System Control Ship

[BFalcon]

I've been working on a design for a System Control Ship, figuring that it would be one of the more common ships encountered in Imperial space...

I've tried adding the lightest Particle spinal weapon, putting a jump-3 drive in it (the lightest I figured that would make sense for a ship that might need to relocate in a hurry to respond to piracy threats), thrust 3 (because having a powerplant rating of 3 just doesn't make sense to have an underthrusted ship, particularly one that might need to catch up with a raider). The trouble is, I'm running out of room, so I thought I'd come to you guys for suggestions... especially since I've not even added the hanger yet (I was hoping for a launch tube, but that's probably not going to be possible - I'll probably go for 2 or 3 hangers instead and have the ship maintain CAP patrols around it as part of its maintained readiness with a further 2 or 3 held ready to be scrambled immediately.

Two main questions: (1): Are there any options other than just Meson or Particle for spinal weapons? The one I've got fitted can do 240 damage (TL13) and is the lightest Particle spinal weapon on the chart, yet I still feel it's a bit over-powered for the role...

2) Do you think I should abandon the spinal weapon? Given the role, it could be considered overkill when the majority of the corsairs will be lighter ships and it'll have fighters to help to overcome the defenses of the smaller ship.

3) Slow it down? Maybe go jump 2 and/or thrust 2? That would have the knock-on effect of losing fuel capacity, so saving space there...

for your reference:

"System Control Ship
The 5,000t System Control Ship is a resurrection of an old idea, combining the features of a very light cruiser with the fighter complement of a “pocket carrier”. Not intended to take on major warships, the SCS’s light spinal mount can shatter the typical commerce raider or corsair, while its wing of fighters, picket boats and inspection cutters can police traffic over a large area within a star system, bringing tight customs and revenue control to the region for as long as necessary, without need for a permanent base.

System Control Ships can also undertake raiding and escort duties, but are not really suited to these roles."

Many thanks in advance for the help...

 

[DFW]

If you are designing something to go after commerce raiders & pirates, 5000t seems like overkill. At least when considering the OTU and the types of ships that commonly engage in pirating and privateering.

A 1000T ship with particle accel turrets should be more than sufficient for the job. Spinal weapons are designed for attacking large warships.

 

[BFalcon]

DFW: Normally I'd agree with you, but I'm following the Sector Fleet description that I quoted... presumably the higher tonnage is so it could act as a carrier for the smaller craft.

Its main task, from my interpretation, is as a customs and shipping protection vessel, basically a mobile base from which the other craft operate, but they mention the spinal mount specifically, as I quoted.

 

[Kromodor]

When I read Spinal weapon, I imagine a "ship cutting armament". I mean, this is probably the ultimate anti-ship weapon. I have no idea what they meant by that in the description, but spinal mount is serious firepower.

 

[DFW]

DFW: Normally I'd agree with you, but I'm following the Sector Fleet description that I quoted... presumably the higher tonnage is so it could act as a carrier for the smaller craft.

I understand. I'm just pointing out that the designation (commerce raider & anti piracy) for that design of ship isn't well thought out.

 

[BFalcon]

Kromodor: Yeah, 240 damage is enough to slice open a 5,000 ton vessel, let alone the smaller ships...

The 5,000 ton SCS I'm designing has 50 hull and structure per section... a head on hit would absorb 200 damage points before all those are gone... leaving 40 excess for shields and armour to have to deal with to keep the ship alive - I just couldn't see it managing it, to be honest... that's one reason why I asked if there were rules for fitting smaller spinal weapons, as mentioned elsewhere (eg plasma).

 

[Kromodor]

Well, I guess you can always Patch up some quick rules

 

[BP]

Yeah - 5000 tons seems a bit large for the role... but, if that is what's written, make use of the space.

#1 - for OTU, that is all HG offers.

#2 - No, the write up seems clear. The idea seems sound too - assured destruction for the smaller craft - resounding overkill would be the point.

#3 - Heck no - 'speed it up'. The jump seems good (normal fleet?) - but its got the room to spare - make it higher G. Its spinal and fighters (have limited fuel based range usually) are not a serious threat if it can't get in range to use them in time...

I'd use high G and launch tubes - space wasting at the expense of rapid deployment and engagement. Also, extra fuel and such for long deployments. Boarding crews don't need to be large - doesn't sound like that is the type of engagement. Wouldn't load it up with lots of other weapons (no bays, maybe some barbettes, probably no missiles) but probably some defensive stuffs (casters and energy), including shields. It should be pretty impervious to the type of vessels it would encounter and an extreme threat to them. The idea, I think, is to 'deter by overkill' as much as to actually engage. Detecting one of these in system should immediately have illegals scrambling to jump away or reaching for the sky...

It projects power and provides a serious threat to private entity threats, but would be less optimized for fleet style engagements (which would depend more on support and supply ships and protection for slower deployment of fighters - allowing it to optimize space for more offensive elements).

 

[hdan]

When I read Spinal weapon, I imagine a "ship cutting armament". I mean, this is probably the ultimate anti-ship weapon. I have no idea what they meant by that in the description, but spinal mount is serious firepower.

If you've seen the old cartoon series "Starblazers" (or Space Battleship Yamato, which is the series Starblazers was dubbed from), then you know what a spinal mount weapon is - both the Wave Motion Gun and the Desslock Gun are good examples.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty-1zWsXFNs shows the first firing of the Wave Motion gun and though it's a bit overwrought, shows some of the limitations of fixed-forward mounted weapons and not having a large enough powerplant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoobYtlE4bE is a larger engagement.

In essence, the ship is built around the spinal mount, and the gun is so powerful that it would vaporize any "adventure class" ships.

 

[BFalcon]

DFW: Normally I'd agree with you, but I'm following the Sector Fleet description that I quoted... presumably the higher tonnage is so it could act as a carrier for the smaller craft.

I understand. I'm just pointing out that the designation (commerce raider & anti piracy) for that design of ship isn't well thought out.

And I agree... it does make me wonder if the author of SF had any designs to refer to for some of the descriptions or maybe had access to prototype rules (maybe a light spinal mount was on the cards at some point and got dropped?). Certainly the "wing" of cutters and fighters, as described, would put this as a possible - a hanger for 18 fighters (6 multi-role, 12 light) and just 2 cutters comes to around 450dt... and that's a light Wing, 18 fighters... and 450dt is a big chunk to find on a ship with a spinal weapon.

I'm considering going up in tonnage, in fact... to a 6,000 or 7,500 ton hull... there's little difference in some of the costs and there'd be more hope of finding room for the spinal mount AND the hanger.

 

[BFalcon]

Yeah - 5000 tons seems a bit large for the role... but, if that is what's written, make use of the space.

#1 - for OTU, that is all HG offers.

Still, it does make me wonder - and I think that SF does refer to different types to spinal mount, including rail/mass drivers, plasma and fusion... makes me wonder if the (I think dropped) High Guard 2 was to have had them in there...

#2 - No, the write up seems clear. The idea seems sound too - assured destruction for the smaller craft - resounding overkill would be the point.

Hadn't considered that... I suppose that it's a bit like having a Naval destroyer levelling its guns at your fishing boat these days... along with its helicopters just to make sure you don't try to run... the hope being that you'll give up without hurting anyone - if you think you've got a chance, you might risk it, I guess...

#3 - Heck no - 'speed it up'. The jump seems good (normal fleet?) - but its got the room to spare - make it higher G. Its spinal and fighters (have limited fuel based range usually) are not a serious threat if it can't get in range to use them in time...

Would love to - but I'm getting low on tonnage now... like I said elsewhere, I'm thinking of trying a slightly heavier tonnage just to accommodate the duel role that it's trying to achieve.

I'd use high G and launch tubes - space wasting at the expense of rapid deployment and engagement. Also, extra fuel and such for long deployments. Boarding crews don't need to be large - doesn't sound like that is the type of engagement. Wouldn't load it up with lots of other weapons (no bays, maybe some barbettes, probably no missiles) but probably some defensive stuffs (casters and energy), including shields. It should be pretty impervious to the type of vessels it would encounter and an extreme threat to them. The idea, I think, is to 'deter by overkill' as much as to actually engage. Detecting one of these in system should immediately have illegals scrambling to jump away or reaching for the sky...

It projects power and provides a serious threat to private entity threats, but would be less optimized for fleet style engagements (which would depend more on support and supply ships and protection for slower deployment of fighters - allowing it to optimize space for more offensive elements).

Understood - I'll give it a try (it doesn't help that my spreadsheet was written for normal ship creation, so I've had to re-write it as I go, with the cap ship creation. I was going to have enough marines for the 2 cutters and a few for security on-board while they're gone.

Thanks for the help guys.

Edit: "normal" fleet is either 3 or 4 parsec jumps... depending on role and size. Some are slower, as slow as 1 for some of the auxilleries... a cruiser, for example, in HG is rated as Jump 4, Thrust 6... but each increase will add fuel requirements...

 

[BP]

Spinals are huge, tonnage wise. I was assuming TL benefits down to at least 3000... 1000 being possible if Meson at TL-15.

This means a more powerful version of the spinal (still lowest end though), but overkill is the point. Other, normal anti-fighter, weapons need not be part of its arsenal (making it less useful for military ops...)

Also, as a 'System Control Ship' - is a Jump drive needed? (The 'raiding and escort' parts mean moving with a fleet between systems?)

 

[barnest2]

I cant find your spinal weapon :$...
Which one are you using, with which tech level changes?

 

[AndrewW]

Two main questions: (1): Are there any options other than just Meson or Particle for spinal weapons? The one I've got fitted can do 240 damage (TL13) and is the lightest Particle spinal weapon on the chart, yet I still feel it's a bit over-powered for the role...

Specifically sticking to TL13 you could make a Type B particle weapon smaller then the type A (which is what you are using based on the damage). Upping the TL would allow more size reduction. Also don't forget you can use TL upgrades on various other systems (drives, bay weapons and so on) to reduce their size. Though a 5,000 ton ship is a bit small to fit a spinal mount weapon along with everything else you would need.

Might consider some sort of frozen watch that is only revived with needed (ie: combat) to reduce the amount of staterooms the ship needs.

 

[AndrewW]

I cant find your spinal weapon :$...
Which one are you using, with which tech level changes?

Type A, with +4 TL (So TL12) to get 240 damage out of one.

 

[rust]

J3 works everywhere except the Reft Sector IIRC

Even J2 should be sufficient, for the few cases where J3 is needed the
fleet can send a tanker.

 

[BP]

Pg 66 in HG (at least my printing).

TL advantages are stated right there (not with the rest around pg 5, IIRC).

Best tonnage is a Meson A (base TL-11)... at TL+4, -80% tonnage - which results in 1000 tons. (Damage becomes 280 - which does put it in the Penetration II category...)

Particles get a much smaller TL advantage - so a smaller 3000 ton at TL-15 only gets -30% (results in 2100 tons). A TL-8 Particle at TL-15 is 3000 tons...

 

[BFalcon]

I cant find your spinal weapon :$...
Which one are you using, with which tech level changes?

Particle, type A, 500 tons, TL8 - reduced by 40% by the ship being TL12 to 3,000 (looks like I had an error in my formula too). Damage boost from 200 by 20% to 240.

Looks like I may have to boost the TL of the whole ship (was hoping to keep it low-ish tech to make it more easy to refit and repair) and go for the Type B, which is smaller and more powerful, but TL12.

It doesn't help that this is my first attempt at a cap ship design...

 

[DFW]

(was hoping to keep it low-ish tech to make it more easy to refit and repair) and go for the Type B, which is smaller and more powerful, but TL12.

No need. A TL 13 ship can be repaired & annual maint at a TL 11 Class B port.

 

[BFalcon]

Pg 66 in HG (at least my printing).

TL advantages are stated right there (not with the rest around pg 5, IIRC).

Best tonnage is a Meson A (base TL-11)... at TL+4, -80% tonnage - which results in 1000 tons. (Damage becomes 280 - which does put it in the Penetration II category...)

Particles get a much smaller TL advantage - so a smaller 3000 ton at TL-15 only gets -30% (results in 2100 tons). A TL-8 Particle at TL-15 is 3000 tons...

Thanks BP - don't you think a TL15 ship might be hard to repair though? Or should I just keep the spinal mount a TL15 and keep certain other systems as TL 12/13 so the ship can put in at any port in an emergency and make do without weapons? Mind you, in SF, it does say that they prefer to send a repair ship out rather than pull into a port damaged, so the repair ship might be TL15...

I'll go the Meson route I think - 1,000 is a decent tonnage.

Do jump drives get reductions for TL? From this, I thought only PP did?