Fires on Ships - Your Opinion Needed!

[Lord David the Denied]

It'd be silly not to wear one. You'd just have to have a military suit designed to be used in shipboard ops so you weren't staggering around like a drunken gorilla...

 

[Abraxas]

I would like fires on ships (of course, none that I am on). It is the most prevelent thing among NAVY ships and usually the cause for the greatest amount of damage during a battle.

It can be done simply, with minimal book keeping (i.e. each round a fire is not put out; -1 damage and -1 crew). These fires are cumulative and can be put out in the end phase... like rolling the dice for each fire. Depending on the crew score, some ships may have easier times putting them out then others. Also, for each fire that survives through the end phase (i.e. not put out) a critical in the 1D3 system (i.e. engines or weapons; most commonly the place I expect fires to occur).

Simple. Realistic. Easy.

Or is it just I like my own ideas :roll: :wink: .

 

[Triggy]

The point is that some sections would flood but others would burn

Tragically, this is exactly what happened to the last survivors aboard the submarine Kursk (according to Robert Moore's book on the subject, A Time To Die).

Having been trapped in the boats' ninth compartment for about three days following the explosion that sank her, they were upto their waists in water as the compartment slowly flooded through the prop shaft glands.

They were in no immediate danger, as the air bubble they were in - although at well above normal pressure due to the ingress of water -had nowhere to escape to, and they had a supply of highly reactive oxygen producing candles (standard equipment in case of just such an emergency).

As far as could be deduced from the positions of, and burns upon, the corpses of the crew, what happened was this; someone fumbled opening a new candle, and it dropped in the water. The water was covered in a layer of lubricant oil, washed off the prop shafts. The candle reacted with the oil, and exploded...

Those close to the blast were killed instantly, their bodies burned from the waist upward. Those further away had time to duck beneath the surface, and were only burnt upon their backs.

The fire lasted only a few seconds - my emphasis - and these men straightened up again...to find the fire was out, but that the air no longer contained any breathable oxygen.

Davids point is that for all intents and purposes, it is a vacuum. No air gets in or out of the sections affected.

It isn't a vacuum as long as it contains air. My living room doors and windows are currently closed, but I'm still (at the time of writing) breathing.

Pretty good illustration of one reason why fire is a hazard on a sub. BTW, I meant fully sealed with effectively a vacuum outside

Also, your living room has at the very least (even with a perfectly sealed door) trickle vents in the window frames to allow air to circulate. Ever wonder why there is a breeze sometimes even in "sealed" buildings? Anyway, that was massively off topic!

 

[Target]

As for it would to complicated, it's actually easier to remember that your ships are on fire than a wpn arc is out or can only fire on 4+. Especially when you come to Damage Control and start to select what to fix. Better fix that fire this turn or i might be crippled. Damn it failed the roll, take 2 damage. Since we have had a similar system for about 8+ months can say for certain it's not anymore book keeping and is dead simple.

 

[Nomad]

Also, your living room has at the very least (even with a perfectly sealed door) trickle vents in the window frames to allow air to circulate.

?? Even with them sealed, it still would not contain a vacuum. Unless you then pumped all the air out.

Ever wonder why there is a breeze sometimes even in "sealed" buildings?

Air conditioning?

Back on topic...I don't really want to see this, as, apart from anything else, my ships die quite fast enough as it is

 

[Reaverman]

Also, your living room has at the very least (even with a perfectly sealed door) trickle vents in the window frames to allow air to circulate.

?? Even with them sealed, it still would not contain a vacuum. Unless you then pumped all the air out.

Ever wonder why there is a breeze sometimes even in "sealed" buildings?

Air conditioning?

Back on topic...I don't really want to see this, as, apart from anything else, my ships die quite fast enough as it is

Agreed!

 

[Target]

It depends what crit it replaces, maybe it's better to have fires than Engineering Hit, +4, +3 No Damage Control

 

[Cerebral Cortex of the Da]

regarding submarines, if you were to completely flood any compartment on a submarine, simply to put out a fire, you'd quickly lose any buoyancy you had. Fires are excetionally dangerous aboard a sub and I have yet to see one portrayed properly in film.
Chern

I disagree, a damage control officer I served with stated that if fires are bad enough, they flood the compartment at the same time they blow the balast and do an emergency assent. And yes they are dangerous because they consume oxygen extermely fast.

Surface ships will flood compartments to keep a ship from capsizing.

Metal burning (a class delta fire) is extremely hot. Aluminum burns really hot. The American Bradley Armored fighting vehicle had 3" of aluminum Armor on it and it was found to be a death trap if the aluminum armor caught fire. But if aluminum caught fire in space, as long as it had all three components, heat, oxygen, fuel, it would burn, but as soon as one of those is removed, the fire would go out. Now if any of those are returned and the conditions are right, a reflash will happen.

I still believe that in the future, crews will not be dressed in their dress uniforms while serving, they will have vac suites on to lessen the damage and mayhem of an explosive decompression. But that is just my opinion. All you need is one hull breach to throw a compartment into pandemonium, even if it is just a small breach and no one is injured from the actual blast hitting the ship.

The way beam weapons cut through ships into the internals, as a captain, I would want my crew in vac suites and the ship decompressed while the battle raged. So if 2 or 3 decks were cut through, then you don't have people, equipment, etc. flying toward the breach. The crews could start repairing the damage if it is warrented.

Gah.... long post.

CCotD'

 

[kritikalfailure]

My vote is no with the following qualifiers:

I think the Crit table is nasty enough as is (although it's not truly terrifying until you start multiplying Damage/Crew through DD and TD weapons). In most of the games I've played, it becomes about who can roll more criticals with said weapons than who has the soundest tactics. While crits are an inevitable and realistic part of any type of naval game (and yes, this is a naval game), I think they play a big enough part already (if not too big a part).

So I would be fine with it if the crit table was revisited to cause more "haywire" (such as no turning) type things and less "holy crap, my ship just exploded" type things (such as 6,4 and above on the Vital Systems).

 

[Cerebral Cortex of the Da]

So I would be fine with it if the crit table was revisited to cause more "haywire" (such as no turning) type things and less "holy crap, my ship just exploded" type things (such as 6,4 and above on the Vital Systems).

I agree, it should be items that change how a player plays that particular ship than actually causes more damage.

Anyone thought of a crit where, "Sure you can fire that weapon, but it overloads <insert system here> and causes 1d6 damage / crew " ?

CCotD'

 

[prelude_to_war]

Anyone thought of a crit where, "Sure you can fire that weapon, but it overloads <insert system here> and causes 1d6 damage / crew " ?

Interesting idea.

I voted no - too much paperwork involved. And the crit table is substantial enough as is.

 

[Target]

So I would be fine with it if the crit table was revisited to cause more "haywire" (such as no turning) type things and less "holy crap, my ship just exploded" type things (such as 6,4 and above on the Vital Systems).

Games would be fun if ships couldn't turn or had to turn. On our modded table we have ships moves before all others. Extremly annoying as it moves out of int order. Means you have move two ships if you lost int. Boresight fleets love it but not so good if you are boresighted.

 

[Chernobyl]

I hadn't heard that bit on the kursk...pretty grim.

Chern

 

[Wulf Corbett]

It depends what crit it replaces, maybe it's better to have fires than Engineering Hit, +4, +3 No Damage Control

The intent (so far) isn't to replace anything, but add fires to certain crits (like the ones that mention fires...) and adjust the damage/crew losses on them.

Wulf

 

[Shadow Queen]

Actually any O2 tank for making sure the crew is able to breath would rather go boom rather fast than burn......or any high enough concentration of oxygen. The only exception to that would be a leaking oxygen tank.

And then you get a few races immune to fire, but that is rare in B5.

thx. for the info Shadow Queen .

Oh yeah and nothing against the SFX guys, ships that are close to being destroyed lose the ability to supreess fires effectively, but a working ship? I dunno.....

And CBD does not save you against the hurt of fires. Crew dies anyway.

No problem sweet,

"The ship, the ship, the ship is on fire!!"

 

[Voronesh]

Why i voted no. It doesnt add a tactical option. So can we fire weapons in a way to induce a fire on an enemy ship? Will we get acid containing bioweapons to eat away at their hulls?

No and it doesnt seem to add a tactical option. Id prefer engine killshot weapons, so my Narn can get more bvoarding options.

Why i mention Oxygen tanks? Wuld said they be prime burning material, rather i wanted to poitn out, taht oxygen burns very pure, and very quickly making it an explosion, and not a fire. And yes you owuldnt have oxygen tanks only for breathing, but smaller ones. (I think, im no spaceship designer specializing in life support).

And thx. again shadow queen, nwo my post is immediatly quoted, so i dont need to do it myself

Oh and canonness.
Ever see a ship burning while in action? No they always do for a few seconds before exploding, or being destroyed a little bit less violently. Crippled ships will have problems with fire control, but we never see a fully working ship buring.....

 

[angelus2000]

I voted no because for 2 reasons

1. Extra book-keeping in a system designed for simplicity
2. Really hammers ships with low Dam/Crew scores that already have enough issues. Crusade EA and ISA woudld get smacked hard by this rule unless extra rules are applied for each fleet, which leads back to reason 1.

I am not against Fires being in ACTA at all. But a new crit system would have to be devised and new ways of dealing with crits would have to be done to really include it in a balanced way.

 

[Wulf Corbett]

Why i mention Oxygen tanks? Wuld said they be prime burning material, rather i wanted to poitn out, taht oxygen burns very pure, and very quickly making it an explosion, and not a fire. And yes you owuldnt have oxygen tanks only for breathing, but smaller ones. (I think, im no spaceship designer specializing in life support).

Actually, I (assuming I became Wuld for the day - a typo I'm prone to myself) mentioned LOX - liquid oxygen - a common part of rocket fuel systems. I wasn't thinking atmospheric oxygen. And I'm pretty sure LOX would be under enough pressure to create a flame vent rather than an explosion.

Wulf

 

[Reaverman]

The whole subject about whether or not 'LOX' is carried is purely speculative. The reaction mass for the thrusters, could be an inert gas for all we know. As for the main drive motors, it could be a radioactive source, the strips electrons off molecules. The byproduct, would be the propulsion system. Both would negate the need for 'LOX', since they could reprocess existing gasses for the life support.

Regarding the effect on the game, I think its already taken into effect with the existing critical results. The bigger the weapon, the greater the fires (double damage etc). To take the effects further, is only going to reduce battles to very biased games. People are not going to buy some of the fleets, since they know of the extremley low numbers on the crew ratings.

And judging by the votes so far, nearly twice as many people are against the possible new amendment, than for.

 

[Target]

The per round damage wouldn't be multiplied by DD, I would hope so anyway. Looks like it's a negative for fires but they are fun but then we also have modded SA's as well which can help vs fires. The choice between try to do all hands to deck SA or Damage or Crew save one. Take the damage or crew and no damage Contro but could save from being cripples/skelton crewed and easier to do than get the All hands to Deck which may not work at all. I guess this is why we have having fun with our house rules.