how about something like this: A dockyard bay is like a hangar bay, but can
also do bigger repairs and servicing. The size of the bay is the total mass of
ships it can accommodate. To actually service ships, servicing facilities must
be provided:
The mass depends on the number and size of ships which can be worked on
simultaneously.
Escort/Merchant Cruiser Capital Supership
Servicing 1 per hull 2 per hull 4 per hull 8 per hull
Repairing 2 per hull 4 per hull 8 per hull 16 per hull
Building 4 per hull 8 per hull 16 per hull 32 per hull
Cost eg 5 points per 1 mass
so a mass 100 dockyard bay with 16 mass of services could build 1 capital, or
2 cruisers, or 4 escorts, or could repair 2 capitals, or service 4 cruisers
while repairing 4 escorts, etc.
Hulls that won't fit in the dockyard bay (as they're too big, or because it's
too full) need double the mass of services (or increase the time pro rata) to
get the same job done due to the inconvenience of using shuttles and workers
in vacuum etc., so the bay above could service 1 supership at the normal
speed, repair it at half speed or build it at one quarter speed.
Military dockyard station:
Mass: Points
Hull (332) 664
no FTL 0 0
Thrust-0 0 0
Dockyard bay 200 202 Services 40 160
Screen LVL-3 9 75
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Totals 249 1101
Hello Listmembers, Just a reminder, dockyard servicing units, should be
capable of being
mobile. During World War II, there were ships that were repair ships -
capable of fabricating their own sheet metal (or so I have been told by a
veteran), machining their own parts, and with loads of specialists capable of
putting a battle damaged ship back into operation with a minimum of time
required. I guess the rational for having such repair ships was due to the
fact that sending ships back from the Pacific theater to San
Fransisco and/or Hawaii was too time consuming.
> On Thu, 5 Dec 1996, Robin Paul wrote:
> Escort/Merchant Cruiser Capital Supership
I thought this looked really good, but I am having some trouble understanding
the whole thing. What is your build rate? What is your repair rate? Most
importantly, what is `Servicing' and how do you handle that?
> Military dockyard station:
Again, what is `Services'?
SNIP
> I thought this looked really good, but I am having some trouble
SNIP
> Chad Taylor
I haven't actually used any of this- it was just a suggestion off the
cuff
yesterday, so I haven't got a system for determining build time etc.-
I'd suggest something like Mike Miserendino's idea of a baseline time plus a
random element for ships of a particular size-class, and keep arecord of
the completion state of ships as they're built.
As far as servicing goes, I mean assorted rearming, re-equipping,
fueling, preventive maintenance etc. I'd suggest something like "1 day in dock
per week on patrol and per day of combat". A vessel spending too long away
from home (ie perhaps "requiring more than 7 days of servicing") would have to
make a threshhold check, with another each week so that eventually even a ship
which had seen no combat would just stop working.
Ships could be given a "discount" related to size to represent endurance.
Unassigned weapons capacity (mass points) could increase thise discount.
For repair times: hull damage:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1st row: 1 day per DP to be repaired 2nd row: 1 weeks per DP to be repaired
3rd row: 1 month per DP to be repaired
system damage: roll a d6
system size 1-3 4-5 6
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1 mass systems: 1 day 3 days 1 week
2 mass systems: 3 days 1 week 2 weeks
3 mass systems: 1 week 2 weeks 1 month
Again, I'm winging it with all this stuff!
Cheers,
> For repair times:
I really like this idea, but I think your times may be a bit off; it seems to
me that you would almost be better off building a new ship rather than
repairing a heavily damaged one, especially if it's a big ship. I'd say
something along the lines of:
1st Row 2 DP per day
2nd Row 1 DP per day
3rd Row 1 DP per 2 days
I also like the services, but I think those may be a bit short (7:1 doesn't
seem like it leaves a lot of time to get anywhere). I would think that 1 day
per month of patrol would be an absolute minimum, with threshold rolls made at
the 6 month mark (or year, if the ship can be resupplied in space). Bear in
mind that modern Aircraft carriers can stay at sea for months at a time, only
requiring fuel for their fighters, and nuclear subs can stay out even longer.
I would think that in the future, the amount of time a ship could remain out
in space would be limited only be their supply of consumable goods (food, air,
water, etc). I would also guess that the ship would by necessity be equipped
with advanced recycling techniques as well as more compact and efficient
storage methods, allowing them to bring more stuff along and make it last a
lot longer.
Just a thought,
> Rob Paul wrote:
Nifty idea. I designed something this a while back for Traveller where all
ship systems had a MTBF("Mean Time Between Failure") rating. Different systems
have different MTBF ratings and ratings could change based on tech level,
race, etc.
As systems reached the MTBF date from the initial install or any preventive
maintenance check or repair therafter, each system would require a die
roll(D10) to determine if it fails. If the system fails the die
roll(9,0),
it is no longer on-line until it is repaired. If the system passes the
die roll it continues to function as normal, except on the next MTBF check,
its probability to fail increases. I increased the fail rate by something like
one for every additional month a preventive maintenance check is not
performed.
Regarding repair times...
Just to get a feel for construction versus repair times, take the actual
number of structure points that a craft gets. Divide this into the
construction time of the ship. Repair times should not exactly get to the same
value (timewise) that actual construction would take. Construction involves
setting up the "ribs" of the ship, and then building it out (or in as the case
may be). On the other hand, it is true that a ship badly damaged, can cost
more to repair than to build a new unit, and recommission the name...
NEW PROPOSAL: this may be used for the FT 3rd edition, or it may be used as an
optional rule...
Negative Damage boxes: it's really a carryover from the FASA game STAR TREK,
and it involves having a number of boxes beyond the normal structural value,
that determines the fate of a ship. Damage equal to Structure total does not
"destroy" the ship, but has a chance of destroying the ship. Excess damage
forces another "explosion" check. Example: a ship with 7 structure points
takes 7 points of damage. It is effectively "dead in the vacuum". Under old
rules, the ship blew up then and there. What I propose doing is this: for turn
that the ship takes negative structure damage, it must roll 1d6. If the
negative structure damage is equal to or greater than the 1d6 roll, the ship
explodes. This gives the crew a chance to abandon ship. Also, ships that take
damage in excess of normal structural levels, cost more to repair, and take
longer to repair.
Please note: this rule change makes no real difference to the "tactical" feel
of the game, but would have repercussions in a strategic game...
> On Fri, 6 Dec 1996, Hal Carmer wrote:
> NEW PROPOSAL: this may be used for the FT 3rd edition, or it may be
This
> gives the crew a chance to abandon ship. Also, ships that take damage
Another very good idea. I have watched several fleet encounters and had
thought that the system left something out - the half dead hulks of
destroyed ships drifting in the vacuum. This idea adds that kind of feeling
nicely. It also adds a nice way for one race to capture the remains of an
enemy ship for study later on.