Carriers Compared

[AnotherDilbert]

Carrier Technologies Compared:

Escort Carrier for 100 medium fighters à 35.5 dT.
J-4, M-1, Armour 0, no armaments or defences, good sensors.
Budget hull, budget drives, jump fuel in permanent drop tanks.
Double occupancy for crew, 25% Common Areas, 500 dT left over.


Hangars + Launch Tubes (1 round) + Recovery Decks (2 rounds)
44400 dT (+drop tanks), MCr 28700

Hangars + Launch Tubes (1 round)
18500 dT (+drop tanks), MCr 9900

Docking Space (90%) + Hangars (10%) + Launch Tubes (1 round) [The hangars let's me pretend I can maintain the fighters.]
14200 dT (+drop tanks), MCr 8100

Docking Space (90%) + Hangars (10%) [The hangars let's me pretend I can maintain the fighters.]
9000 dT (+drop tanks), MCr 4300

Docking Clamps (90%) + Hangars (10%) [The hangars let's me pretend I can maintain the fighters.]
6200 dT (+drop tanks), MCr 3500


Example, Docking Space + Launch Tubes:

TL 15         Hull 5112                              8079        
                          Desired  Rat  #    dTon    Cost    Power
Hull                                        14200             2840       
Config    Sphere              3     3                 391            
Hull strength    Light        1     1                        
                                    
JumpD      Budget, Late       4     4    1   2372    2668     9467  
ManœuvreD  Budget, EneIneff   1     1    1    237     355     2958     
PowerP     TL12:3*Size                   1    740    1111    15867   

Drop Tank Collar  9466,7 dT   1     1    2     75,7    37,9            
Drop Tank         9466,7 dT                           236,7            
Fuel, Power                   4     4    1     74                
Fuel Purification          48 h  48 h    1    240      12            
                                    
Command Bridge                1          1     80     107            
    Holographic               1          1             27            
Comp           CORE/40        8    40    1             45            
Backup Comp    m/15 bis fib   3    15    1              4            
                                    
Sensors    Advanced           9     4    1      5       5        6        
Array    Distributed          9     3    1     10      11            
Extension Net                                    
Signal Processing  Enhanced   9     2    1      2       8        2        
Countermeasures    Military   9     2    1     15      28        2        
                                    
Staterooms                 100%   404  404   1616     202            
Common Areas                25%   25%    1    404      40            
Cargo                                         515                
                                    
                                    
                                    
Docking Space    35,5 dT     90              3515     879           
Full Hangar      35,5 dT     10               710     142           
Launch Tubes     35,5 dT     10              3550    1775     3550        
Recovery Deck    35,5 dT      0                            
                                    
                                    
                                    
                                    
Crew               740                            
    Command         68                            
    Bridge           27                            
        Pilot              3                        
        Astrogator         1
        Sensor & EW       23    
    Engineer       125    
        Engineer          96
        Maintenance       28,4
    Service         20    
        Admin             14,2
        Medic              5,551666667
        Steward            0
    Gunner        
    Flight         500    
    Troops

We can see that Recovery Decks are ridiculously uneconomical and will never be used on normal carriers.

The difference between Full Hangars + Launch Tubes and Docking Spaces + Launch Tubes isn't great.

Launch Tubes doubles the cost of the carrier and will probably not be used.

The cost difference between Docking Clamps and Docking Spaces isn't great, but Docking Clamps are preferable since it is cheaper and can launch and recover quicker.

 

[arcador]

Hangars have the advantage of allowing repairs when the fighters are docked. The 10% requires one to leave and dock before the next one comes for repairs. Technically it allows repairs, but only on 10% of the squadron at once. Also, while in jump space, the fighters may no be able to change places.

Of course, I am not saying hangars are awesomest. Simply - different.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Yes, Full Hangars are clearly superior, but at almost twice the size, hence twice as large carrier, hence twice as expensive carrier.

Even better is a small construction deck. Since it can build small ships, if functions as a shipyard and should be able to perform yearly maintenance on the fighters and repair critical hits, given enough spare parts.

 

[Condottiere]

Sounds like Homeworld.

Construction should take longer than normal maintenance.

 

[phavoc]

The small craft rules remain broken, in my opinion. Launch tubes, recover decks, hangars, etc. They don't work very well. In some ways it feels like the rules were specifically designed to insert certain operational penalties.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The rules for carrying and launching craft are, ahum, questionable...

This close to release I guess we are stuck with them.

 

[phavoc]

The rules for carrying and launching craft are, ahum, questionable...

This close to release I guess we are stuck with them.

Yep. Won't be the first time bad rules got published. But ideally small craft deserve better.

Fortunately a lot of people are able to make better rules than what we have, and are willing to share.

 

[wbnc]

I personally think the subject is a bit complex to shoehorn into the basic rules for High Guard. Perhaps at a future date, a Fighter/Carrier supplement can be put out giving the subject detailed consideration. As it is the fighter/carrier rules are part of a larger issue, and will have to remain as is to get the basic system out the door at a reasonable rate.

Given that the Standard fleet of The 3I setting is based around battlewagons, and such. Carrier rules are not as high on the priority list as rules for getting a dreadnought to work right or, commercial vessels to balance out properly. With a lot and I mean, a LOT of irons in the fire at once the guys at the office have their hands full.

 

[phavoc]

I personally think the subject is a bit complex to shoehorn into the basic rules for High Guard. Perhaps at a future date, a Fighter/Carrier supplement can be put out giving the subject detailed consideration. As it is the fighter/carrier rules are part of a larger issue, and will have to remain as is to get the basic system out the door at a reasonable rate.

Given that the Standard fleet of The 3I setting is based around battlewagons, and such. Carrier rules are not as high on the priority list as rules for getting a dreadnought to work right or, commercial vessels to balance out properly. With a lot and I mean, a LOT of irons in the fire at once the guys at the office have their hands full.

2E isn't that wildly different from 1E, and 1E wasn't built from scratch. The issues/complaints being tossed out here have been around for as long as 1E has been around for quite some time. Small craft operations were nerfed in 1E for some reason. And with the 2E rules, its gotten even sillier operationally for small craft. Sadly that was by design. I think it will be a great leap of faith to assume the powers that be will come back around and fix this in the future. I will be pleasantly surprised if it happens, but I won't be shocked if it doesn't.

As far as the makeup of the fleet, the presence of fighter craft has a long history prior to 1E. Look at the naval designs from CT and MT and see how many carriers were listed. Look at the AHL / Lightning class cruiser with it's fighters, or the Tigress with it's fighters. Fighter craft ARE part of the fleet of the Imperium. That's not to say the rules have always kept up with having fighters around.

 

[wbnc]

2E isn't that wildly different from 1E, and 1E wasn't built from scratch. The issues/complaints being tossed out here have been around for as long as 1E has been around for quite some time. Small craft operations were nerfed in 1E for some reason. And with the 2E rules, its gotten even sillier operationally for small craft. Sadly that was by design. I think it will be a great leap of faith to assume the powers that be will come back around and fix this in the future. I will be pleasantly surprised if it happens, but I won't be shocked if it doesn't.

As far as the makeup of the fleet, the presence of fighter craft has a long history prior to 1E. Look at the naval designs from CT and MT and see how many carriers were listed. Look at the AHL / Lightning class cruiser with it's fighters, or the Tigress with it's fighters. Fighter craft ARE part of the fleet of the Imperium. That's not to say the rules have always kept up with having fighters around.

I m not saying that fighters and carriers weren't around. They have been there. But not as a major portion of the game. And yes I admit there are things that have been leaking badly for years so to speak, with a few attempts to patch those leaks taking place with varying degrees of success.

Unfortunately, due to the pressure beyond the control of the publisher,a few leaks may have to wait for another day. I am one of the guys designing the next generation of ships, and I know there are folks with other projects that could fix some lingering issues. If there are folks with ideas that might provide additional fixes, write them up, put them together in a proposal for a future project, and submit them. There would be a lot more room in a dedicated book on fighters, and carriers, to go into greater detail tan trying to wedge it into an already crowded sourcebook.

There has been enough material tossed around in the past couple of months to fill several books. If the present rules don't fit your personal idea of how to do things take advantage of the situation.

Honestly, the ideas you have put out would be a great addition to my library. I know it's not ideal, and may seem like a copout to suggest the idea of "fix it yourself", but in some cases it is an option. The guys at the office have a lot of things to handle, with other games, and other products. I'm sure if you, or someone else, proposed a dedicated book on the subject Mongoose wouldn't be totally unreceptive. It would take a bit of workload off of them, and patch a few leaks at the same time.