Technology pdf questions

User avatar
gstano
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 2:41 am
Location: Huntsville
Contact:

Re: Technology pdf questions

Post by gstano »

I'm resurrecting a quiet thread, but this appears to be the most relevant section to discuss technology in 2E.

I am looking at the Tender and Hangar abilities. Let's take Tyrel's Columbus carrier example that has a Hangar rating of 8. This rating means the Columbus can hold up to 8 SIZ of fighters in any combination (e.g. 1 SIZ 6 and 2 SIZ 1), correct? It also means the carrier to launch up to 8 SIZ worth of fighters per turn.

Tender appears to be different. If I have interpreted this correctly, a single rating of Tender means that a ship can hold a flight/gunboat of any SIZ, correct? However, the description then stats that the ship can only launch a total of (Tender rating times ship SIZ). This appears to lead to the possibility of a small ship (SIZ 2 with 1 Tender) able to hold a large flight (SIZ 8). Would that mean it would take 4 rounds to launch that single flight/gunboat?

I am trying to decide how best to design a small ship that is capable of hauling a gunboat or two, like a Star Fleet Battles frigate carrying a PF or a B5 wars frigate holding a super-heavy fighter. The more I look at it, the more it appears that an SFB frigate with PFs would be tough to replicate in VBAM since these tiny ships can carry six PFs (as the Tender rating's base mass cost is 250).

Thank-you for your thoughts!
It's not as bad as it turned out to be.
User avatar
Tyrel Lohr
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
Posts: 1466
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:48 am
Location: Lusk, WY
Contact:

Re: Technology pdf questions

Post by Tyrel Lohr »

The rules have matured quite a bit since this discussion first began, and makes me realize just how far behind I am on responding to forum posts. The way things are looking with the current tech and unit design snapshot is that the maximum command cost of flights that a carrier can base is equal to its Hangar/Basing rating (still deciding on final term). In order to simplify flights and make everyone's life easier, a flight's command cost is now always equal to its construction cost, so a 3 EP fighter would have a command cost of 3.

Going back to the 8 Hangar Columbus, this would allow the ship to carry 4 @ 2 EP fighters, 8 @ 1 EP fighters, or some other combination of fighters whose total command cost is less than or equal to 8. The two elements that players have to keep in mind is that a carrier's Hangar is going to be halved (rounding up) when its crippled, and the number of fighters based from it has to be reduced if their command cost total exceeds the unit's new Hangar rating. The flights can be rebased from another carrier in the same squadron or commanded directly by the squadron's command element, but in most cases the crippling of a carrier is going to the loss of flight units due to lack of space.

The other factor in carrier warfare is that the number of flights that start already launched at the start of a scenario is determined by the task force's initial Readiness modifier. At +0 Readiness you have 50% of your total command cost of flights launched, and this percentage shifts either direction depending on your Readiness bonus or penalty. A fleet that is caught entirely off balance won't even have any flights launched at the start of a battle.

During a battle in the CSCR, a carrier can launch/land a total command cost of flights per round equal to its Command rating. For example, a carrier with 6 Command could launch/land a maximum 6 command cost of flights per round. Flights have to be launched to participate in combat, but flights have to be landed in order to retreat with their carriers. Fighters that are still in space when their carrier retreats from a battle are left to fend for themselves and are destroyed if there's no one left in their squadron to command them.

The way that the current unit design rules are setup, it isn't out of the realm of possibility for players to build large carriers that have 20+ Hangar ratings. Consider a "fleet carrier" concept that costs 30 EP to build (unit costs have significantly inflated over 1E, or even previous 2E drafts!) and is designed at a TL 10 (+100% mass unit) level of technology. Such a ship has 60 MU to spend on abilities. Using the current rules we could build something like this:

12 DV, 3 AS, 6 PD, 7 CR, 20 BC, 2 FTL
Construction Cost 30, Maintenance Cost 6, Command Cost 3

Without the extra point of FTL (currently costing 20% x Construction Cost), this fleet carrier could expand its hangar capacity even further or significantly increase its Defense rating. Your "average" home world with 60 shipyard capacity could purchase two of these fleet carriers each turn. I am still debating on a good change for completion time lengths, as the doubling of unit costs and a change in how maintenance cost is calculated has made the previous formula grossly untenable. The easiest solution is 20% x Construction Cost (round up), but Maintenance Cost + Command Cost is also very attractive, especially as it would make both flights and starbases take longer to build. The only downside to the latter option seems to be that advanced units would always take longer to build, but that might actually be for the best.

Consider a 10 EP starship at TL 0, TL 10, and TL 20 that uses its maximum mass unit allowance. They would have maintenance costs of 1, 2, and 3, respectively, with 10 times that in mass units spent on abilities. In such a circumstance, making the TL 20 power wait 3 turns for his 10 EP "destroyer" doesn't seem that bad considering it could have the same stats as the TL 0 power's 30 EP heavy cruiser!

Thoughts?
[i]"Touch not the pylons, for they are the messengers!"[/i]
Locked