, Cost MCr 0.300), 12 Missile Magazines 
(10.000 tons, Crew 0, Cost MCr 0.500)

COST
MCr 83,816.431 Singly (incl. Architects fees of MCr 829.866), 
MCr 66,389.252 in Quantity

CONSTRUCTION TIME
195 Weeks Singly, 156 Weeks in Quantity

COMMENTS
Commonly known as the "Imperial 74", the Duguay-Trouin class was one of the 
mainstays of the Imperial fleet for well over a century. The lead ship was 
commissioned in 889 and the class remained in production until the first 
flight of the Implacable in 1012. Even today four remain in active service 
with Batron 925 of the 124th fleet, with at least another twelve still 
serving in auxiliary roles.



Duguay-Trouin Class Third Class Battleship

Book 5 Crew Breakdown
Command section: 7 officers and 30 ratings; Engineering section: 26 
officers and 226 ratings; Gunnery section: 12 officers and 105 ratings; 
Flight section: 1 officers and 18 ratings; Service section: 15 officers 
and 133 ratings; Medical Section: 1 officers and 2 ratings
HULL
Hull: 0.000 Td; MCr 8,880.000
Armour Factor-14: 11,100.000 Td; MCr 18,870.000

ENGINEERING
M-Drive Factor-5: 10,360.000 Td; MCr 5,180.000
J-Drive Factor-3: 2,960.000 Td; MCr 11,840.000
P-Plant Factor-8: 11,840.000 Td; MCr 35,520.000; +5,920.000 EP

FUEL
P-Fuel: 5,920.000 Td; MCr 0,000
J-Fuel: 22,200.000 Td; MCr 0.000
Scoops: 0.000 Td; MCr 74.000
Purification: 563.000 Td; MCr 3.941
L-Hyd Drop Tanks: 0.000 Td; MCr 22.210

AVIONICS
Bridge: 1,480.000 Td; MCr 370.000
Computer Model/8fib: 22.000 Td; MCr 140.000; -9 EP
1 x Backup Bridge: 1,480.000 Td; MCr 370.000
1 x Backup Computer Model/8fib: 22.000 Td; MCr 140.000

WEAPONRY
Spinal Meson Gun Factor-H: 2,000.000 Td; MCr 600.000; -900 EP
1 x 100T Particle Accelerator Bays: 100.000 Td; MCr 36.000; -60 EP
6 x 100T Repulsor Bays: 600.000 Td; MCr 66.000; -60 EP
12 x 50T Missile Bays: 600.000 Td; MCr 150.000
10 x Laser Turrets: 10.000 Td; MCr 30.000; -30 EP
10 x Energy Turrets: 20.000 Td; MCr 40.000; -40 EP
480 x Sand Turrets: 480.000 Td; MCr 360.000

SCREENS
Nuclear Damper Factor-6: 12.000 Td; MCr 38.000; -60.000 EP
Meson Screen Factor-6: 24.000 Td; MCr 50.000; -888.000 EP

CRAFT
2 x Launch: 78.000Td; MCr 0.156; Cost of craft: MCr 0.000
4 x Ships Boat: 104.000Td; MCr 0.208; Cost of craft: MCr 0.000

ACCOMODATIONS
338.0 x Staterooms: 1,352.000 Td; MCr 169.000
333 x Low Berths: 166.500 Td; MCr 16.650
Cargo: 98.500 Td; MCr 0.000

USER DEFINED
48 x Sand Magazine: 288.000 Td; MCr 14.400; -0.000 EP
12 x Missile Magazine: 120.000 Td; MCr 6.000; -0.000 EP

 

[Dragoner]

It is cool, thanks! However, at 74K tons, wouldn't it be a crusier?

 

[AndreaV]

It is cool, thanks! However, at 74K tons, wouldn't it be a crusier?

Well with factor 14 armour its somewhat thicker skinned than most cruisers, fully capable of standing in the line (probably better than some battleships.) Its a third rate intended to provide capital ship presence in quite areas where you don't need a full sized battlewagon.

 

[rancke]

Well with factor 14 armour its somewhat thicker skinned than most cruisers, fully capable of standing in the line (probably better than some battleships.) Its a third rate intended to provide capital ship presence in quite areas where you don't need a full sized battlewagon.

The Atlantic Class Heavy Cruiser (75K) has an armor factor of 10, as has the Plankwell class dreadnaught (200K), so the armor factor does not seem to be a factor (so to speak).

And as we've discussed before, a combat system that allows 75,000 T ships to be more or less as effective as much bigger ships costing four or five times as much is flawed somehow. There has to be something that "in reality" makes cruiser-sized ships unable to stand in the line of battle regardless of armor factor and makes battleship-sized ships worth building in larger numbers despite their relative ineffectiveness according to the combat system.


Hans

 

[AndreaV]

The Atlantic Class Heavy Cruiser (75K) has an armor factor of 10, as has the Plankwell class dreadnaught (200K), so the armor factor does not seem to be a factor (so to speak).

And as we've discussed before, a combat system that allows 75,000 T ships to be more or less as effective as much bigger ships costing four or five times as much is flawed somehow. There has to be something that "in reality" makes cruiser-sized ships unable to stand in the line of battle regardless of armor factor and allows battleship-sized ships to be worth while building in larger numbers despite their ineffectiveness according to the combat system.

Hans

In my own games I've abandoned Battleships, cruisers etc and gone over to a "rating" system like Nelsonian times Its where this comes from. But yes I do agree about the combat system.

 

[McPerth]

AFAIK, the only advantage for larger ships (aside from more secondary weaponry and large capability for troops) is the less criticals received when fired by spinals, but as we have discussed many times, when meson spinals fire, criticals are not the larger of your problems...

 

[McPerth]

Just one small errata:

Craft: 2 x 30T [B]Ships Boats[/B], 4 x 20T [B]Launches[/B]

(...)

CRAFT
2 x [B]Ships Boats[/B]: 78.000Td; MCr 0.156; Cost of craft: MCr 0.000
4 x [B]Launches[/B]: 104.000Td; MCr 0.208; Cost of craft: MCr 0.000

I'm afraid you swapped the small crafts, as each tonnage corresponded to the other's name.

 

[AndreaV]

AFAIK, the only advantage for larger ships (aside from more seccondary weaponry and large capability for troops) is the less criticals received when fired by spinals, but as we have discussed many times, when meson spinals fire, criticals are not the larger of your problems...

Actually not entirely true. The larger ships can get their armour up to 14+ at which point they become immune non-nuclear missiles. This forces any attacking missile to go through the nuclear damper. Has huge implications in reducing the "nibbled to death by missiles" strategy.

That is possibly the biggest problem with HG combat, the everfull missile rack.

 

[McPerth]

Actually not entirely true. The larger ships can get their armour up to 14+ at which point they become immune non-nuclear missiles. This forces any attacking missile to go through the nuclear damper. Has huge implications in reducing the "nibbled to death by missiles" strategy..

Also smaller ships may have armour 14+, as long as they don't need jump fuel. That's the principle under the BR/BT system, so discussed in many threads. But even so, they receive more criticals from large spinals.

That is possibly the biggest problem with HG combat, the everfull missile rack.

I'm glad not to be the only one expressing this...

And also, about the same problem, the fact that missiles in HG are free. In MT, where you must have your missile magazines, and pay for them (a nuke costs kCr 150), one cannot freely arm its ships with missile bays and load them with nukes (at MCr 3.75 per 50 dton bay salvo, and MCr 7.5 per 100 dton one, one must weight the usefulness of every shoot...)

 

[AndreaV]

And also, about the same problem, the fact that missiles in HG are free. In MT, where you must have your missile magazines, and pay for them (a nuke costs kCr 150), one cannot freely arm its ships with missile bays and load them with nukes (at MCr 3.75 per 50 dton bay salvo, and MCr 7.5 per 100 dton one, one must weight the usefulness of every shoot...)

Oddly enough, this very subject is currently being discussed on CT-Starships. I'm trying to work out a system to bring magazines into HG Its where the 74 came from.

 

[McPerth]

In my own games I've abandoned Battleships, cruisers etc and gone over to a "rating" system like Nelsonian times

I guessed it. No one else would have rated a ship a 74, as easy as number are with 75...

 

[AndreaV]

I guessed it. No one else would have rated a ship a 74, as easy as number are with 75...

Well yes, but in HG there are some very tangible benefits to a 74. Its size code P, and 75 is code Q. P is +1 to be hit, Q is +2, and you get an extra 5% batteries bearing.

 

[McPerth]

Well yes, but in HG there are some very tangible benefits to a 74. Its size code P, and 75 is code Q. P is +1 to be hit, Q is +2, and you get an extra 5% batteries bearing.

...and you receive one more critical if hit by a meson gun rated Q+ (PA's criticals are voided due to armor)

 

[rancke]

Well yes, but in HG there are some very tangible benefits to a 74. Its size code P, and 75 is code Q. P is +1 to be hit, Q is +2, and you get an extra 5% batteries bearing.

...and you receive one more critical if hit by a meson gun rated Q+ (PA's criticals are voided due to armor)

It's never going to happen, because I'm not sufficiently interested in large-scale starship battles, but if I ever do run a TCS battle, I'm going to come up with a way to randomize breakpoint advantages/disadvantages. I'm not sure how to go about it. Make a determination once and for all and allow one 74K design to have +1 to be hit, extra 5% batteries bearing and the number of criticals hits of a cod Q while another 74K design turns out to be a lemon with +2 to be hit, no extra batteries bearing and critical hits of a code P? Or make that determination anew for every battle?

Be that as it may, breakpoint speculation is one of those things that really, really reminds me that it's all just a game and not remotely related to any reality; it fairly kicks my suspension of disbelief in the unmentionables and stomps on the remains...

Sorry for the rant. YM is, of course, more than welcome to V.


Hans

 

[AndreaV]

...and you receive one more critical if hit by a meson gun rated Q+ (PA's criticals are voided due to armor)

If you get hit by a Q+ meson you're dead several times over anyway

 

[AndreaV]

It's never going to happen, because I'm not sufficiently interested in large-scale starship battles, but if I ever do run a TCS battle, I'm going to come up with a way to randomize breakpoint advantages/disadvantages. I'm not sure how to go about it. Make a determination once and for all and allow one 74K design to have +1 to be hit, extra 5% batteries bearing and the number of criticals hits of a cod Q while another 74K design turns out to be a lemon with +2 to be hit, no extra batteries bearing and critical hits of a code P? Or make that determination anew for every battle?

Be that as it may, breakpoint speculation is one of those things that really, really reminds me that it's all just a game and not remotely related to any reality; it fairly kicks my suspension of disbelief in the unmentionables and stomps on the remains...

Sorry for the rant. YM is, of course, more than welcome to V.

Hans

May I present a house rule from my own campaigns...

Lemons and cherries
When a ship is designed roll 2D with a DM of the designer's Naval Architecture skill. On a 5- the ship is a lemon with some fatal flaw, on 17+ the ship is a cherry with some superb feature. This information should be kept secret by the umpire until such time as the flaw or feature reveals itself in combat.

Naval Architects skill is determined as below
2D
2 - Skill 2
3 - Skill 3
4-10 - Skill 4
11 - Skill 5
12 - Skill 6

Players should be assigned 1D worth of architects at the start of a campaign and may replace one per year. Naturally the exact skill level of an individual designer should be known by the umpire alone.

Fatal flaws
Linked fuel tanks: Fuel loss at 5X normal
Inadequate internal subdivision: Armor does not reduce meson damage rolls (actually thats my house rule, in normal games treat as -2 armour)
Fatal hull weakness: Any critical hit has a 1 in 36 of breaking the ship in two
Sealed maneuver drive: No battlefield repairs possible
Poorly designed crawl ways: All damage control rolls at -2DM
Faulty bulkheads: Critical hit to craft bays results in 2D crew casualties
Sitting duck: Treat size code as +3 for determining to hit modifications
Poor battery layout: Treat size code as +2 for determining batteries bearing

Superb features
Excellent maneuverability: +1 to agility
Superior armor scheme: +2 to effective armor
Modular power plant: Critical hit reduces factor to zero, but may be restored through regular damage control
Improved fire control: +1 to all rolls to penetrate
Excellent computer network: +1 to computer rating
Superior damage control system: +2 to all damage control rolls.
Highly Stealthy: Treat size code as -3 for determining to hit modifications
Excellent battery layout: Treat size code as -2 for determining batteries bearing.

Naturally, superb features and fatal flaws are the result of a complex interaction of components and can not be reproduced or avoided in other designs.

 

[AndreaV]

And updated

Ship: Implacable
Class: Duguay-Trouin
Type: Third Class Battleship
Architect: Andrew Vallance
Tech Level: 14

USP
         B3-P1358HZ-E96608-999H9-0 MCr 82,987.065 74 KTons
Bat Bear             X   4 11119   Crew: 650
Bat                  Y   6 1111C   TL: 14

Cargo: 28.500 Passengers: 10 Crew Sections: 74 of 9 Frozen Watch (x37) 
Fuel: 28,120 EP: 5,920 Agility: 5 Shipboard Security Detail: 74
Craft: 2 x 30T Launches, 4 x 20T Ships Boats
Fuel Treatment: Fuel Scoops and On Board Fuel Purification
Backups: 1 x Model/8fib Computer 1 x Bridge
Substitutions: X = 38 Y = 48 Z = 74

Architects Fee: MCr 829.871   Cost in Quantity: MCr 66,389.652

With Drop Tanks

         B3-P1236HZ-E96608-999H9-0 MCr 82,987.065 96.2 KTons
Bat                  Y   6 1111C   TL: 14
Bat Bear             X   4 11119   Crew: 650
Agility: 3
Drop Tanks Cost: MCr 22.200


Detailed Description
  (High Guard Design)

HULL
74,000.000 tons standard, 1,036,000.000 cubic meters, 
Needle/Wedge Configuration

CREW
62 Officers, 588 Ratings

ENGINEERING
Jump-3, 5G Manuever, Power plant-8, 5,920.000 EP, Agility 5

AVIONICS
Bridge, Model/8fib Computer
1 Backup Bridge, 1 Model/8fib Backup Computer

HARDPOINTS
Spinal Mount, 7 100-ton bays, 13 50-ton bays, 520 Hardpoints

ARMAMENT
Meson Gun Spinal Mount (Factor-H), 1 100-ton Particle Accelerator Bay 
(Factor-9), 12 50-ton Missile Bays (Factor-9), 10 Triple Beam 
Laser Turrets organised into 1 Battery (Factor-9), 10 Dual Fusion 
Gun Turrets organised into 1 Battery (Factor-9)

DEFENCES
6 100-ton Repulsor Bays (Factor-8), 480 Triple Sandcaster Turrets organised 
into 48 Batteries (Factor-9), Nuclear Damper (Factor-6), Meson Screen 
(Factor-6), Armoured Hull (Factor-14)

CRAFT
2 30.000 ton Launches (Crew of 2, Cost of MCr 0.000), 4 20.000 
ton Ships Boats (Crew of 2, Cost of MCr 0.000)

FUEL
28,120 Tons Fuel (3 parsecs jump and 28 days endurance)
On Board Fuel Scoops, On Board Fuel Purification Plant, 
22,200.000 ton drop tanks

MISCELLANEOUS
338 Staterooms, 333 Low Berths, 10 Middle Passengers, 28.500 Tons Cargo

USER DEFINED COMPONENTS
48 Sand Magazines (6.000 tons, Crew 0, Cost MCr 0.300), 12 Missile Magazines 
(10.000 tons, Crew 0, Cost MCr 0.500)

COST
MCr 83,816.936 Singly (incl. Architects fees of MCr 829.871), MCr 66,389.652 
in Quantity

CONSTRUCTION TIME
195 Weeks Singly, 156 Weeks in Quantity

COMMENTS
Commonly known as the Imperial 74, the class was originally nicknamed 
Ward's Follys after their sponsor Admiral Lalla Ward. Ward was the most 
prominent proponent of the so called "Kaliimir Ike" (young school) of 
naval thought popular in the early 800's. This school called for a 
fleet based around capital ships mounting small spinal mounts backed 
by large numbers of missile boats using barrage fire rather than the 
dominant "big gun" school of thought.

Ward was talented and well connected. In 832 she managed to gain the 
support of Empress Paula II for the Kaliimir Ike. The Empress 
personally overruled the ImpBuConRep (Imperial Bureau of Construction 
and Repair) and ordered the construction of ships according to Ward's 
theories. In 834 the Duguay-Trouin was laid down.

Unfortunately for Ward, the Duguay-Trouin was stunted from the very 
start. Paula II death in 836 lead to a change in policy as the "big 
gun" admirals reasserted themselves. In 838 production its companion, 
the Cthonian class missile destroyer, was cancelled after only twelve 
examples had been completed, preventing her theories being tested. 
Further, the ImpBuConRep altered the design, reducing its magazine 
capacity, arguing it encourage "profligate expenditure of ordinance."

However the navy was now faced with a conundrum. The Duguay-Trouin 
was nearing completion and there were nineteen others at various 
stages of construction. It was decided that the eight most advanced 
ships would be completed for service in non-critical regions and the 
others suspended pending evaluation of their performance.

It was fully expected that the class would be a failure and the 
remaining vessels scrapped. However, against all expectations, the 
class proved extremely cost effective, far more so than the previous 
policy of deploying squadrons of two or three mismatched obsolete full 
sized battleships to these areas. Therefore in 843, work on the 
suspended vessels was resumed and orders for twenty more were placed. 
The class would remain in continuous production from that date until 
the first flight of the Implacable in 1013.

While derided by the "Big Gun" admirals as woefully under armed and 
a cruiser with battleship pretensions; and by the "Kaliimir Ike" for 
lacking the magazine capacity for barrage attacks, the 74's salvation 
was its undeniable economy. It soon became the standard capital ship in 
"quiet" areas of the Imperium. While these regions may have been labeled 
"quiet", the class faced more than its share of action in this role. The 
class even saw service in the Solomani Rim War where it acquitted itself 
more than adequately despite the criticisms of the design.

One of the more unusual features of the design, is its fittings for drop 
tanks. Originally the concept was that the ship would use tanks to jump 
into hostile territory, thus retaining the ability to immediately jump 
again. However, in practice tanks were used only extremely rarely, and by 
the early 900s production of the tanks themselves had halted. Also, the 
last twelve examples produced after 1003 were completed to a slightly 
revised design, with upgraded TL 15 avionics and a factor 9 nuclear damper.

The main reason for the class' longevity was the navy's inability to 
produce a replacement, mostly for political reasons. Their intended 
replacement, the Potempkin class, were basically just an improved TL 15 
version of the Duguay-Trouin (to the extent that the last two, the 
Dannebrog and Sharik Yangila, were modified on the ways to become 
members of the Potempkin class.)

Unfortunately the Potempkins met the same resistance from the dominant 
"big gun" admirals as the Duguay-Trouin's had. And without a powerful 
advocate such as Admiral Ward, the class fell victim to politics and 
production halted in 1017 after just eight examples. The R gunned Vyborg 
class was then designed as their replacement, but it was to proved 
extremely deficient in both protection and performance. Production of the 
Vyborg's was likewise halted in 1029 after only thirty examples, all of 
which have since been retasked to secondary roles.

Thus the Duguay-Trouin's soldiered on. But by the 1070's the situation was 
starting to become desperate as the oldest surviving examples were now over 
200 years old. The eventual policy adopted has essentially been a reversion 
to the situation as it existed before the 830's. The Duguay-Trouin's have 
been largely replaced by squadrons of two or three obsolete full sized 
battleships. Only four squadrons of Duguay-Trouin's remain in active service, 
though many more still exist in auxiliary roles.

 

[rancke]

"One of the more unusual features of the design, is its fittings for drop tanks. Originally the concept was that the ship would use tanks to jump into hostile territory, thus retaining the ability to immediately jump again. However, in practice tanks were used only extremely rarely, and by the early 900s production of the tanks themselves had halted. Also, the last twelve examples produced after 1003 were completed to a slightly revised design, with upgraded TL 15 avionics and a factor 9 nuclear amper."​

It can't have helped that drop tanks weren't invented yet when the ships were designed and built.

("¶L-Hyd drop ships have only been in service for the last dozen years in the interior, being made possible by recent advances in the field of capacitor engineering, a joint press release explained." [TNS 097-1105])


Hans

 

[AndreaV]

"One of the more unusual features of the design, is its fittings for drop tanks. Originally the concept was that the ship would use tanks to jump into hostile territory, thus retaining the ability to immediately jump again. However, in practice tanks were used only extremely rarely, and by the early 900s production of the tanks themselves had halted. Also, the last twelve examples produced after 1003 were completed to a slightly revised design, with upgraded TL 15 avionics and a factor 9 nuclear amper."​

It can't have helped that drop tanks weren't invented yet when the ships were designed and built.

("¶L-Hyd drop ships have only been in service for the last dozen years in the interior, being made possible by recent advances in the field of capacitor engineering, a joint press release explained." [TNS 097-1105])


Hans

Okay so lose the drop tanks

 

[McPerth]

If you get hit by a Q+ meson you're dead several times over anyway

I agree. that's what I meant in my earlier post

... but as we have discussed many times, when meson spinals fire, criticals are not the larger of your problems...

BTW, Andrew, you keep listing the Launch as 30 dton craft and the Ships Boat as 20 dton. If you're talking about the standard crafts so named, I'm affraid you swapped the names/tonages relation

It's never going to happen, because I'm not sufficiently interested in large-scale starship battles, but if I ever do run a TCS battle, I'm going to come up with a way to randomize breakpoint advantages/disadvantages. I'm not sure how to go about it. Make a determination once and for all and allow one 74K design to have +1 to be hit, extra 5% batteries bearing and the number of criticals hits of a cod Q while another 74K design turns out to be a lemon with +2 to be hit, no extra batteries bearing and critical hits of a code P? Or make that determination anew for every battle?

Be that as it may, breakpoint speculation is one of those things that really, really reminds me that it's all just a game and not remotely related to any reality; it fairly kicks my suspension of disbelief in the unmentionables and stomps on the remains...

Sorry for the rant. YM is, of course, more than welcome to V.


Hans

I agree that rules often leave loops that allow those 'unreal' designs (a 74999 dton ship would have only a +1 to be hit and be as powerful as a 75000 dton...). Of course we're talking about rules and the border must be set somewhere, then the comon sense (the less comon of all senses, as is said) of the referee must try to avoid those rules profiting number-crunching (and in this way, your ideas seem great to me).

I also agree with you this will have little to do in RP games, where the apparition of so large a ship will be out of league for the players in most campaigns.